The changing Palestinian/Israeli picture

1356715

Comments

  • KwesiKwesi Shipmate
    Gramps49: National boundaries=that imaginary line that separates one nation from another.

    Thanks for the clarification. My next question is what you define as a nation?
  • KwesiKwesi Shipmate
    This discussion of "Who was there first" is all very interesting, but "So what?" It's of no help in addressing the current issue of "What to do?" Taking sides doesn't help one little bit.
  • amen Kwesi. It is a very very very very boring subject with no right answer. Apart from anything else, there is a fair old chance that the people in a place don't move. New leaders emerge internally or externally and kill the old ones off, but the people who are ruled stay. So when we see one cultural or religious group change over time in a region, we are seeing just that: the same people wearing new cultural clothes.

    What is interesting, surely, is the present moment, when old emnities are breaking down and new prospects for peace might be opening up. What is interesting, among the horror, the pain and the injustice, is the tiny possibility for reconciliation.

    There have been flaws in the narration of events in this thread, but who cares? It is a difficult and horrendous narration. All but the experts will make mistakes and nobody looks good when it is finished. I follow Israel, but I know that the absolute best outcome for my team is PEACE. Peace on almost any terms, is better than the present situation. Saying that requires me to push a few shibboleths back down my throat, and I probably couldn't do that if I was Jewish. But it is true. Almost anything is worth being able to wander around the streets of Jerusalem old and new with the only thing to fear being the madcap drivers.

    I know what living in peace feels like. I have lived without fear for my whole life. I want that for Israelis and that requires Palestinians to have it too. I know this sounds wrong. Why can't I wish peace on both groups equally? Why can't I have the same feelings about Israelis and Palestinians who live so far away from me? It is because I am so invested in Israel, in Judaism, in the Holy Land. Palestinians are, to borrow a phrase, an inconvenient truth in my emotional map of the Middle East. All I can hope for is to join hands with those who are invested in the Palestinian cause and look into their eyes, as they wish peace at almost any price on the people they hold dear.

    So this is my prayer, my flawed, prejudiced, loving, hoping, inconvenient and embarrassing prayer: Peace.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Thank you for that. I suppose Malaysia counts as a democratic liberal nation. That said, it seems racist and xenophobic to me.

    The most that can be said is that Malaysia is a largely democratic nation, not showing a great deal of liberalism much of the time, but with whom we have generally friendly relations.

    Fixed quoting code. BroJames, Purgatory Host
  • {{{{{{{Gallilit}}}}}}}
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    The arabs invaded Palestine in the 7th century, at a time when the population was roughly 50-50 Jewish and Christian.
    The Arabs set up as a ruling class where they invaded. They never replaced whole populations. Most Muslims are descended from later converts.
    In Palestine there is of course a substantial proportion of Christians.

  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Gee D wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Thank you for that. I suppose Malaysia counts as a democratic liberal nation. That said, it seems racist and xenophobic to me.

    The most that can be said is that Malaysia is a largely democratic nation, not showing a great deal of liberalism much of the time, but with whom we have generally friendly relations.

    Fixed quoting code. BroJames, Purgatory Host

    Thanks for fixing the error - I could not work out how to.
  • I have spent an interesting couple of hours reading up on the genetics of Jews of various Diaspora histories and Palestinians, Samaritans and Druze (not much on the latter, it's true). Common ancestry about 2000 years ago, it seems, but the discipline is subject to heavy and heated argument. It looks as though Diaspora Jews, both Sephardic and Ashkenazi, have men with Jewish Y chromosomes, and Palestinians have inheritance through the female line, shown in mitochondrial DNA, but both groups have a lot of similarities else where in the genome, in the very high 90s%. (Presumably higher than usual between any random humans, or it wouldn't have been quoted.)
    One writer compared the issue over the land as cousins arguing over the inheritance at a funeral. It's a horrible mess all round.
  • It is almost impossible to tell an Israeli from a Palestinian when both are naked and silent.
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    The code for the original post read
    [quote="Dafyd;c-367839"][/quote]
    Thank you for that. I suppose Malaysia counts as a democratic liberal nation. That said, it seems racist and xenophobic to me.[/quote]
    
    The most that can be said is that Malaysia is a largely democratic nation, not showing a great deal of liberalism much of the time, but with whom we have generally friendly relations.
    
