world court to rule against Israel

[welsh]

Well the thing abotu Nazi War Criminals is that a person found to be an international jurisdiction can be prosecuted anywhere. As for the Israeli's abducting Nazis out of South American countries without asking the Argentina (I think it was Eichmann) well, it's been dealt with.

There was a trial on this issue between Argentina and Israel at the world court- and the World Court found that Israel acted wrongly by abducting a Nazi from Argentina. Argentina demanded an apology.
Israel said, "sorry."
Argentina said, "Ok, we're cool."

It's hard to get, or expect, sympathy if you're a Nazi. Often I think the Russians were right and the lot of them should have been hung.

As for Israel, and I agree- they are doing stuff to the Palestinians that reminds people of the Nazis (much like the French policies against the Algerians during the Algerian war) and they are playing on world sympathies after the Holocaust.

However, let's be a little fair. The Jews really have a good argument for trying to make their own national-state and to play up on that national persecution card. As for the formation of Israel- ok, it's a case of state creation and formation by conquest- but it's not that much different than much of the world went through for hundreds of years.

Israeli state formation is "old school" nation-state building- by war and conquest. While we may say that it's not kosher under international standards, the Jews can say, "yeah and the Holocaust was? Because if it wasn't why did all you folks turn your backs on us when you damn well knew what was happening."

ANd to be fair, everyone knew what has happening and what was going to happen. THere was an international conference before World War 2, I think at Evian, when the issue of accepting Jewish refugees was discussed and everyone turned their back on them. So is it any wonder when the war is over the Jews will say, "Fuck you, we're going to do this ourselves."

 

[Montez]

At bottom Israel is no better than any muslim-ruled country, and the only thing that seperates their method of operation from their arab neighbors is their religion and the financial aid they recieve.

Supporting Israel over the palestinians is like supporting the English over the Irish before the Irish Republic. I've got no sympathy for them, there's plenty of land in the world that could have been used to create a jewish homeland that would insure the safety of the jewish people, without giving implicit support of old testament "chosen people vs. the world" crap. The holocaust was a horrible, horrible thing, but using it as a crutch to gain sympathy when they purposely created a state in an area that would guarantee near-constant war is ridiculous. Yeah, they really have my sympathy when they've purposely set themselves up so that millions of arabs would hate them and guarantee that another holocaust would happen if the arabs ever got the upper hand.

 

[welsh]

MOntez- I generally agree with you that the Israeli's have little reason, based on modern values, to expect legitimacy for their cause.

But that wasn't my point. As for popular legitimacy or "righteousness" I am not sure if the Israelis care.

What you have in Israel, I think, is part of the same problem you have seen in the US of late- the sense of fear and insecurity run amock.

In the Israeli case though, it's deep.

THere are lots of nations that lack states and which want to acquire states. Examples-- the Kurds for Kurdistan, the Eritreans for Eritrea, and the Igbo during Biafra. THe Igbo lost and got crushed, the Kurds are divided and the Eritreans did it through war.

THe Jews had no state. They could have made one in Uganda- i believe was an option. I think Australia was one too. Would it have made a difference? There are very few uninhabited places in the world, and those that are, are uninhabited for very good reasons.

Now we could say that under modern notions the Israelis have no right to that state or what they do to the Muslims. But the Israelis claim the right of security is similiar to that of the US- our security justifies our actions.

Now do the Israelis have a claim? Yes. One could say modern values say no. Fair enough. But modern values have not stopped genocides from happening in the 20th Century. Kampuchea is perhaps the most glaring example, but there have been other cases of ethnic violence- including what the Israelis do to their neighbors.

If you were the Israelis would you count on international outrage as your guide? After you have lost 6 million in Europe? I doubt it. For all the outrage that the international community puts forward, have they made the world a safer place for Jews- not really. And if you were to promise it, they would laugh at you. Why? Because the world turned their back on them once, why would they trust you again?

So let's go to the religious motivation. THe Israelis claim it's the holy land they are reclaiming. The arguments for the most miitant of the Palestinians, is that it's a holy war. So two religious movements going head to head over the same stretch of dirt? Is one better than the other?

Ok, but the Israelis took it by conflict? Yes, through a civil war. The two fought over a piece of land and one one and the other lost. Well that's not much better than most of human history.

So if you are going back to the question of International humanitarian values saying the Israelis are wrong, they would laugh at you- as if those values matter or if those values were enough to protect them.

