“Where else do they force a little child to crawl with a backpack on his back? When Hamas treats its children like this, Israeli parents tut-tut with disgust: Look at these beasts.”
Remember that supposed to be private exchange between the then French president
3:25 and Obama in 2011, Sarkozy saying, I cannot bear Netanyahu. He's a liar. Obama responding.
But I have to deal with them even more often than you.
Now the world and me, before I met with both of them, 4:56 I thought it was the exact opposite. I thought the Palestinians were impossible and the Israelis would do anything to make peace and a deal. I found that not to be true.
So the attacks were absolutely vicious, terrible that occurred.
But the end state has to look something like this and it has to have two
elements. Number one, Israel has to have the security to not be threatened by its neighbors and to be able to protect its citizens. That is absolutely crucial, has is non-negotiable. And I do think a lot of the world agrees that that's something that should exist. The second element is that the Palestinian people have to have the opportunity to live a better life. And I think that if you go through the element, it's not just saying let's create a state. It has to be a state that can function and thrive, because if you don't create that, then the people will again find ways to blame other people instead of the leadership that's putting it there.
After the 2022 election, Netanyahu was sworn in as Prime Minister again as the leader of a hardline coalition.[238] He officially started his sixth term on 29 December 2022
For a long time the Prime Ministers of Likud have wanted simply to push the Palestinians somewhere else:Everyone wants a solution, and wants peace. All except the current Israeli Prime Minister. — FreeEmotion
(Oct 1988) Then, as recently as 1982, Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir wrote that, “reduced to its true proportions, the problem is clearly not the lack of a homeland for the Palestinian Arabs. That homeland is Trans-Jordan or Eastern Palestine. . . . A second Palestinian state to the west of the river is a prescription for anarchy.”
Naturally they want peace. But that peace isn't what Palestinians, or people in general, would accept as peace to this conflict. — ssu
Hold it there. But that is the reality in the framework here. Israel conquered Gaza and West Bank in 1967. Palestinians there are under occupation: they aren't treated as normal Israeli citizens, but are under a different law. And yes, the PLO did use terrorist attacks outside to attack Israel, which lead to fighting between Jordan and the PLO and Lebanon and the PLO. And then to the occupation of Southern Lebanon by Israel.Because of the "oppressor/oppressed" framework people seem to be working on in this forum, the focus is on Netanyahu's failure(s) (along with the Israeli right-wing in general). — schopenhauer1
Their most abysmal failure was to lose the war, I guess. Once when you lose a war, you are on the mercy of your enemy. And of course as they think of themselves as Palestinians, it's convenient for both Egypt and Jordan then to agree that they indeed aren't either former Egyptians or former Jordanians (as both countries had only a brief stay either in Gaza and the West Bank).However, what is not discussed is Hamas, representing some portion of Palestinian attitudes, is an obvious abysmal failure. The PA is to a large extent a failure as well in terms of trying for peace. — schopenhauer1
Gandhi and MLK type leaders using the pacifism might work especially if the focus would be on non-Jewish citizens of Israel of the pre-1967 borders. And the non-violence approach obviously would mean that there wouldn't an active violent insurgency against Israel. That's hard, because Palestinians have been represented by those who have believed in the military solution. Bibi and the far right simply need the bloodshed, need the attacks. And the repression works for Hamas. As I've said, Bibi and the hardliners and Hamas simply embrace each other: both get strength from the violence and hate. And of course, Bibi and the hardliners have literally supported Hamas.It certainly isn't Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. level leadership over there anywhere. — schopenhauer1
We can totally discuss this too. The idea that one has to have the good guys and the bad guys here is naive (or well, typical). My view is that extremists have hijacked the conflict.SSU, it would be interesting to discuss Palestinian failures and missed opportunities in the same breath, but I fear that side won't be told. — schopenhauer1
Yet that there has been a PLO working outside from Israel doesn't erase somehow the fact that the civilian population in Gaza and the West Bank came under Israeli control in 1967.
Then that this civilian population fights an insurgency is again something that everybody understands here.
So what according to you, is here the wrong in describing the situation as occupier and occupied? — ssu
That's hard, because Palestinians have been represented by those who have believed in the military solution. Bibi and the far right simply need the bloodshed, need the attacks. And the repression works for Hamas. As I've said, Bibi and the hardliners and Hamas simply embrace each other: both get strength from the violence and hate. And of course, Bibi and the hardliners have literally supported Hamas. — ssu
Sure, we can imagine an alternative reality, but the violence, bloodshed fear and hatred is there. That cannot be changed. A leader like MLK worked with a Civil Rights Movement, but that Civil Rights Movement wasn't looking for a separate country from the US. And the Black Panthers didn't commit such terrorist attacks against white people as PLO did (and later Hamas) against Israel. — ssu
Jasser Arafat surely did errors and could have perhaps reached a better solution. The representative of the Palestinians was (is?) the PLO and Fatah's leader Jasser Arafat dominated that position. So it is a quite undemocratic organization. Fatah was formed in 1959 by the Palestinian diaspora and PLO in the 1960's.