    It just needed the first '[/quote]' to be removed.
  • We are never going to figure out the whole 'who was there first question' for Israel/Palestine. Because that is a messy business.

    I suspect there are some in both communities that can probably trace their ancestry back 2000 years ago to the exile of the Jews after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 66. I also think there are some in both communities that descended from groups who were not present at that time, whether it be Jewish descendants of Eastern Europeans who converted to Judaism or Arabs who moved into the Land after the Muslim conquest.

    That question is a distraction from the more pressing issue right now, the Palestinians have long standing grievances arising firstly from the Nakba in 1948, and the fact that time and time again, they are denied their legitimate right to self-determination. The refugees and their descendants are denied the opportunity to return home in Israel proper, and the Palestinians do not have complete control over their territories in the West Bank and Gaza, because Israel (i) controls the borders, (2) actively builds Jewish settlements in territories it knows it does not legitimately own under international law, and (3) generally makes life miserable for the Palestinians, especially with its long blockade against Gaza.

    In 1948 the Palestinians then -- and ever since -- have been much more dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel than to establishment of their own state ...

    As of today, there are no internationally recognized borders of the State of Palestine and the Jewish State of Israel ... There are only armistice lines functioning as de facto borders ...

    The bottom line is that the Jewish State of Israel is not going to negotiate itself out of existence, nor is the "Jewish" part of that a bargaining chip ... If and when the Palestinian people develop/choose leadership that is interested in serious negotiation, then things can begin to be settled -- land swaps, compensation, treaties, etc. ...
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    Especially following the 1948 Partition, "Jews" were expelled from surrounding nations ... while, as noted above, about 20% of Israeli citizens are not "Jews" ...

    But ... as you seem to be saying above re: Jerusalem having originally been a Jebusite town ... are you saying that "possession" of a piece of land is the first thing ... ??? ... If so ...

    I'm simply wondering about your self-proclaimed standards. If the lack of a statement of cession is reason to doubt legitimate possession of a piece of land, as you argue, in what sense is Jerusalem an Israeli city?
    And "Native Americans" arrived in "North America" crossing the Bering Strait more than 10,000 years ago ... What's your point ... ??? ... "Possession is nine points of the law ... " ... ???

    Again, still waiting for an answer to my question about why Minnesota legitimately belongs to the United States of America and not the descendants of its original inhabitants.

    see: Treaty of 1837 ... I fully support the treaty rights of native American tribes ...
  • We are never going to figure out the whole 'who was there first question' for Israel/Palestine. Because that is a messy business.

    I suspect there are some in both communities that can probably trace their ancestry back 2000 years ago to the exile of the Jews after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 66. I also think there are some in both communities that descended from groups who were not present at that time, whether it be Jewish descendants of Eastern Europeans who converted to Judaism or Arabs who moved into the Land after the Muslim conquest.

    That question is a distraction from the more pressing issue right now, the Palestinians have long standing grievances arising firstly from the Nakba in 1948, and the fact that time and time again, they are denied their legitimate right to self-determination. The refugees and their descendants are denied the opportunity to return home in Israel proper, and the Palestinians do not have complete control over their territories in the West Bank and Gaza, because Israel (i) controls the borders, (2) actively builds Jewish settlements in territories it knows it does not legitimately own under international law, and (3) generally makes life miserable for the Palestinians, especially with its long blockade against Gaza.

    In 1948 the Palestinians then -- and ever since -- have been much more dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel than to establishment of their own state ...

    As of today, there are no internationally recognized borders of the State of Palestine and the Jewish State of Israel ... There are only armistice lines functioning as de facto borders ...

    The bottom line is that the Jewish State of Israel is not going to negotiate itself out of existence, nor is the "Jewish" part of that a bargaining chip ... If and when the Palestinian people develop/choose leadership that is interested in serious negotiation, then things can begin to be settled -- land swaps, compensation, treaties, etc. ...

