-->
@Vader
Hamas attack Israel countlesslyIsrael responds backOH LOOK AT THIS OMG LOOK FREE PALESTINE
Dude I expected better from you, aren't you Orthodox? How can you side with K_kes over Orthodox Palestinians?
The Israeli-Arab conflict
Posts
Total:
109
-->
@triangle.128k
I side with both. There should be an unified state where each can live peacefully with each other, I don't side with Hama terrorists
-->
@Benjamin
Who creates legality?
I would suggest that legality was imposed by force and tenuous agreement, and is maintained by force and tenuous agreement.
Hence....."The Israeli-Arab conflict".
And all based upon tenuous and highly speculative ideology.....Good Lord!....... Humans are clever sometimes.
Nope.....Unfortunately most humans out-sheep the sheep, most of the time.
Hey....Let's fire rockets....Yeah.
Hey...... let's fire rockets back....Yeah.
Excuse me..... Why don't we all sit down and have a chat.
BAAAAAAH.
-->
@Vader
I'll just say that your understanding of Muslim empires and how they operated in terms of dealing with non-muslim inhabitants is quite biased and yellow media-fed.
I'm surprised at the amount of people diverting the issue to "how much of a terrorist group Hamas is and what they're doing" which is a debate of its own. First off, I don't have to support Hamas to somehow justify their rocket attack to Tel aviv. They own Gaza, that's basically their territory. They evidently warned the Israelians to refrain from the Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood- which they were forcibly stripping the native original Palestinians of and the attacks on Al-Aqsa. They launched after the warning and yet the Israelians actually managed to prevent some of the rockets from landing- which only means they knew it was coming. Then there was this anti-tank missile attack on one of the patrolling jeeps of Israel military roaming around sheikh jarrah where still no death occured as to my knowledge yet. So, the narrative is pretty skewed on your part when you claim that the Palestinians or Hamas is not doing the right thing by "defending their land from being illegally destroyed and firing back" lol. You kill the women and the children by mass and I can't protect them cause yeah, that's not how diplomatic settlement works!
-->
@Safalcon7
Hamas is brutalising and terrifying their own people and blackmailing their people and PLO to not negotiate with Israel.
This then results in their people being victims of Israel since no negotiations of any kind can take place and Hamas continually blackmails their people to be human shields and involuntary warriors in a battle they don't want to be part of but are forced to be at gunpoint.
-->
@RationalMadman
Hamas was never the one to make any deal happen for that matter. 8 months back UAE constructed a deal with Israel while promising a peaceful negotiation between Israel and Palestine- what happened? The UAE ambassador in Israel has set an example by NOT releasing any official update on the current situation- for once. Arab actually tried to play mediator between the two but within political reasons. They've never been the one- despite belonging to the same majority community as the Palestine- to ever help out the ACTUAL victims here. And you expect a deal with Israel- who are actually working towards that Zionist land will magically absolve the problems? Hamas never supported the UAE deal and they're right to not support any Israel deal 'cause that'll just worsen the case for the Palestinians- not just the Muslims but the Christians too. You can badger on Hamas all day- maybe I can too but there's a specific ideology other than the terrorist agenda- that they are quite justified in. Politically.
-->
@RationalMadman
Besides I was speaking of the specific context of their firing back as they own Gaza, however that may be. Like, in my country the current government is in its 3rd course through vote-corruption. Now i aint complaining about that everyday, If there was an international invasion in my country which is very much possible in the next few years if the country decides to fight back, won't I support to defend my land?
-->
@Safalcon7
am not actually saying you aren't entitled to your opinion especially as your profile states you to be a Muslim Bangladeshi, however I would like to tell you that you should perhaps research about Hamas.PLO are a puppet-organisation of Hamas now, the leaders of PLO that didn't cooperate were thrown off buildings (a tradition they have to 'make an example' on top of the other things they do) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-palestinians-gaza-scene-idUSL1264188820070612WARNING an answer in the following link may have real-life violent video content, it isn't too graphic as it passes Quora's terms of use but I haven't viewed it and can't speak for how brutal it is.Hamas are a mafia, a terrorist organisation of sorts, that have used and still do use pregnant women, adolescents and all kinds of human shield or 'provoke and play the victim' tactics against Israel to frame the other for needing to fight back.It is Hamas who has blackmailed Palestine to never be able to negotiate with Israel, not the other way around.
