That's an odd statement. Life isn't a children's movie and there's no pure good and evil, and a country-- not a single entity, and not frozen in time is so ambiguous and constantly-changing that stamping it with a single "GOOD", "BAD", "LAZY", "VIOLENT" stamp is reductionist and lazy. If you don't know the situation well enough (not saying you personally don't), I think it's better to just stay silent or at least make it clear that you are not certain in your views.
Israel Approves Construction of 1,800+ Settler Homes in Occupied West Bank
- Thread starter AAK
- Start date
That's an odd statement. Life isn't a children's movie and there's no pure good and evil, and a country-- not a single entity, and not frozen in time is so ambiguous and constantly-changing that stamping it with a single "GOOD", "BAD", "LAZY", "VIOLENT" stamp is reductionist and lazy. If you don't know the situation well enough (not saying you personally don't), I think it's better to just stay silent or at least make it clear that you are not certain in your views.
lol?
Sunster
Member
okie I'll substitute bad guy with apartheid state.
the two state solution has been dead for years, there's no place for a palestinian state to exist. gaza is a bombed-out hellhole that will be literally uninhabitable by human beings within the next few years, and the west bank is swiss cheese:
it's a convenient political fiction because it's something the israeli leadership is willing to give lip-service to, while a single state assimilating palestine and giving all citizens full legal rights is a complete non-starter. and since nobody will ever actually pressure israel to do anything we'll just have the current situation of apartheid and slow-moving ethnic cleansing.
It's the oddest thing that while Saudi Arabia no doubt officially wants Israel to cease to exist, their geopolitics and Israel's align very closely.
Messofanego
Banned
Why do you jump to Palestinians being inherently violent as the reason for settlements if you're not defending settlements?
TheRealTalker
Banned
Is there even anything left of the West Bank
us as a global community have failed so much here unfortunately
us as a global community have failed so much here unfortunately
Vox had a pretty good two part series on Settlements late last year. Doesn't really touch upon the evicted Palestinians or Israeli settlers facing that at all, but you get a decent overview of the history and more importantly the people who are moving out there today. A lot, probably most, of residents are not serious Zionists, they move out to the settlements because it offers a better life than in the major cities. The Gov spends a disproportionate amount of money on settlement residence than mainland ones resulting in better schools, services and so on. These people aren't radicals looking to be on the front lines for Israel, they're go there because they're getting a better life and the consequences aren't there problem. It's the epitome of indifference because they know the Palestinians have little to no recourse and the Israeli government goes above and beyond to keep them safe and happy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0uLbeQlwjw = History of settlements.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6L9mS9ti6o = A look at the current state and residents of settlements.
Ethnic cleansing isn't evil, folks. Glad that's cleared up.
cloudburst
Banned
Israeli Settlements in the West Bank have been occurring since 1967. Netanyahu has obsessed over settlements since the 90s when he outlined a plan for Israel to occupy 60% of the West Bank.
They have been built, regardless of the US President or policy, so maybe you should shift your blame elsewhere.
old manatee
Banned
Shameful.
JordanN
Banned
Where did I say "inherently violent"?
Since you want to drag settlements along, tell me why was Israel invaded in 1948 when they neither occupied Gaza or the West Bank? And before there was even state, why was there several riots targeted at Jews between 1920 - 1948?
No matter how some want to skew the conflict, it's never a black and white issue.
Gentleman Jack
Member
The issue is complicated but calls for reason and appeals for nuance tend to evaporate in the wake of galactically stupid rhetoric like "If Israel is just a land-hungry monster then why don't they invade two other countries instead of taking it from a marginalized and defenseless occupied population?"
Charles Brandon
Member
Exactly. What an asinine argument.
Expect to see this story in many permutations over the next few years, for the same settlement.
The "Israel approves construction of" part of the text refers to the settlement passing the first (called deposit) of multiple stages in the process of getting building permits. The next few steps will be:
1. A two month period for the public to file objections. This includes existing landowners (Palestinians), individuals, NGOs etc.
2. Then there will be a debate about these objections
3. Then the committee will decide on approval for validation (yes/no)
4. If successfully approved for validation applications for building permits can then be submitted.
I would hazard a guess that each of these steps will generate headlines like the one mentioned in OP.
For context: The new settlement (Amichai) is intended to rehouse the families from the Amona settlement which got demolished following the Israeli High Court Rulings of 1997/2003 /2006/2014 + Israeli police investigation in 2014. Amichai is located inside Area C which is administered by Israel under the Oslo II accord.
Additional clarifications to OP: The approval is AFAIK not for 1800 homes in terms of new settlements, but for 102 covering the Amichai settlement [first NEW settlement in ca. 25 years], as well as a series of settlement buildings inside the physical boundaries of already existing settlements blocks.
The "Israel approves construction of" part of the text refers to the settlement passing the first (called deposit) of multiple stages in the process of getting building permits. The next few steps will be:
1. A two month period for the public to file objections. This includes existing landowners (Palestinians), individuals, NGOs etc.
2. Then there will be a debate about these objections
3. Then the committee will decide on approval for validation (yes/no)
4. If successfully approved for validation applications for building permits can then be submitted.
I would hazard a guess that each of these steps will generate headlines like the one mentioned in OP.
For context: The new settlement (Amichai) is intended to rehouse the families from the Amona settlement which got demolished following the Israeli High Court Rulings of 1997/2003 /2006/2014 + Israeli police investigation in 2014. Amichai is located inside Area C which is administered by Israel under the Oslo II accord.
Additional clarifications to OP: The approval is AFAIK not for 1800 homes in terms of new settlements, but for 102 covering the Amichai settlement [first NEW settlement in ca. 25 years], as well as a series of settlement buildings inside the physical boundaries of already existing settlements blocks.
Thanks.