    So as soon as Palestinians are willing to accept permanent exile from huge tracts of their homeland the Israelis might consider stopping stealing even more? How about Israel stop murdering people, destroying their homes and their livelihoods, so that Palestinians have some reason to believe the Israelis have any interest in neogtiation.
  • In 1948 the Palestinians then -- and ever since -- have been much more dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel than to establishment of their own state ...

    Source? You just generalized an entire people.

    It might be that the Palestinians in general object to the notion of a state that privileges Jewish identity over justice and fairness. Mainly because they have experienced Zionism as the force that bulldozes their homes, that kills their unarmed children, and that refuses to allow them to exercise their political rights.

    Another way of putting what you wrote might be,

    Israel refuses to offer full and civil rights to Palestinians because they are much more dedicated to privileging Jews at the expense of any other people than to the establishment of their own state of being democratic, fair and progressive.


  • I think many devout Christians hoped in 1948 that when the Jews, the Chosen People of God, set up their own state, that they would behave better than any other nation. It turns out that they are a peope like any other.
  • That is just another kind of anti-Semitism; holding the State of Israel/Jews to a higher standard than "the Nations"
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    I'm sure you know that Arab political parties are full participants in the Knesset.

    And are always excluded from the governing coalitions.

    There is nothing to formally "exclude" arab and Druze members of the Knesset from any coalition. The fact that they haven't been asked so far to be part of a coalition is exactly the same as, say, Plaid Cymru or the Scottish National Party not being asked to be part of our 2010 coalition government.

    The difference is that Israel has had 7
    Kwesi wrote: »
    Israel has always been ambiguous regarding what constitutes a Jew, religion or parentage, to avoid the charge of racism, for obvious reasons. The state, nevertheless, privileges 'Jews'. Like apartheid South Africa, Israeli Jews find themselves running a state which effectively includes a majority of others, most of whom have been incorporated into a Bantustan called the Palestine Authority. This state of affairs is clearly at odds with decolonisation and democracy, but reconciling those ends would lead to the destruction of Israel: it is an existential question. It is easy to be moralistic in one's attitude towards Israel's actions, but what else can you expect it to do?

    It is easy for *outsiders* to instruct the "Jews" and the Israelis on all of these questions especially from Moral High Ground ...

    I'm sure you think the same about those mean outsiders passing judgement on the Afrikaaners.

    The Afrikaaners don't have a continuous 3,000 year history in southern Africa ...

    The vast majority of Israeli Jews are descended from people who moved there less than 100 years ago. The Palestinians have been there since at least the time of Christ.

    The arabs invaded Palestine in the 7th century, at a time when the population was roughly 50-50 Jewish and Christian.

    Palestinian comes from an ancient Egyptian word Peleset. It meant the Sea People Remember the Old Testament word of Philistine--that was the Hebrew word for the very same people. They were the people that lived along the coast of the Mediterranean into Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan when the Hebrews first invaded the land. Eventually, after Jesus, those people were largely Christian.

    So, if you really want to get technical about who was there first....

    And "Native Americans" arrived in "North America" crossing the Bering Strait more than 10,000 years ago ... What's your point ... ??? ... "Possession is nine points of the law ... " ... ???

    I was responding to the claim that Arabs invaded Palestine in the 7th Century. My point is that the Palestinians were already there. In fact, they were already there before the Hebrews invaded the land--The Organist was claiming the Hebrews were there first. The Hebrews, as I recall, invaded Philistine land through the mountains and then spread down to the Mediterranean Coast. There is archeological evidence that both cultures co-existed for many centuries.

    Moreover, the Arab invasion in the 7th century was not so much about taking land as it was about converting the people that were living in the area. Yes, at the time of the invasion, half the people were Jewish, and half the people--the Palestinian people--were Christian.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Galilit wrote: »
    That is just another kind of anti-Semitism; holding the State of Israel/Jews to a higher standard than "the Nations"

    That depends on whether @Eirenist is criticising Israel for not being better than other nations or merely relating an observation.
  • In 1948 the Palestinians then -- and ever since -- have been much more dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel than to establishment of their own state ...

    Source? You just generalized an entire people.

    It might be that the Palestinians in general object to the notion of a state that privileges Jewish identity over justice and fairness. Mainly because they have experienced Zionism as the force that bulldozes their homes, that kills their unarmed children, and that refuses to allow them to exercise their political rights.