They can't evict them, Hamas are the legal representation Palestine has (I am not joking) because they 'won' elections there to be the local council/governors (if you didn't vote for them or at least pretend to, you risked you and your entire family being brutally punished, so they've won every election since they properly enforced that).
The issue is about how to achieve piece at all at this point, Hamas have no intention of negotiating and PLO are submissive/compliant to Hamas because Hamas will kill their leaders if they aren't so both organisations that lead Palestinians refuse to negotiate with Israel. In the meantime, Israel has grown more and more conservative and hostile so it's now twoway aggression and hostility.
So much Anti-Semitism because of this. I bet you if the roles were reversed then people would be coming to attack Jewish people. When Muslim people attack Jews nothing is said and is backed by sheeps. Saying Israel doesn't exist is Anti Semitic as it denies the existence of many people who live in Israel where a majority population is Jewish, thus saying the Jewish people do not exist
By the way, I support neither side if it isn't obvious. Hamas treat Christians like shit and Israel has been known to treat Christians like shit too.
-->
@Vader
So much Anti-Semitism because of this. I bet you if the roles were reversed then people would be coming to attack Jewish people. When Muslim people attack Jews nothing is said and is backed by sheeps.
Really? because last I checked, Muslims were being severely criticized for supporting Hamas style retaliation, for actually defending Palestine and its people. More so in the west. US State Department Spokesperson Ned Price refused to acknowledge Palestine even as a state now and said Israel has the right to self defense. What a joke! When asked if they condemn the attack on children killed in Gaza, he hesitated in condemning. lol. The illegal expansion of Israel for the last 50 years along the line and suddenly its anti-semitic to call them on it. Besides, anti-zionism is never anti-semitic- even the dogs do understand that.
-->
@Benjamin
The Israelian occupation of the west bank started in 1967 and has been in effect for more than half a century. Before 1967, the piece of land was occupied by the Transjordanian kingdom - also illegally I might add. Before that, the piece was a part of the British mandate "Palestine", which included Israel, Gaza, Jordan and the west bank. Before that, it was controlled by the Ottomans. It would be dubious to claim that the current occupation is more a legal problem than any of the previous ones.
Good thing I never claimed that. Do you think I support British imperialism? Israel is occupying a de jure sovereign state and wiping it off of the map. Representatives of Palestine do not and never did consent to that, so Israel is just conquering and destroying something that is not theirs to take. A nation, its culture, and its people do not waive the right to self-determination because dead people started a war in '67.
Additionally, the territory is important for Israel's security, an all-important thing for the Israelian state due to the 6+ wars and conflicts with the Arabs.
What about Palestine's security? Do you not think that building settlements and military checkpoints within, eliminating the voting rights of the members of, and annexing portions inside, Palestine constitutes an existential threat to the nation?
And I am not unwilling to believe this, but please substantiate your national security concerns.
If we are talking about issues in terms of importance, aka priority and feasibility of solving, the occupation of the west bank isn't high on the list.
Issues of human and national rights are always important. It is not as if we can only deal with one issue at a time.
Even if you could instantly remove this occupation, who is to say that Arabs won't invade Israel in an attempt to eradicate the state as they did in 1948 and later in 1973?
Will the sovereignty of Palestine somehow enable an invasion?
-->
@triangle.128k
Can you substantiate your claim that Israel's existence is illegitimate?
-->
@Username
You said you had studied this topic for a long time. Did you study the history of this conflict as well?
A nation, its culture, and its people
Palestine, area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip (along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea) and the West Bank (west of the Jordan River). [https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine].
Palestine was never a state. Palestine was a geographical term. If anything, the word Palestinian was used to describe Jews before the state of Israel was born. The Jerusalem Post was first called the "Palestine Post" [1]. This was the first Jewish newspaper and the company was made by a Jew before Israel was even a thing.
The modern usage of the word "Palestine" as referring to the Arab population was a conscious Arab strategy with the specific intention to fuel propaganda and sway public opinion in favour of the Arabs. If you have read about the six-day war then you know that the "Palestinian flag" didn't exist before Israel conquered the west bank after being attacked by Transjordanian, and neither did Palestinian resistance to the illegal occupation (Arabs in the west-bank didn't crave freedom from illegal Jordanian occupation). The flag of Palestine is literally the flag of Jordania except for the number of stars, which is different.