As stated before I am pretty lenient towards the Palestinians on this one, but I think the religious radicals on both sides are whacked.

I don't think the Israelis are worried as much about your sympathy. The only place they need to get it is the US. What matters is that they remember what happened. They conquered that piece of dirt, and the only way they are going to give it back is if they get conquered in return. Because they know it would allow another holocaust, they won't let that happen.

 

[Sovz]

There was a bus station bombing it Tel-Aviv this morning.
that’s rather suspicious, there were no "terrorist acts" as israel presents them for more then two months now, including after all the targeted killings of the resistance leaders.

two months, and suddenly, after a court decision favoring the palestinians... BOOM.

This is rather suspicious if you ask me, just two days after.

Israel is more then capable to stop the palestinains from blowing themselves, so why suddenly it didnt. IMO is that it either intentionally let them pass, or even worse planted the bomb themselves. What better explanation do the israeli authorities have for building the damned fence?

we are protecting our citizens from terrorist acts.

now if you ask me, something is rather fishy here.

 

[quietfanatic]

The Israelis were there before. It is the 'Holy Land', so they are not going to just buy some cheap land north of Adelaide or something. Even though others were there before, the Jews are there again thanks to their determination and the actions of England and now America. They may not have gained the land according to politically correct methods but they are still fighting for their survival. If you were beaten and subjugated for so many centuries, I am sure you might be a bit twisted and viciously defensive. I would probably go and hunt down the Nazis in South America myself if I was in Israels position. Judaism is more about justice and retribution than forgiveness, which creates many of their problems. It is a 'backed into the corner' response, the state of Israel being surrounded by hostile nations which do not acknowledge their right to be there.

The Jews do not just have a huge influence on the media, but also on politicians. As well as the money, they have the numbers. There are more than four million Jews in America, sympathetic to Israel, and they make or break the next American President. If you lose the Jewish vote, you lose everything.

The Palestinians are in a mess as well because most of the other Muslims dislike them only marginally less than the Jews. They will be happy to use the Palestinians to attack the Jews, maybe even justifiably, without getting their own hands dirty. I believe that foreign extremists and even governments will try to fuel the conflict indefinitely, even though the Israelis and Palestinians could make a good job of it all by themselves.

The Israelis have gone too far in many situations, such as the establishment of the highly provocative settlements, but they still have a right to be left alone. Most Jews in Israel are secular or moderate, but the extremists try to take over, and are perceived as necessarily strong enough to defend the Holy Land. They think that the security fence will protect them (it is contributing to lowered attacks, so they say). If it as the cost of the Palestinians, who are enemies, why do you think they would care if it could save lives?

Israel is more then capable to stop the palestinains from blowing themselves, so why suddenly it didnt. IMO is that it either intentionally let them pass, or even worse planted the bomb themselves.

Are you joking?

The Mossad and similar security organizations are among the best (and most ruthless) in the world. They have a sophisticated network of spies in Palestinian territory and still, they could not stop the attacks. If they could, they wouldn't need the fence.

They are not trying to gain world sympathy by killing their own own people. Don't be so paranoid. They simply don't care what the world thinks of them (as long as they are continuously supported). They don't need to 'let' people bomb them, they cannot stop them all. Or do you think they find it entertaining for people to kill busloads of their people?

The wall is mostly a practical thing, for defensive purposes. They do not want to steal more territory, just consolidate what they already have and make the country safe.

The only possible positive political impact of the fence would be if it was seen as similar to the Berlin Wall. However, in this case, the two groups hate each other, are from different cultures and agreed borders do not even exist, so I'll have to scratch that hopeful idea of seeing both sides taking down the wall together.

 

[Brother None]

And you tell that to a Belgian... Tsss...

No really: if you say the Palestinians don't have a right to their own country because they had never had a country in the (distant) past, then Jordania shouldn't exist either. Then it should either be a part of the Abbesidan Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Roman Empire, the Eastern Roman Empire, the Hashemite "Empire", the British Empire or what not. Because you see, there never was a "Jordania". The British created it in 1921, when they made Abdullah amir of what would be Trans-Jordania.

Basically, the Palestinians have a right to their own nation just as much as the "Jordanians" do.

Hahaha, man, you think that's the only one? Almost all of the African states were created in the 20th century by drawing arbitrary lines through colonised territories. None of them have any right to exist, by CC's criterium. They're drawn straight through tribes, geographic boundaries and whatnow.