    Another way of putting what you wrote might be,

    Israel refuses to offer full and civil rights to Palestinians because they are much more dedicated to privileging Jews at the expense of any other people than to the establishment of their own state of being democratic, fair and progressive.


    (1) The Jewish State of Israel is a shining beacon of liberal democracy in that part of the world ... Instead, you would hold up ... Syria ... ??? ... Egypt ... ??? ... Saudi Arabia ... ???
    (2) The longstanding corruption of The PA is well recognized ... which led to, e.g., Hamas becoming the chief power in Palestinian Gaza ... But, okay, I'll *bite* ... Please name a significant Palestinian leader -- recognized as such by the Palestinian people as a whole -- who fully embraces liberal democracy and is not dedicated to the utter destruction of the Jewish state of Israel ...
  • (1) The Jewish State of Israel is a shining beacon of liberal democracy in that part of the world ... Instead, you would hold up ... Syria ... ??? ... Egypt ... ??? ... Saudi Arabia ... ???

    Complete non sequitur, where have I ever mentioned the other countries in the Middle East?
    (2) The longstanding corruption of The PA is well recognized ... which led to, e.g., Hamas becoming the chief power in Palestinian Gaza ... But, okay, I'll *bite* ... Please name a significant Palestinian leader -- recognized as such by the Palestinian people as a whole -- who fully embraces liberal democracy and is not dedicated to the utter destruction of the Jewish state of Israel ...

    You are sidestepping the issue. Is it okay for Israel to privilege Jews above everyone else, including I might add, Palestinian Christians, your fellow brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ? I argued that if this is the definition of a "Jewish state" you are using, then I completely understand Palestinians rejecting it.

    What is wrong with a single Palestinian State where all of its citizens have equal rights and equal opportunities, where yes, Jews are free to practice their faith and culture, but that same right is afforded to everyone?

  • KwesiKwesi Shipmate
    Fr Teilhard Shipmate: The Jewish State of Israel is a shining beacon of liberal democracy in that part of the world ... Instead, you would hold up ... Syria ... ??? ... Egypt ... ??? ... Saudi Arabia ... ???

    How do you expect a reasoned response to your tub-thumping, Fr Teilhard Shipmate ?














  • (1) The Jewish State of Israel is a shining beacon of liberal democracy in that part of the world ... Instead, you would hold up ... Syria ... ??? ... Egypt ... ??? ... Saudi Arabia ... ???

    Complete non sequitur, where have I ever mentioned the other countries in the Middle East?
    (2) The longstanding corruption of The PA is well recognized ... which led to, e.g., Hamas becoming the chief power in Palestinian Gaza ... But, okay, I'll *bite* ... Please name a significant Palestinian leader -- recognized as such by the Palestinian people as a whole -- who fully embraces liberal democracy and is not dedicated to the utter destruction of the Jewish state of Israel ...

    You are sidestepping the issue. Is it okay for Israel to privilege Jews above everyone else, including I might add, Palestinian Christians, your fellow brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ? I argued that if this is the definition of a "Jewish state" you are using, then I completely understand Palestinians rejecting it.

    What is wrong with a single Palestinian State where all of its citizens have equal rights and equal opportunities, where yes, Jews are free to practice their faith and culture, but that same right is afforded to everyone?

    You object to the "Jew-ish-ness" of The State of Israel ... Thank you for illustrating the problem ...
  • Kwesi wrote: »
    Fr Teilhard Shipmate: The Jewish State of Israel is a shining beacon of liberal democracy in that part of the world ... Instead, you would hold up ... Syria ... ??? ... Egypt ... ??? ... Saudi Arabia ... ???

    How do you expect a reasoned response to your tub-thumping, Fr Teilhard Shipmate ?


    I think that the issues in the Middle East can be solved only with a serious application of (1) Realism, and, (2) Liberal Democracy ...

  • Anglican BratAnglican Brat Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    (1) The Jewish State of Israel is a shining beacon of liberal democracy in that part of the world ... Instead, you would hold up ... Syria ... ??? ... Egypt ... ??? ... Saudi Arabia ... ???