The claim that there was a culture and nation called Palestine is not true.
According to statistics:
- In 1914, there were 689.000 total inhabitants in Palestine, 13.6% of them Jewish.
- In 1947 there were 2 million people, 32% of them Jewish.
In just 3 decades the non-Jewish population of Palestine doubled. Arab immigration was also substantial, meaning the population was not stable. There was never a "Palestinian nation", there was just an Arab nation. The earliest conflict between Jews and Arabs was not due to Palestinian nationalism, it was due to Arab nationalism. They expected of the allies that after the Ottomans were defeated the entire Middle East would be sovereign Arab land. Once again, there was neither a Palestinian nation nor Palestinian people before the war of 1967.
do not waive the right to self-determination because dead people started a war in '67
Israel got their nation the same way every other Arab got it: through the division of territory, fair or unfair, by the Allied powers. The Arabs can't deny the legitimacy of Israel without also undermining their own legitimacy. The UN made a plan wherein the remaining parts of Palestine were to be divided into a Jewish and Arab state (TransJordania already was given to the Arabs, even though it was a part of Palestine). But the Arabs in Palestine intentionally refused to create their state in 1948. Instead, the Arab nations attacked Israel and started a war. Thus started the Jordanian occupation of the west bank and the endless conflict. The Arabs in 1967 forced Israel into a war, and Jordania attacked Israel -- thus the west bank fell into Israeli hands.
The problem of today that is the Israelian-Palestinian conflict, ultimately, is the fault of Arab mistakes throughout history. They simply did not accept the authority of the UN, nor did they respect the Jewish right to live in peace and prosperity. All they cared about was attacking Israel because of grand nationalistic dreams. Today, Arabs in the west bank and Gaza strip are being occupied by a foreign power and also being led by terrorists posing as freedom fighters. Blame that on Israel all you want, but Arabs have had THE major role in creating this problem. Even the actions of Israel, like the occupation itself, can be traced back to unfair and provocative military actions by Arab states.
Representatives of Palestine do not and never did consent to that
Who do you consider representative of Palestine? PLO, Hamas, Fatah? These are terrorist organizations, and the very "Palestinian Authorities" organization were created by multiple of these. Yassir Arafat, the very person who created and led PNA, was also the leader of the terrorist organization Fatah. These people and organizations have selfish, political and/or religious reasons for existing, and I would bet all my money any day that they aren't any better than Israel with regards to helping Palestinians.
Do you know the son of Hamas? This person was the son of one of Hamas's leaders, but his life led to him working for Israel security and later move to the west.
Here is what he has to say, on behalf of UN WATCH, about the PNA, the "Palestinian representatives": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2NaiX-hvVQ.
I highlight the quote: "You are the greatest enemy of the Palestinian people!". Now that puts things into perspective, doesn't it.
I am not denying the problems the occupation caused. But do not tell me that these representatives have any legitimacy other than the power they have accumulated specifically because they use terrorism and other means of prolonging and worsening conflict.
please substantiate your national security concerns
- The constant threat of war with Arabs is a major concern for Israel
- The west bank is the perfect springboard for invasions, missile attacks, pre-emptive airstrikes and terrorist attacks
- With control of the west bank, Arab armies can easily reach Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, effectively cutting the country of Israel in half
- The hills provide excellent protection for military installations. It's either an Arab advantage to attack Israel or Israelian advantage to protect itself.
- After the war in 1967, Jordan has never attacked Israel. The hills prevent any attack from the East.
Much more importantly though, with being safe from invaders Israel doesn't need to strike first to have a chance in war -- helping ensure peace and prevent another six-day war.
Human rights issues are always important
I agree that human rights are important. Tell that to the Arab nations. This video, while being funny, explains the situation: Andrew Klavan: the one-state solution
The major takeaway point is that Arabs living inside Israel live better, freer lives with more democracy and human rights than Arabs in any Arabian nation.
Why would you rather have yet another failed democracy in the west bank, when most "Palestinians" immigrated into Palestine the same ways Jews did.
Unless one agrees with those Arabs who are motivated by irrational religious or nationalistic extremism, then one should agree that Israel annexation is a valid possibility.
