No but it wouldn't necessarily stop their neighbours from trying. Nuking in your backyard isnt going happen vs an enemy far away.
But the thing is. The nr. 1 priority of a good goverment is security. If Israel based on the last 80 years feel their security would be comprised its nothing going to happen. From the plo blowing up school busses and cafes, to hijacking airplanes, to having 3 major wars involving the neighbours to etc etc... and in a similar vein apart from jihadist extremists there will always be real sense among Palestinians that revenge is appropriate
Israel and Lebanon are sworn enemies. They also manage to exist next to each other as sovereign countries without apartheid and concentration camps (there's the odd kerfuffle here and there but what you gonna do eh?).
If your security is dependent on keeping a group of people in wretched situations, then you're never secure.
Yes and yes. I have no wish to "get rid" of Israel, as you put it, and I haven't seen any posters in this thread advocate for it either - either directly or implicitly. Being very critical of the actions of a state is not the same as wishing it gone entirely.
But imagine if someone said about Israel what you’re saying here about the Palestinians. I don’t see how you can on one hand be worried about people wanting a two state solution potentially developing into questioning Israel’s right to exist, which I haven’t seen suggested anywhere in this thread, and at the same time say what you just said about Palestine.
To Moderate Israeli friends @Amir @Drizzle @owlo
I do understand your perspective and how stressed, fearful and frustrated you may be feeling at this time especially with the constant attacks and blaming. I honestly think and realize that there is not much you can do even if you wanted to.
But, I plead you to atleast open your eyes and see and internalize the boarder strategy at play here beyond just the elimination of Hamas.
Interesting you mention this. People often forget Israel invaded Southern Lebanon in 1982, and it took an armed struggle from Hezbollah to force them out in 2000.Are you just going to gloss over the history of Israel and lebanon?
Point being. Israel doesnt claim territory of Lebanon or the other way around.
Are you just going to gloss over the history of Israel and lebanon?
Point being. Israel doesn't claim territory of Lebanon or the other way around.
So you're essentially saying the Palestinians have a choice between living under occupation and apartheid.... or ethnic cleansing, with you pretty much advocating for the latter.You've not seen a large number of posters in this thread call it an illegitimate state or one that should not/has no right to exist? I'm not a good thread detective, but I'm sure somebody can make you a montage. That and the thousands of people around the world chanting it make me think its real and not an isolated wish. There has been a movement to illegitimise Israel forever.
What am I saying about the Palestinians? I've said I feel the best solution is as above, for the reasons I stated. I think their militancy is rational, but that even a peaceful Israel next door would not solve any issues (assuming you could wave a magic wand and get the two sides to the table.) Were a Palestinian state to exist there, the same issues would occur. It would still be an Iranian proxy, as much as or more than Israel is a US proxy. The militancy and febrile political environment would still exist, just as it does in the neighbouring countries. And Israel would still end up invading and overreacting every time there was an act of terrorism. It's a clearly stated aim of both Palestinian and Iranian leadership that they want to wipe out Israel. What would be left is a poor, exploited rump state with a perfect environment to continue the current militancy and proxy war. (And probably many of the same valid complaints)
Israel can't/won't trust Palestinians for decades now anyway, so either you maintain the status quo or they move elsewhere. My opinion is its better for them to move elsewhere, preferably out of the region and malign influence of Iran et al. (And back to the magic wands, if I could wave one and move Israel and its Jews to say Texas, that'd be hella cool.)
I know exactly what he meant, I just wanted him to explicitly say it.
Only so much I could put in 3 sentences
Point being. There is no excuse for Israel's oppression. Not even "fears about it's security". They're a nuclear state, and have the United States bent over for fecks sake. If they truly fear about their security, in addition to being apartheidy concentration camp perpetuators, they're bitches.
Evict the settlers, go back to 1967 borders, then Iron Dome and mine your borders, and shoot the shit out of any intruders on your sovereign land.
Interesting you mention this. People often forget Israel invaded Southern Lebanon in 1982, and it took an armed struggle from Hezbollah to force them out in 2000.
This isnt what i meant. I wasn't talking about Palestinians having a real chance of obliterating Israel, but going back to days of your average cafe being blown up.
I do agree that their is no excuse for a lot of what Israel does, but essentially i gave my answer directed at owlo as to why it is thought at this point in time would be considered at stopping Stone to the end of Isrsel.