    Complete non sequitur, where have I ever mentioned the other countries in the Middle East?
    (2) The longstanding corruption of The PA is well recognized ... which led to, e.g., Hamas becoming the chief power in Palestinian Gaza ... But, okay, I'll *bite* ... Please name a significant Palestinian leader -- recognized as such by the Palestinian people as a whole -- who fully embraces liberal democracy and is not dedicated to the utter destruction of the Jewish state of Israel ...

    You are sidestepping the issue. Is it okay for Israel to privilege Jews above everyone else, including I might add, Palestinian Christians, your fellow brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ? I argued that if this is the definition of a "Jewish state" you are using, then I completely understand Palestinians rejecting it.

    What is wrong with a single Palestinian State where all of its citizens have equal rights and equal opportunities, where yes, Jews are free to practice their faith and culture, but that same right is afforded to everyone?

    You object to the "Jew-ish-ness" of The State of Israel ... Thank you for illustrating the problem ...

    No, I object to any country that grants political privileges to a group simply on the basis of race or ethnicity, because it results in people who are not of that privileged group being oppressed and marginalized.

  • You object to the "Jew-ish-ness" of The State of Israel

    What I find intriguing is your assertion that Israel should have not just a Jewish character but the ability to maintain a Jewish numerical majority. Exactly what steps should be taken to rid Israel of its surplus non-Jewish population, should such a thing become necessary? West Bank annexation would come dangerously close to this point, if not being already past that point. (Current demographic information is hard to come by for the occupied territories.) Incorporating Gaza into Israel would definitely push it past that point. What's the plan for getting rid of these unwanted people?
  • KwesiKwesi Shipmate
    Fr Teilhard: I think that the issues in the Middle East can be solved only with a serious application of (1) Realism, and, (2) Liberal Democracy ...

    I'm not sure what you mean by 'realism' in this context, though it sounds appealing, but it doesn't seem to me that the values of liberal democracy stand much of chance in a region where ethnicity/religion is so powerful- and I include Israel in that equation. Where we are doesn't seem likely to permit us to embark on a journey to either of those destinations, however desirable.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    @TheOrganist

    Don't worry, I am not going to attack you. You have put forth the traditional Zionist position. I have tried to present the Palestinian position. I have learned long ago, that in such cases, the real truth is somewhere in between. The point is, there are irreconcilable differences between the two sides.

    Regarding a two-state solution--this is really not a new concept. Both Canada and the United States have First Nations Reserves or Native American Reservations. Both governments recognize the sovereignty of the tribes on their respective reserves/reservations, sometimes with more success than other times---though with a Native American being nominated for the head of the Department of Interior (which handles Native American Affairs) I am looking for even more dramatic changes in the US system. There are similar relationships in Africa and Asia.

    The point is you cannot just move into someone's house without their permission. The Palestinians have long-standing claims to parts of the Holy Land that have to be addressed somehow.

    The People of Israel ("The Jews") have lived and moved and had their being in The Land of Israel for the last 3,000 years ... During that time various aggressive neighbors have dominated them, threatened them, occupied their territory, sent some into Exile, and even trie to exterminate them ... But during all that time, the People of Israel have never ceded even one square meter of the Land of Israel to any invading/occupying power -- not the Egyptians, or the Assyrians, or the Babylonians, or the Greeks, or the Romans or any Arab tribes or the Ottomans or the League of Nations ... During all that time the undivided City of Jerusalem has been the spiritual -- and political -- capital of the State and People of Israel ...

    But for some reason, there is a very popular opinion that uniquely among all the peoples of the Earth, "the Jews" may NOT -- must not -- be the majority population in their own land ...

    In which alternative universe did that history of the Jews occur? In which the State of Israel has been continuous since David within the same borders? Didn't it exist under Saul and Samuel and Gideon back to Joshua in your universe?

    Oh God. This is terribly sad.
  • I've been where @Fr Teilhard is. I've made all those arguments. I know how to respond to the arguments made on behalf of the Palestinians. I have been tutored in the hateful rhetoric of some Muslim preachers. I have met and been horrified by the extremism of some Israelis. I have heard representatives of both sides dehumanise the other.