Personally, I think that the impossibility of ensuring that former terrorist organizations treat people fairly (look at Gaza), coupled with the security needs of Israel as well as its superior democracy, economy and human rights; I think all of these points together show that the best solution, while maybe the most controversial, would be that the west bank gets annexed by Israel. It will be more beneficial for the Arabs, it will remove the power of terrorist organizations and the state of Israel can be much safer. Israel already has a large Arab population, with Arab parties and Arab members of the government. Arabs in Israel are better off in almost every way.
-->
@Benjamin
Planet Earth is legitimate.
As I suggested previously, who lives where and the legitimacy thereof, is maintained by force and tenuous agreement.
And if the Jewish homeland is in Arabia, then all Jews are Arabs.
The difference is religious ideology and assumed culture.
-->
@zedvictor4
Homeland and homeland. More like religious and national ties with the land. Israel was a nation of Jews thousands of years ago, and it lasted for hundreds of years. With continued invasions, the Jewish presence diminished but was still there throughout history. Before and especially after the world wars Israel was the place Jews immigrated to, and they bought pieces of land became farmers. It was first after the second world war that the conflict and dispute about "legitimacy" started. I uphold that any functional democracy with an agreeing population and basic human rights is legitimate in the sense that removing it would be unjustifiable. Israel more than conforms to this standard.
-->
@Benjamin
Who did they buy the land from?
And "Jews" otherwise known as human beings, as ever, lived and live all over the World.
And legitimacy is fine, if you only have to agree with yourself....With U.S military support of course.
Planet Earth is a place of people....As is the Arabian Peninsular....Everywhere is legitimate.
-->
@Benjamin
I did study the history of the conflict. I have heard every claim you have made before. I'm going to be collapsing to the things that are actually important.
The main problem with your argument about the status of Palestine is that regardless of the history of Palestine, people whose culture is radically different than Israel's have a legitimate interest in separating from Israel. You cannot be perpetually controlled and erased (and yes erased, because Palestine is de jure a state) by another nation. A nation of people have the right to choose who governs them. If they want to be governed by another group, that is fine. If they do not, then there's a problem if the governing continues to happen.
I can't believe you believe that the slow erasure of a sovereign nation is just fine but targeting civilians in attacks (which is something that Israel is not exactly innocent of either) makes you a party that cannot negotiate for peace. Whoever becomes the representatives of the Palestinian people are going to oppose the occupation of the West Bank, because people in the West Bank do, too. I would oppose the occupation as well if I was increasingly unable to move within my own nation. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_freedom_of_movement#:~:text=Checkpoints%20between%20Israel%20and%20West%20Bank,-There%20are%2039&text=There%20are%2063%20gates%20in,a%20few%20hours%20each%20day.)
Just substantiate the claims about national security with a source. Please. You can't just theorize about things as complex as this without actually citing someone who knows what they're talking about.
I agree that human rights are important. Tell that to the Arab nations
I almost always oppose human rights abuses done by any nation.
The major takeaway point is that Arabs living inside Israel live better, freer lives with more democracy and human rights than Arabs in any Arabian nation.
And?
Unless one agrees with those Arabs who are motivated by irrational religious or nationalistic extremism, then one should agree that Israel annexation is a valid possibility.
Let me know when the Palestinians consent to that.
*Side note: It is not clear that the 1967 War was initiated by Arab nations. To be clear: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_relating_to_the_Six-Day_War#Preemptive_strike_v._unjustified_attack)
-->
@Username
You do not need a university-level professor to teach kids how to write. I do not need an expert to explain the fact that Israel is vulnerable to attacks from the west bank.
A nation of people have the right to choose who governs them.
Annexation by Israel ensures the Arabs in the west bank can vote on whoever they want -- remember that there are already Arab members of the Israelian government.
If the west bank becomes an independent country it will most likely become a dysfunctional democracy or something worse. Just look at the Gaza strip.
Also, did you even watch the video I provided. He literally denies that Palestinians are choosing their leaders; rather they are self-appointed.
Whatever the average Palestinian says is determined by religious fundamentalism and political propaganda by groups who breach the basic human rights of both Jews and Arabs. One cannot hear their real voices clearly, and thus backing one's claims on "Palestinian opinion" is a fallacy.
Do you support the regime of North Korea? The population does, and you would be a hypocrite if you do not accept the fact that a populations opinion is irrelevant unless it is free of outside control --- as is the case with North Korea and the west bank.