Ah gotcha
And any considerations by anyone along those lines are bullshit. A 2 state solution is not a stepping stone to the end of Israel or the annihilation of Jews.
You've not seen a large number of posters in this thread call it an illegitimate state or one that should not/has no right to exist? I'm not a good thread detective, but I'm sure somebody can make you a montage. That and the thousands of people around the world chanting it make me think its real and not an isolated wish. There has been a movement to illegitimise Israel forever.
So you're essentially saying the Palestinians have a choice between living under occupation and apartheid.... or ethnic cleansing, with you pretty much advocating for the latter.
Do you not see how insane that sounds?
It's hard to get honest opinions/answers because of the laws in the west, but the feeling I get is that the vast majority in this thread feel Israel is completely illegitimate, and that a two state solution is simply the first step to getting rid of it.
Yes. My argument/position has long been that in 1948, Israel should have been formed in somewhere like Alberta where they could flourish nicely, and the middle east left to the pan-palestinians. Unfortunately they were a useful geopolitical pawn to have right there, and that's where they wanted to be. Obviously Israel can't move now, and I think the situation is now hopeless, and they are in a position of either repeatedly killing to defend themselves and sitting in a cycle of violence, or simply being honest (like the Kuwaitis etc) and simply saying 'We don't believe you can live here in peace. We want your land.' Find them a spot of land, pay them reparations, and let people live in peace.
Of course it's wrong morally and there would be outcry, but it would cause far less pain, and in 50 years you'd hopefully have a thriving people outside of the influence of Iran etc. I disagree with pushing them into the Sinai though, they need a home not more displacement. There's plenty of land on the planet that the US etc are holding onto for no reason. Even nice islands.
They used that as their justification to invade the territory of another sovereign country, which they seemingly had no intention of leaving until they were forced out.And they invaded because of the PLO. Who were also operating from that area.
Well yes, call me crazy but I don't happen to consider ethnic cleansing the only solution.Yes. Do you see the situation differently? Do you see another way out for them now?
And it not only sounds insane, but is insane.
They used that as their justification to invade the territory of another sovereign country, which they seemingly had no intention of leaving until they were forced out.
This idea of them having no interest in occupying neighbouring territory clearly isn't true, they're still occupying Syrian territory too.
Are you just going to gloss over the history of Israel and lebanon?
Point being. Israel doesnt claim territory of Lebanon or the other way around.
So?Syria occupied Lebanon after that. Untill 2005
That is what being Arab is. Palestinians have been Arabised over the years but aren't genetically Arab. Genetic Arabs originate from Yemen and moved up to occupy all of the land up to Jordan. There have been tribes that have migrated of course, In Palestine not so much but the Ummayad Caliphate who's capital was Damascus led to many Arabs migrating to Syria. The overall majority of those populations are not Arabs though and have been Arabised. Saying North Africans are Arabs is akin to saying Spanish and Portuguese people are also Arabs since some tribes migrated their during the Moorish period.That’s only if you consider Arabness in strictly genetic terms with origins in the Arabian Peninsula. Even then there is much evidence of tribes from there migrating into Palestine and greater Syria, and into North Africa, over the centuries.
Arabs however tend to think of it as a much broader umbrella encompassing language, culture, and heritage. Sati Al-Husri, who was the most influential ideologue of Arab nationalism in the early 20th century, said an Arab is anyone who speaks Arabic as their mother tongue. Though of course anyone is free to reject this.
In any case the charters of all Palestinian political parties describe Palestinians as an Arab people, part of the Arab nation, Palestine as an Arab land, and the Palestinian cause as an Arab cause. It would be crazy for an outsider to tell them they not Arab.
Umm, it does? Golan heights
What's the relevance?Syria occupied Lebanon after that. Untill 2005
What's the relevance?
Eh?I guess that none of this happens in vaccum
Eh?
You made the suggestion that Israel isn't interested in occupying neighbouring territory, a point that's easily refuted by their historical exploits in Lebanon, and the fact they are - you know, currently occupying neighbouring territory in Syria, something the international community itself agrees on. And let's not forget this is a country that to this date has refused to declare its borders. So your point hardly sticks.