    We have a problem with no solution but to love.
  • Me too. Worse. But our fantasies were extrapolated from fundamentalism applied to actual history and science. A beguilingly narcotic brew.

    Your solution is the only one that could possibly work, but it can't be tried. I'm sorry, but I cannot see a Muslim Gandhi-King-Mandela led movement arising in Ramallah and even if it did, I couldn't imagine it winning. What passive resistance tactics could be effectively employed against the Israeli state so that it granted Palestinian statehood, and the right of return to property in Israel?
  • In other news, the Israeli government crumbled just a few hours ago.

  • Crœsos wrote: »
    You object to the "Jew-ish-ness" of The State of Israel

    What I find intriguing is your assertion that Israel should have not just a Jewish character but the ability to maintain a Jewish numerical majority. Exactly what steps should be taken to rid Israel of its surplus non-Jewish population, should such a thing become necessary? West Bank annexation would come dangerously close to this point, if not being already past that point. (Current demographic information is hard to come by for the occupied territories.) Incorporating Gaza into Israel would definitely push it past that point. What's the plan for getting rid of these unwanted people?

    I find it fascinating that there are so many objections raised to one geographical small country having a majority Jewish population (as distinct from "Jewish 'character'," whatever that means) ...

    "Gaza" is not part of the Jewish State of Israel ...
  • Martin54 wrote: »
    Me too. Worse. But our fantasies were extrapolated from fundamentalism applied to actual history and science. A beguilingly narcotic brew.

    Your solution is the only one that could possibly work, but it can't be tried. I'm sorry, but I cannot see a Muslim Gandhi-King-Mandela led movement arising in Ramallah and even if it did, I couldn't imagine it winning. What passive resistance tactics could be effectively employed against the Israeli state so that it granted Palestinian statehood, and the right of return to property in Israel?

    Yasir Arafat (supposedly seeking peace with Israel) made it clear that the proposed "two state solution" would be a temporary step to ONE state, being "Palestine," NOT "Israel" ...
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited December 2020


    BroJames - Thanks, I'll watch for that in the future. I often heavily edit a post I quote, deleting quotes built into that and so forth. I must have left the first one in by mistake.
  • Martin54 wrote: »
    Me too. Worse. But our fantasies were extrapolated from fundamentalism applied to actual history and science. A beguilingly narcotic brew.

    Your solution is the only one that could possibly work, but it can't be tried. I'm sorry, but I cannot see a Muslim Gandhi-King-Mandela led movement arising in Ramallah and even if it did, I couldn't imagine it winning. What passive resistance tactics could be effectively employed against the Israeli state so that it granted Palestinian statehood, and the right of return to property in Israel?

    Yasir Arafat (supposedly seeking peace with Israel) made it clear that the proposed "two state solution" would be a temporary step to ONE state, being "Palestine," NOT "Israel" ...

    as with most politicians, watch the hips not the lips.
  • What other nation has the stated purpose of keeping one religious or ethnic group in the majority?
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Crœsos wrote: »
    What's the plan for getting rid of these unwanted people?
    I find it fascinating that there are so many objections raised to one geographical small country having a majority Jewish population (as distinct from "Jewish 'character'," whatever that means) ...
    You haven't answered Croesos' question.
    Instead you're confusing Israel having a majority Jewish population (to which nobody here objects) with Israel taking steps to keep a majority Jewish population.
    Nobody objects to the US having a majority white population. But given demographic trends it's not going to stay majority white for much longer. If people propose ways to keep the US majority white in spite of those demographic trends then one would object in short order.

    So answer Croesos' question. What methods do you think are permissible to keep Israel a majority Jewish country?

  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    Me too. Worse. But our fantasies were extrapolated from fundamentalism applied to actual history and science. A beguilingly narcotic brew.

    Your solution is the only one that could possibly work, but it can't be tried. I'm sorry, but I cannot see a Muslim Gandhi-King-Mandela led movement arising in Ramallah and even if it did, I couldn't imagine it winning. What passive resistance tactics could be effectively employed against the Israeli state so that it granted Palestinian statehood, and the right of return to property in Israel?

    Yasir Arafat (supposedly seeking peace with Israel) made it clear that the proposed "two state solution" would be a temporary step to ONE state, being "Palestine," NOT "Israel" ...

    as with most politicians, watch the hips not the lips.