-->
@Benjamin
Whatever the average Palestinian says is determined by religious fundamentalism and political propaganda by groups who breach the basic human rights of both Jews and Arabs. One cannot hear their real voices clearly, and thus backing one's claims on "Palestinian opinion" is a fallacy.
1. You have no way to determine that this is true; it's not a reasonable assumption. Palestinians in the West Bank are subject to military law, have their homes repeatedly settled in by outsiders, cannot vote in the elections of their occupiers, and have no free movement within their own country.
2. This is irrelevant because the Israeli annexation of the West Bank gives Palestinians no choice. By the time they are liberated from whatever authoritarian government they live under they'll no longer have a say in their statehood.
Do you support the regime of North Korea? The population does, and you would be a hypocrite if you do not accept the fact that a populations opinion is irrelevant unless it is free of outside control --- as is the case with North Korea and the west bank.
I do not support North Korea, but if America permanently annexed North Korea against the will of the North Koreans I would oppose that as well.
-->
@Benjamin
The difference between the population's opinion in this case and the North Korea case (which I don't even know to be true) is that there is the potential for an alternative action. In that case you afford more credence to the opinion of the populace in case you end up ruling over a group of people who oppose being ruled over. In addition, it is highly unlikely that Palestinians would support an Israeli annexation of Palestine even without PLO propaganda. None of these are variables in the NK case.
Finally, I should point out that if you're the one who supports the Israeli annexation of Palestine, you would need to establish that Palestinians do support it. Even if I did concede that Palestinians may or may not support an annexation (which is ridiculous), you'd have to establish that they do.
I dont think the conflict effects america
-->
@Username
Do you claim that a minority (religious and political activists; self-appointed leaders who don't care about human rights) should rule Palestine?
Or
Do you agree that they should be able to rule themselves by living in a free democracy wherein their voices are heard and their votes counted?
Remember that Arabs in Israel live better lives than Arabs in other countries -- and the Arab minority in Israel has a solid voice with solid representation in the Israeli parliament.
THE ONLY REASON WHY ARABS IN THE WEST BANK AREN'T LIVING GOOD LIVES IS BECAUSE ISRAEL HAS NOT ANNEXED THE WEST BANK.
Simple as that.
-->
@Username
Once again, their direct permission isn't needed. There are no legitimate representatives to ask. Furthermore, their constant terrorism against civilians discredits their opinion from being put in high regard.
-->
@Benjamin
Do you claim that a minority (religious and political activists; self-appointed leaders who don't care about human rights) should rule Palestine?OrDo you agree that they should be able to rule themselves by living in a free democracy wherein their voices are heard and their votes counted?
I oppose both.
-->
@Benjamin
Obviously because you worded the second one as favorably as possible to your side. But I'm aware that you meant under a Jewish state.
-->
@Username
I was not referring to Israel specifically, but rather to a concept known in the west as "free democracy". I would much rather have the Palestinian people, or any people for that matter, sent to a free democracy than to any other type of state. I am too lazy to study expert articles digging for answers, but if you know about a free Arab democracy, please inform me. I would surely be happy if such a mythical beast existed in real life.
-->
@Username
Can you substantiate your claim that Israel's existence is illegitimate?
Because the land was Palestinian for centuries. Israelis came in as hostile settlers using a vague claim to justify Jewish apartheid.
-->
@triangle.128k
Don't take this personal, but your claims are BS.
"Palestinian" was first used to refer to Jews in Israel, evidenced by the Jerusalem post first being named the Palestinian post. Furthermore, Jewish immigrants were neither hostile or did they steal land -- how could they be, they did not have weapons or numbers. In fact, they bought the land and then cultivated it, literally being the least hostile one can possibly be. The conflict was never there until the British Mandate appointed an anti-jewish Muslim to be the religious leader of Jerusalem -- and even then it was still small clashes. Not before the Arab-started war in 1948 was there a serious conflict.
Jewish apartheid? You mean the occupation of the west bank, which came hundreds of years after the first Jewish immigrants arrived in Palestine. Even still, Arabs IN Israel have all the freedom and human rights everyone else gets. Your claims are absurd as well as untrue. Learn some history before making extreme claims about controversial issues.
-->
@Benjamin
I don't believe that Palestine is a free democracy.