That is what being Arab is. Palestinians have been Arabised over the years but aren't genetically Arab. Genetic Arabs originate from Yemen and moved up to occupy all of the land up to Jordan. There have been tribes that have migrated of course, In Palestine not so much but the Ummayad Caliphate who's capital was Damascus led to many Arabs migrating to Syria. The overall majority of those populations are not Arabs though and have been Arabised. Saying North Africans are Arabs is akin to saying Spanish and Portuguese people are also Arabs since some tribes migrated their during the Moorish period.
Well considering the whole reason this problem started in the first place was due to genetics and who are the rightful/first owners of the land, I'd say it's a pretty big deal.Ethnicity has a lot more to do with a shared history, language, culture, than it does with genetics. If those people consider themselves Arabs, other Arabs consider them Arabs, and they speak Arabic... they're Arabs. What's even the point in bringing DNA and genetics into this thread? It might be an interesting discussion, but this thread at this point is not the right place.
That is what being Arab is. Palestinians have been Arabised over the years but aren't genetically Arab. Genetic Arabs originate from Yemen and moved up to occupy all of the land up to Jordan. There have been tribes that have migrated of course, In Palestine not so much but the Ummayad Caliphate who's capital was Damascus led to many Arabs migrating to Syria. The overall majority of those populations are not Arabs though and have been Arabised.
Saying North Africans are Arabs is akin to saying Spanish and Portuguese people are also Arabs since some tribes migrated their during the Moorish period.
Well yes, call me crazy but I don't happen to consider ethnic cleansing the only solution.
I'd expect Israel to stop being an occupying force and actually do the human thing of giving Palestinians their nation and dignity. I also don't buy into that being some existential threat for Israel - not when you're looking at a heavily militarised nuclear power with the US as its biggest ally.
The issue is Israel had no intention in pursuing that benevolent path to peace prior to October 7th, decades prior in fact. Let's not pretend the Israeli government on October 6th were dreaming of a friendly Palestinian nation at their doorstep. October 7th just gave them the blessing to do away with the notion publicly and pretend they now no longer have a choice, when in reality that choice has been available to them for decades.Then you're optimistic than I am. No side will stop in my opinion, I see no optimism in this. I expect Israel to do nothing of the sort. They won't even consider it now for decades. The ship has sailed and attitudes have hardened. There's no trust and no hope.
I'm not sure if you 'expect' it as in actually think it might happen, or more have a moral expectation that it should happen. Because my opinion is although it should, it has no chance of doing so. None at all after the 7th.
I think you're misunderstanding me, my point was that Israel justify the taking of land, settlements etc. by accusing the Palestinians of being Arab 'invaders' and the 'we were here before you' rhetoric when that is complete fabrication. Yes there are some Palestinians that are Arabs, just like there are some Spanish/Portuguese people that are Arabs, the majority of the population aren't ethnically Arab and were there before they became Arabised through language, culture etc. The same is true in North Africa and the majority of countries in the levant.Migration from the Arabian Peninsula into the Levant, Mesopotamia, and North Africa doesn’t seem to have been limited solely to that wave related to the early expansion of the Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates. There was at least one other major significant wave of migration of Yemeni tribes to the Maghrib during the 11th and 12th centuries, while some historians have suggested that much of the Levant had already been populated by Arab tribes before the arrival of Islam. Even today there are many families in Palestine (e.g. the Nusseibehs) who can trace their lineage back to the Peninsula.
But in any case, I’m intrigued why you restrict your understanding of Arabness to a strictly genetic definition, while the vast majority of those who identify as Arab today - including the Palestinians themselves - are comfortable embracing a much broader understanding?
Nobody would describe Spanish and Portuguese as Arabs because they don’t speak Arabic or share in the cultural Arab heritage. However many of them undoubtedly have “Arab blood” so perhaps, by your own strictly genetic definition of Arabs, we actually should refer to those as Arabs.
The pro-Israeli lot on here seem to be fine with 'Yes, we're cnuts, but if you go back in time far enough you'll find even bigger cnuts who did worse things...so we're good.'
I think you're misunderstanding me, my point was that Israel justify the taking of land, settlements etc. by accusing the Palestinians of being Arab 'invaders' and the 'we were here before you' rhetoric when that is complete fabrication. Yes there are some Palestinians that are Arabs, just like there are some Spanish/Portuguese people that are Arabs, the majority of the population aren't ethnically Arab and were there before they became Arabised through language, culture etc. The same is true in North Africa and the majority of countries in the levant.