Now we could say that under modern notions the Israelis have no right to that state or what they do to the Muslims. But the Israelis claim the right of security is similiar to that of the US- our security justifies our actions.

Under modern notions Israel is recognised by the UN and thus a state.

Can't really go around that one.

As stated before I am pretty lenient towards the Palestinians on this one, but I think the religious radicals on both sides are whacked.

I am not. The Palestinians, as far as I'm concerned, have no right to a nation. Not because of their historical roots, that's all bullshit and claptrap, but because they have done nothing to prove that there could be a secure, non-violent Palestinian state.

A lot of the non-violent Palestinians have fled the area, let's be honest here. What's left has abnormally huge amounts of extremists. So what if we gave them a state? What if we convinced Israel to let the Palestinians have a state bordering to theirs? End of the problem? Hell no. They would keep on attacking Israel.

Israel can live with having Arab neighbouring states, it has proven so time and again, until they got nivaded. Most Arab nations have learned their lesson and stay the fuck away from Israel. The Palestinians, however...tssss...

I mean you don't have the right to a nation because you shout at the highest pitch of your voice, and you certainly don't have a right to a nation because you commit terrorist acts against those on "your ground". If we accept this from Palestine, what's next? What about the Basques? Chechna?

No nation for them, fuck that. Let them be swallowed up and divided by their neighbours, like Jordan and Egypt.

 

[Sovz]

They do not want to steal more territory

Somehow I doubt it

No nation for them, fuck that. Let them be swallowed up and divided by their neighbours, like Jordan and Egypt.

The problem is, that they dont want them

But seriously, the Gaza strip was Egyptian until after the six days war, later when Egypt and Israel signed a peace treaty, Israel offered to give back Gaza strip in addition to Sinai, but Saddat refused saying that they don’t need it.

Almost the same thing with Jordan, in fact the Palestinians even started a revolt against the Jordanian monarchy back in 76’, the Jordanians slaughtered the revolt (in an incident called the black October) and sent Mr. Arafat to Lebanon to cause trouble there.

 

[Fyu-jon!!!]

They do not want to steal more territory

Somehow I doubt it

Well, that depends on which sector of the population you're talking about.

Extremist fundamentalists (i.e. a minority that may well produce a second Ig'al Amir*) - yes.

Secular and moderate religious Israelis (i.e. the majority) - no. Most people don't want anything to do with it. That's not to say it's always been like that (hence the old, well established settlements, like Ariel), but it is now.

And speaking of those settlements (i'm not talking about small holdouts) - they're the reason the barrier** doesn't hug the 1967 border all the way. You can't just leave settlements with 15,000+ people to rot. Building them in the first place, back in the 70s-80s, might have been wrong and illegal, but they're a de facto reality now. However, that doesn't mean that the current layout is the best compromise between security and human rights and that it can't and won't be changed (our own supreme court has already ruled that 30 km of it must be relocated).


* The guy who assassinated Rabin. There's serious talk about an assassination attempt at Sharon for planning to evacuate Gaza.
** wall and fence are both inaccurate since it's made up of both, as well as electronic surveillance.

 

[welsh]

The problem with the palestinians and the israelis is, I think, the same.

Both have populations that generally want to have peaceful, prosperous lives, have a nice home and see their kids be happy. But these are populations that are both very security conscious and willing to go to violence if you piss them off. Both like the idea of someone doing a little kick ass when they feel it's called for.

Alone these people could live together.

But then you have the extreme. Among the Palestinians you have your Hamas, among the Jews you have your religious fanatics. Both of them see this as a religious mission.

I used to think the government was kind of screwed by this, but the governments of both keep playing footsie with the extreme violent wings. Perhaps because each can be used to turn up the heat which keeps each government in power.

Moderation and peaceful compromise are not likely, becuase the more violent extremists can turn the heat on for the entire society.

Irony is that most of these guys really want the same thing- a hot long legged blond who has both experience and is low on moral scruples.

 

[Bradylama]

The question I'd like to pose, though, is what else are the Israelis supposed to do? Do you honestly think that the West Bank will ever be independent of Israel without any means of keeping terrorists out? This is just like Bush saying Palestinian refugees can't return to their old homes in Israel if there's to be an independant Palestine. Nobody likes to hear it, but everyone knows its true.