And of course there were those on the Palestinian side who opposed the Oslo accords. And surely they did their part alongside Bibi in derailing the Oslo accords.
As I've stated, is see no peaceful resolution to this conflict. — ssu
So you think the inmates at Sobibor death camp were wrong to rise up? — RogueAI
If there were chances to compromise, and you didn't like the terms of the other side, this doesn't mean you get to mow down civilians and such because you are unhappy that you didn't get what you wanted. — schopenhauer1
What we know for sure is that one side, or both sides, did not take the 'chance to compromise'. In an ideal world, no-one should mow the lawn, but in a world that is not ideal, the less people get killed the better, but there are those who do not share that opinion either. Its up in the air. — FreeEmotion
Jesus said, "You should turn the other cheek." He didn't say Israel should, or Rome should, or Persia should, or any other nation should. — BC
So you think the inmates at Sobibor death camp were wrong to rise up?
— RogueAI
Yes, it follows. This is an emotional argument. — FreeEmotion
So let me ask you, is it wrong for Hamas to kill Israeli military, like they did on October 7th? If they had confined their attacks to military targets only, then what? Would you support Hamas on that?
Naturally the king of Jordan and Jordanians didn't think so and the Oslo peace accord made some problems to this kind of thinking, but I guess it's still popular in the right-wing circles. — ssu
I think this is absolutely the crux of the problem. Because of the "oppressor/oppressed" framework people seem to be working on in this forum, the focus is on Netanyahu's failure(s) (along with the Israeli right-wing in general). However, what is not discussed is Hamas, representing some portion of Palestinian attitudes, is an obvious abysmal failure — schopenhauer1
I would have more respect for Hamas if they only targeted soldiers, but I would still side with Israel. — RogueAI
If you think Nazi death camp inmates are wrong to rise up against their exterminators, I don't know what to tell you. Your moral compass is so off from mine, we probably won't agree on much. — RogueAI
That is to say, massacring people and sending rockets isn’t excused, period. — schopenhauer1
This imprecision was to change on December 3, 1982. At that time UNGA resolution 37/43 removed any doubt or debate over the lawful entitlement of occupied people to resist occupying forces by any and all lawful means. The resolution reaffirmed “the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle”.
Everyone wants a solution, and wants peace. All except the current Israeli Prime Minister. — FreeEmotion
In any case, the more information we get on this and other conflicts the more useful in preventing them. — FreeEmotion
I take the stand that civilians should not be killed as far as possible — FreeEmotion
I hope that is the case. We'll see. — BC
I find it very irksome that demonstrators in Europe and the US have marched down the street chanting "From the ocean to the sea, Palestine will be free." — BC
It isn't the Israeli government's fault that Hamas launched an attack in southern Israel. — BC
Sure; everybody is nominally against killing innocent civilians. It's just that, unfortunately, "as far as possible" isn't much of a barrier, whether it involves blowing up people on an Israeli bus or in a restaurant in Tel Aviv, or dropping a bomb on an apartment building. — BC
Don't they have good PR firms in those countries, or good advisors? — FreeEmotion
You or someone else might push this "oppressor/oppressed" and think there's some moral competition going around here of blameless underdogs and justified defense. This is basically about a conflict, which both sides have their victims, their reasons and their justifications.I said "oppressor/oppressed", there is a difference. — schopenhauer1
Festering hatred is apt to use here. For Palestinians, the Nakba is a central part of their identity. And so is that Israel should be the home for Jews, a Jewish Israel, is also central to many Israelis.. It turns into something else- a festering hatred. It is an identity defined by its grievance rather than its ideals. — schopenhauer1
I mean, but you did think of the Black Panthers as a counterpoint. Some people thought MLK was too soft. But he wasn't. Strength in peace and non-violence. That is harder, and therefore braver, more courageous. It's also more effective. The other divides, causes friction, causes bad blood. MLK was also proud, so you can't use that argument either. Being proud, doesn't mean being violent. — schopenhauer1
there are limits on how finely you can direct the groupthink. Small groups can control small demonstrations -- 200-300 people at most -- much better. — BC
If there is no physical and psychological recovery in Gaza, then there will be no peace in the area either, just a lot of very bitter, angry, revenge-minded people. — BC
“Hey, Hey LBJ, How many kids did you kill today?” —A protest chant that first became popular in late 1967. — FreeEmotion
What upsets me is that bombing of civilians has been going on for years all over the world, in wars, civil wars, but without the news media attention that this has got. Where were the protests? 1 million Iraqis? 3 million Vietnamese? — FreeEmotion
It is time to pull out your moral compass and do some judging of the right and wrong here. — FreeEmotion
including Saudi Arabia and Qatar — Benkei
Hence I'm firmly in the view that this conflict has no peaceful solution anywhere near.
People are quick to call out Israeli assaults yet when Saudi does something similar there appears to be less of an outcry. — I like sushi
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.