I think these sort of threads have just become "let's talk about the conflict again"-sort of topic and never really discuss the topic at hand, which I think we're all at fault for in a certain way. But I don't think an OT or something for that sort of thing would be a good thing so there's no solution.
TestOfTide
Banned
What about my side of the argument that the issue isn't that Israel has always been the bad guys but rather that Netanyahu's shitty leadership the last 10+ years has undermined all the work that was previously done to try to get peace between Israel and Palestine?
Sunster
Member
they cannot leave so, nothing. don't throw rocks at the brave IDF though. They might gun you down.
Yep - it turns out that throwing rocks at people with firearms is generally not a winning strategy. If you want to analyze it the rock paper scissors framework identifies the issue: rock looses to bullet.
Gentleman Jack
Member
I haven't really kept an eye on Israeli politics in the last few years, but is there a lot of stagnation in the Knesset and in the office of the PM? I would imagine that under a parliamentary system that if the people really wanted to force the government to change on the issue of funding, defending and expanding settlements, and assuming an educated population can predict that this would be seen as a big provocation to a continuing violent insurrection, that they'd have supported candidates who opposed Netanyahu long before now.
Instead, Netanyahu promised "No palestinian state under my watch" in 2015 and is still in power. I can't help but think his continued strength in government doesn't draw from the will of the people, unless the Israeli electorate feels duped the same way the British were when Brexit passed and the Israeli campaigners on Bibi's coattails similarly put their hands in their pockets and said 'one mustn't be too hasty now.'
There's a lot I admit to not knowing about Israeli politics and I hesitate to think it's even a majority opinion that continued support for settlements on occupied land are not intertwined with ongoing terror in the region. I merely wish the actions of their leadership reflected that notion and I'm not seeing it. Furthermore it's true that the Palestinian Authority has not been able to even present a unified front in peace talks for at least a decade, so there's lots of 'decades of shitty leadership' accusations to go around, but the Fatah/Hamas division didn't intensify in a vacuum, so I don't buy into JordanN's deflection of blame.
The fact that I know that you are being serious makes this even more ridiculous. Jesus christ
Gentleman Jack
Member
Shit, the first time I even remember hearing about Bibi was in 1996, and it was all favorable. 21 years later people still seem to love him. Guy has a lot of good PR considering he really hasn't changed even a little bit on the palestinian issue.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
I just don't understand why the US supports Israel when they pull this shit. It's maddening.
^ US doesn't give a shit about people, only US interests.
US has vetoed action against Israel or any sanctions constantly. US is also Saudi's backer.
US has vetoed action against Israel or any sanctions constantly. US is also Saudi's backer.
The Hamburglar
Banned
Can't see the palastines getting their own state in my lifetime. Expect in 50 years a new open air ghetto in the West Bank.
JordanN
Banned
Are you looking for a serious answer?
It comes from Cold War politics when Israel took on and single handily defeated neighboring countries that were sponsored by the Soviet Union.
Sunster
Member
with their resources dwindling I doubt they have 50 years at this rate.
TestOfTide
Banned
This idea that Israel were always the bad guys is ridiculous.
Or do you think the Oslo Accords were bad for Palestine?
cloudburst
Banned
I never said Israel has always been the bad guy, I simply stated factsthe US has nothing to do with this.
Short version: the position is based on the cost-benefit analysis looking at the political, security, economic and foreign policy implications of either choice. That and the US (as a governmental entity) realize that they probably don't have much of a leg to stand on in the "morality" department.
The long answer is way longer and involves a fair amount of (recent)history, historical commitments, and some exposition trying to explain just how costly it would be for the US to "abandon" Israel in the UN in terms of "trustworthiness". This last part is not easy to get a grasp on, but in short, it highlights that the US abandoning a long-term partner (Israel in particular) would most probably lead to fundamental geopolitical shockwaves the outcomes of which most politicians (regardless of country) would probably really hope to avoid. It would essentially void the credibility of the US in most, if not all, of its geopolitical arrangements concerning security (and a whole lot of other topics).
If I manage to find the time I might do a proper write-up on it.
There won't be another refugee crisis, most of them will be dead by then...
Saying "im not defending settlements" doesn't change what you are saying. These Israeli settlements are illegal under international law, I don't care what story you try to spin around it.
Maybe dial the hyperbole down a notch or two? I get what you are going for - and it is not like the Palestinians have had much progress to look at, but I don't think there is any data to support your statement. (i.e. look at the historical population numbers for the region - they can't support your statement).
The Hamburglar
Banned
There's a lot more to it than that... any American politician that doesn't share their sole to israels interests will be labelled an anti Semite, will miss out on cash for getting elected or relected and can kiss good by to their political career.
Ive just realised ive replied to the pro Israeli defender Stan, nvm.
because the white countries gotta look out for one another. this is a race war at its core. the zionist political platform of israel literally wants to take over palestine and install a jewish state.
america likes this because they are also built from a similar trajectory (white colonialism of the "new world" which belonged to indigenous peoples). they also got buddy buddy with israel during the cold war.
Post have been edited since people disagreed with my choice of words:
If you were a soldier I somehow doubt that you would let yourself be hit by those stones either.
Original post:
If you were a soldier I somehow doubt that you would let yourself be stoned either (literally).
Palestine never had a shot at existing. Israeli politicians set out to control the entirety of "Greater Israel" from the very start. The Two-State solution is nothing but a red herring used to keep in place the current status quo. The only actual possible solution has always been a single secular state covering current day Palestine and Israel.
RyougaSaotome
Member
Ugh, this is disgusting.
waveuponwave
Member
Wow...
You can make nuanced arguments about the status of Palestinians in the occupied territories. "They can work in Israel so why don't they just leave" is not one of them.
JordanN
Banned
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked