What should have israel done instead?


It seems to me like the Fatah leadership doesn’t really want peace. Look at their move on the ICC, which again quite possibly lost the Israeli left the election. They had to wait three months and they’d have had everything they wanted in the first place!

If there was peace, the (corrupt, no doubt about it) Fatah leadership would be slung out on their ear, after all. And on the Israeli right, while I’m not at all sure that Netenyahu thinks the same way, Lieberman and Bennett…well…


Only the ones I vote for. Also, Palin didn’t get elected to anything of note, unless “reality TV star” is a position of power.

I don’t have to like what Isreal does. They’re running towards facism and have been for quite some time now. I’m not sure how I’m “playing into” anyone’s hands when they’re going to do what the did regardless of what the US wanted. You know, [I]like they always have.[/I] Then they come over here and start mucking around in domestic politics and pissing on our lawn like they run the world.


You’re still blaming “Israel”, as you defend the Republicans and the Tea Party elected, etc.

Thanks for that budget brinkmanship you support!
(Same “logic” of accusing me of supporting austerity because I’m British)

Your double standards are notable, of course.


No I’m blaming the elected leader of the country.

Much like others rightly blamed the US when Bush was being an idiot.

Isreal reelected the tool, even after he went off the reservation, so therefore it’s their fault.


Ah, so you’re a backer of Obama’s moves on spying. You re-elected him, therefore it’s your fault.
You’re a nasty illiberal, afaik, then.

(And of course, again, by your logic I’m a austerity-pushing right winger…)


One thing I’m curious about- if a Dem let a UN Security Council resolution pass against Israel, how much backlash would they receive for it?
Would it be offbalanced by a rise in support among Muslims?


In sheer numbers, there are a few more people who identify as Jewsish in the US than there are people who identify as Muslim. However, in a pure calculation, one must ask the following questions: if the US doesn’t let a UNSC resolution pass, are many Muslims going to shift their vote to a Republican? I really, sincerely doubt it. That’s the nastiness of identity politics - the more one party has you “in their pocket” because of identity, the less they have to actually do to support you in order to get your vote. Obama lost 9% of the Jewish vote from 2008 to 2012, but still pulled 69% of it. That said, both demographics are pretty small in the US - Jews make up only 2% of the electorate, after all. It’s less about the votes, and more about the symbolism. That’s one thing that GWB’s campaigns managed to grasp. Jews in general voted against GWB, but talking about “Israel” in those campaigns was all about the conservative Christian view of things, regardless of whatever platitudes were included.


Of course you can blame the American people for the Republican congress. And you should. We’re (writ large) responsible for those we (mass-plural “we”) elect.

You can’t blame the American people for Sarah Palin because the American people actually denied her an elected position of power. Any power that she has is due to individual or corporate actions, and you should blame her directly or blame those individuals who have handed her non-political power.

Yes, and there are differences between individuals in a group and the group.

However, if the country is a functioning democracy (like the US and Israel both appear to be), then the people as a whole are responsible for their government. They put them there. You can also blame them (as a whole) for the actions of that government. But only as a whole. You can’t (or at least shouldn’t) blame an individual, because that individual person may have voted the other way.

So yeah, the American people are responsible for the NSA’s practices, the Iraq invasion, and any other action that our elected government has taken on behalf of the people. The American people are CERTAINLY responsible for the GOP/Tea-Party Congress, and we’re responsible for Obama. That doesn’t mean that you can hold Tin Wisdom or Dave Markell or Timex individually accountable though.


Nah, it’s my fault.


That’s a complete cop-out, when all Israelis are being blamed individually for the election results.

I can and will hold people with that view individually responsible for every last policy, which is plain logic when you ignore the fact that democracie[I]s allow people to hold different views to those of their government[/I]. I disagree with the UK government on 95%+ of their policies, for instance, and yet you blame me (depersonalisation is nonsense, again) for ATOS, etc.


And Netanyahu walks back his previous statement that he didn’t want a two state solution, because he’s not as crazy as he pretended to be to get elected.


I said this upthread already, but I’ll repeat it: his statement on the eve of the election is the true one. Watch his policies going forward. See walls and settlements expand. Try to reconcile that with a two state solution.


True - that’s the view of Lieberman and Bennett, though. Let’s not sugar-coat.

Dave - And once more you try and link defence against terrorism with settlements!


There’s some truth to saying these are two different things, but really, the settlements are one of the reasons for the attacks by Palestinians, who have not surprisingly come to the conclusion that while violence may not be winning for them, it at least gives them the illusion of doing something, and pretty much everything else they’ve tried has come to naught.

Unless you really think there’s no connection between the continual building of settlements on land taken from the Palestinians in 1967, and terrorism. And these settlements are not, as I’m sure you know, not little log cabin affairs. They are freakin huge complexes often with zoning and land claims far beyond their initial construction, and which are designed specifically to Balkanize the rest of Palestinian territory and isolate Palestinians from each other. The damn things look more like Crusader forts than towns.


Couldn’t Israel, as part of a negotiation, transfer ownership of those settlements to the Palestinians?

It seems like that could actually be beneficial to everyone involved, as providing not just land, but nice developed communities to move into would likely make the population less likely to want to blow stuff up.

Not that such a thing would happen, but it COULD happen.


Starlight, we’ve been told to ignore each others’ posts in the past. Do your part and stop replying to me. I only see what you say to me when someone else quotes it–but there should be nothing to quote.

And TheWombat nailed it. Check out this somewhat outdated graphic from 2010 (it’s worse now, not better). The areas in gold are West Bank territories where Palestinians are either restricted or outright forbidden. Countless roadblocks, settlements, and walls have chopped their homes into isolated, economically unviable enclaves.


I remind you that Hamas is based in Gaza, not the West Bank. You seem to be confusing two issues there.

And I support Peace Now, and don’t have time for the settlers, so…

Timex - Unlikely. The settlements which have been ruled illegal have been bulldozed.


No, I don’t think I’m confusing anything. There are attacks from Gaza, and there are attacks by Palestinians from the West Bank, though not usually with rockets these days. More likely with cars or knives. But if you think Hamas would have any real support if there were no settlements and the Israelis had actually, you know, given the Palestinians in general an equal shot at the West Bank, I think you might be the one who is mistaken. There are issues that go back to the establishment of the British Mandate and the establishment of the Jewish Agency, sure, but the crux of the issue today remains what happened in 1967 and its aftermath. This is true for Palestinians wherever they are, and settlements are the most visible and dramatic evidence that Israel has zero intention of cooperating in the creation of a viable Palestinian state.

That’s not to champion, Sartre-like, violent acts by the Palestinians, but it sure helps explain why they occur.


But you are again seeming to conflating Hamas and the West Bank. They have a minimal armed presence there these days (it’s in Gaza).

Why not ask the Egyptians why their border with Gaza remains closed? It’s not because Hamas are good neighbours! Have you read their charter? Read about what they’ve done to Christian Arabs in Gaza? They’re an entirely different proposition to Fatah, who can be negotiated with (as the IRA were, in Northern Ireland).

Hamas initially rose because of Fatah’s corruption, incidentally.

There’s no explanation other than terrorism for thousands of rockets fired exclusively at civilian areas within Israel.


Starlight, Amnesty International, the International Red Cross, Human Rights Watch, and many other groups have all said the the building of walls by Israel is a violation of the Geneva convention. They are being used to fragment the West Bank and annex territory. That understandably provokes violence from Palestinians whose land and economic livelihood is stripped from them. It’s violence Israel can completely avoid by tearing down the walls, pulling out of the settlements, and returning to the borders of 1967. The fact is that Israel doesn’t want the peace this would bring. It wants the territory.

So yes, in Starlight land, that means that “stopping terrorists having free access to Israel is intolerable to me,” and I will indeed keep saying it.