    In English -- to Western listeners -- Arafat talked about "peace" and "the two state solution" ... In Arabic he praised suicide bombers as "martyrs" a
    nd promised that there would eventually be just ONE state -- "Palestine" ...
  • Dafyd wrote: »
    Crœsos wrote: »
    What's the plan for getting rid of these unwanted people?
    I find it fascinating that there are so many objections raised to one geographical small country having a majority Jewish population (as distinct from "Jewish 'character'," whatever that means) ...
    You haven't answered Croesos' question.
    Instead you're confusing Israel having a majority Jewish population (to which nobody here objects) with Israel taking steps to keep a majority Jewish population.
    Nobody objects to the US having a majority white population. But given demographic trends it's not going to stay majority white for much longer. If people propose ways to keep the US majority white in spite of those demographic trends then one would object in short order.

    So answer Croesos' question. What methods do you think are permissible to keep Israel a majority Jewish country?

    Being neither Jewish nor an Israeli, that question is not for me to decide (any more than deciding who is a REAL "Jew" and who is not) ...

    I simply take note of the facts of history and understand why "the Jews" are no longer keen on being a minority population everywhere, subject to occasional pogroms and/or "relocation" ...

    By way of full disclosure, my Rep. in Congress is a Muslim woman who has been a very vocal open critic of the Jewish State of Israel ... I have actively campaigned for her ... I recognize that these are not simple issues ... and that singling out "the Jews" as somehow malign influences in the world has been associated with horrific results in the past ... Never again ...
  • mousethief wrote: »
    What other nation has the stated purpose of keeping one religious or ethnic group in the majority?

    Saudi Arabia ... (and ... about 70,000,000 Americans who voted for Trump just last month ...)
  • mousethiefmousethief Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    mousethief wrote: »
    What other nation has the stated purpose of keeping one religious or ethnic group in the majority?

    Saudi Arabia ... (and ... about 70,000,000 Americans who voted for Trump just last month ...)

    Saudi Arabia, ah yes, now there's a country for Israel to proudly compare itself to. So now we have two dictatorships trying to maintain the majority of one ethnic or religious group.

    And Israel can proudly compare itself to MAGAts. Israel isn't looking too good based on your comparisons.
  • mt--
    mousethief wrote: »
    What other nation has the stated purpose of keeping one religious or ethnic group in the majority?

    Vatican City.
  • ... Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Bangladesh - there's a long list of countries that have Islam as the state religion and legislation forbidding conversion to another (apostasy), frequently making it a capital offence.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    China, India, Russia de facto if not de jure. UK. England. Scotland... which nation doesn't?

    Israel will continue to be a pivotal sore point until the Palestinian cause becomes sufficiently meaningless over time and it just becomes a dull background ache. Palestinians will be gradually bought out of the West Bank as they are being in Jerusalem. I had a Palestinian friend who had a Christian girlfriend, Jewish friends and hated Palestinian sell-outs above all. Are there other peoples who have returned against the tides of history? Only by ascending in power. As the Rohingya never will. Nor the Uighurs, over a sanctioned China. (Oooh look, another axis of mutual self-interest.) There can never come a time when American, Russian, EU, Turkish, Saudi, Jordanian, Egyptian even Lebanese and Syrian interests can include the elimination or even weakening of Israel as a priority. Stalemate in ghastly pluralism is always best. Regime change always worse as Iraq, Syria, Libya even Afghanistan demonstrate in spades.

    So, while we wring our helplessly privileged hands, is there anything we can do? Stop going to M&S?
  • ... Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Bangladesh - there's a long list of countries that have Islam as the state religion and legislation forbidding conversion to another (apostasy), frequently making it a capital offence.

    And how approving, generally, are we of that?
  • The difference is that even the ultra orthodox don't demand the death penalty for jews who marry out.
  • They just have a funeral for them and carry on as if they were dead.

    John Lennon where are you now?
  • MaryLouiseMaryLouise Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    Galilit wrote: »

    Heartbreaking, @Galilit.
  • There are parts of the UK where if I flaunted my privilege that would happen.
Sign In or Register to comment.