8 ms·

No offense intended (really!), but you're talking about a very complicated situation, which it appears that you don't really understand fully. > But Israel se

by edanm 8y ago

No offense intended (really!), but you're talking about a very complicated situation, which it appears that you don't really understand fully. > But Israel seems to have forgotten the humanity of the Palestinians, striping them from their human rights, or passing laws that could affect the rights of Israeli minorities [0]. The situation of the Palestinians is terrible, IMO. But there is simply no simple solution that anyone has for how to solve it. Sure, some Israelis are terrible people, and are racist, etc, as are many Americans, Europeans, etc. But as a whole, the reason the Palestinian situation continues is partly because no one really has a good answer to how to solve it! It's probably also partly because Israel has more power right now, and the feeling is that the longer the situation continues, the better for Israel, so why not let it drag out? But if there were a decent solution, many people in Israel would push very hard to implement it. The truth is, most Israelis just don't know what to do anymore (and solutions have been tried before, negotiations have happened). And btw, the new law that you talk about isn't really going to affect Palestinians so much as minority citizens of Israel (and it probably won't actually affect them either, it's more a symbolic thing I think). > just pointing out that because the number of dead Palestinian people is relevant enough and the author who fought for and lives in Israel, was speaking of when countries do dehumanize people and was hoping that in this case there would be voices in Israel that could disagree with the current situation. If you think there aren't voices in Israel who disagree with the current situation, you're very wrong. Unfortunately, as I said, many people have "given up", or at least have no idea what to do anymore.

botverse 8y ago
No offence taken. > But there is simply no simple solution that anyone has for how to solve it. I think the problem can be less complicated if there is a sincere open conversation around it. Let's put some context. In 1948 lots of people were dispossessed of their land and properties, this is still a very controversial thing that is very difficult to talk about. Just go to Jaffa in Israel and ask any Israeli person living in an Arab looking house how their family got to own it and you will realise how of a taboo subject this is. Of course there is no reparations or right of return in the pipeline of the talks. So the first step to solve a problem is realising of it's existence. Instead, Israel seems to continue putting pressure onto the Palestinians with the appropriation of more land and the creation of more settlements [0]. [0] - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-45276555 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-45276555
- edanm 8y ago
  > I think the problem can be less complicated if there is a sincere open conversation around it. While I wish that was true, I don't think it is. For one thing, I don't think the subject is nearly as taboo as you imagine - Israelis love to talk politics, after all! However I think that most Israelis would disagree with your characterization of what happened in '48. The (I think typical) view is that the UN decided to split Israel into two states, one for Jews and one for Palestinians. However, the Arab countries urged the Palestinians to leave Israel, as they were preparing to attack Israel. They attacked, Israel won, and ended up with all the original land, with most of the Palestinians having fled to neighboring countries in the meantime. Israel didn't really do anything wrong - it simply won a war, which would likely have ended up with Israel destroyed if it had lost. Reparations wouldn't really make sense in that view. (That summary is basically my view of the history as I understand it, so assume the summary would probably be told differently by someone with a different opinion.) The other issue with your statement is that even with open conversation around this issue wouldn't really change anything. At the end of the day, the right of return is something that simply can't be granted, not if Israel wants to remain a Jewish country, which is the entire reason it was founded (and in my view, in light of the historical precedents, a totally valid and moral reason). And Israelis simply don't trust the Palestinians with having a state right next to it - which probably doesn't matter much, since Palestinians don't appear to accept such a solution either. So simply saying "well let's just talk about it and it will work out" is ignoring the fact that, no, there probably isn't a solution right now that both sides will find acceptable, unfortunately, and the structural forces of the situation are probably such that nothing will change anyway (e.g. as I said, Israel being in power and thinking it's probably better to delay action on this as much as possible, Hamas being in power in Gaza and preferring to keep the situation mostly as is).
  - Udik 8y ago
    > The (I think typical) view is that the UN decided to split Israel into two states, one for Jews and one for Palestinians. However, the Arab countries urged the Palestinians to leave Israel, as they were preparing to attack Israel. Haha. No. The UN decided to split Palestine in two states, giving half of it to the Jews. Of course the Jews had everything to gain from this partition and the Palestinians everything to lose, since they were the sole owners of the place. Of course they rejected the partition and there was a war, but the Palestinians have been actively expelled by the Israeli army. In fact, 200 thousand of them had already fled their villages before Israel's declaration of independence, to escape from violence- episodes like that of Deir Yassin, where a Jewish commando massacred the inhabitants of a Palestinian village- women and children included-, throwing grenades inside the houses. It was a proper ethnic cleansing operation. > Israel didn't really do anything wrong No, as far as ethnic cleansing goes, Israel didn't do anything wrong. > At the end of the day, the right of return is something that simply can't be granted, not if Israel wants to remain a Jewish country I agree with this. However, I also think that the right of return is mostly aspirational, and given good will on Israel's part, the issue could be just ignored long enough until it's not an issue anymore. By good will on Israel's part, I mean: establish a border once and for all (on the green line), abandon all settlements beyond that border, either renounce completely to Jerusalem east or share the undivided capital with a Palestinian state, completely remove the blockade of Gaza (and create a wide corridor between Gaza and the West Bank). Stop opposing the creation of a Palestinian state, and contribute to it with aids and reparations (that would make up for the right of return). You'll say: this is a lot to ask from Israel. And it is, because Israel is currently enjoying great profits from its illegal and immoral actions, and there will be no end to the conflict until it decides to abide to international law and moral standards.
Udik 8y ago
> But if there were a decent solution, many people in Israel would push very hard to implement it. The truth is, most Israelis just don't know what to do anymore (and solutions have been tried before, negotiations have happened There are perfectly good solutions. The problem is that they require Israel to give up what has appropriated during these years of violence, and stop appropriating more. And Israel doesn't want to do it, because it knows it can get away with it. That's it. Enough excuses.

by edanm 8y ago

botverse 8y ago

No offence taken. > But there is simply no simple solution that anyone has for how to solve it. I think the problem can be less complicated if there is a sincere open conversation around it. Let's put some context. In 1948 lots of people were dispossessed of their land and properties, this is still a very controversial thing that is very difficult to talk about. Just go to Jaffa in Israel and ask any Israeli person living in an Arab looking house how their family got to own it and you will realise how of a taboo subject this is. Of course there is no reparations or right of return in the pipeline of the talks. So the first step to solve a problem is realising of it's existence. Instead, Israel seems to continue putting pressure onto the Palestinians with the appropriation of more land and the creation of more settlements [0]. [0] - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-45276555 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-45276555

edanm 8y ago
> I think the problem can be less complicated if there is a sincere open conversation around it. While I wish that was true, I don't think it is. For one thing, I don't think the subject is nearly as taboo as you imagine - Israelis love to talk politics, after all! However I think that most Israelis would disagree with your characterization of what happened in '48. The (I think typical) view is that the UN decided to split Israel into two states, one for Jews and one for Palestinians. However, the Arab countries urged the Palestinians to leave Israel, as they were preparing to attack Israel. They attacked, Israel won, and ended up with all the original land, with most of the Palestinians having fled to neighboring countries in the meantime. Israel didn't really do anything wrong - it simply won a war, which would likely have ended up with Israel destroyed if it had lost. Reparations wouldn't really make sense in that view. (That summary is basically my view of the history as I understand it, so assume the summary would probably be told differently by someone with a different opinion.) The other issue with your statement is that even with open conversation around this issue wouldn't really change anything. At the end of the day, the right of return is something that simply can't be granted, not if Israel wants to remain a Jewish country, which is the entire reason it was founded (and in my view, in light of the historical precedents, a totally valid and moral reason). And Israelis simply don't trust the Palestinians with having a state right next to it - which probably doesn't matter much, since Palestinians don't appear to accept such a solution either. So simply saying "well let's just talk about it and it will work out" is ignoring the fact that, no, there probably isn't a solution right now that both sides will find acceptable, unfortunately, and the structural forces of the situation are probably such that nothing will change anyway (e.g. as I said, Israel being in power and thinking it's probably better to delay action on this as much as possible, Hamas being in power in Gaza and preferring to keep the situation mostly as is).
- Udik 8y ago
  > The (I think typical) view is that the UN decided to split Israel into two states, one for Jews and one for Palestinians. However, the Arab countries urged the Palestinians to leave Israel, as they were preparing to attack Israel. Haha. No. The UN decided to split Palestine in two states, giving half of it to the Jews. Of course the Jews had everything to gain from this partition and the Palestinians everything to lose, since they were the sole owners of the place. Of course they rejected the partition and there was a war, but the Palestinians have been actively expelled by the Israeli army. In fact, 200 thousand of them had already fled their villages before Israel's declaration of independence, to escape from violence- episodes like that of Deir Yassin, where a Jewish commando massacred the inhabitants of a Palestinian village- women and children included-, throwing grenades inside the houses. It was a proper ethnic cleansing operation. > Israel didn't really do anything wrong No, as far as ethnic cleansing goes, Israel didn't do anything wrong. > At the end of the day, the right of return is something that simply can't be granted, not if Israel wants to remain a Jewish country I agree with this. However, I also think that the right of return is mostly aspirational, and given good will on Israel's part, the issue could be just ignored long enough until it's not an issue anymore. By good will on Israel's part, I mean: establish a border once and for all (on the green line), abandon all settlements beyond that border, either renounce completely to Jerusalem east or share the undivided capital with a Palestinian state, completely remove the blockade of Gaza (and create a wide corridor between Gaza and the West Bank). Stop opposing the creation of a Palestinian state, and contribute to it with aids and reparations (that would make up for the right of return). You'll say: this is a lot to ask from Israel. And it is, because Israel is currently enjoying great profits from its illegal and immoral actions, and there will be no end to the conflict until it decides to abide to international law and moral standards.

Udik 8y ago

> But if there were a decent solution, many people in Israel would push very hard to implement it. The truth is, most Israelis just don't know what to do anymore (and solutions have been tried before, negotiations have happened There are perfectly good solutions. The problem is that they require Israel to give up what has appropriated during these years of violence, and stop appropriating more. And Israel doesn't want to do it, because it knows it can get away with it. That's it. Enough excuses.