4 ms·

You're mixing up Gaza and the West Bank. What Israel (and Egypt) are doing is - 1) blockading Gaza, 2) entering armed conflicts with the Hamas with high huma

by ikonst 12y ago

You're mixing up Gaza and the West Bank. What Israel (and Egypt) are doing is - 1) blockading Gaza, 2) entering armed conflicts with the Hamas with high human casualties and vast damage to infrastructure Israel is not occupying Gaza. All settlements in the Gaza strip were dismantled in 2005: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza The Israeli military absolutely does not enter Gaza frivolously as it does in the West Bank, and Hamas law is in full effect there, not Israeli martial law. Supporting the project on Indiegogo is probably the best thing to do, as an Israeli: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/save-gaza-s-only-startup-accelerator https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/save-gaza-s-only-startup-...

marvin 12y ago
I don't think the situations in Gaza and the West Bank can be treated as individual and isolated, though. Israeli oppression and annexation (confiscation) of West Bank territory breeds resentment and hatred among all Palestineans, though, and with good reason. I have never seen a good argument for why this policy should be in place. If you forcibly take away people's property and livelihood, of course they will want to defend themselves. Pulling out of Gaza was probably a good move on Israel's side, although it's incredibly sad that this opportunity has not even after a decade resulted in a higher standard of living for the people of Gaza. Hamas, on the other hand, needs to act less like a terrorist organization and more like a mature government. I am certain that this last bit will not happen, but at least there are more sound arguments for why Hamas policy is foolish if Israel's peace-time policies are solid from a human rights perspective. Self-defense against terrorism and guerillia tactics is predictably destructive to the civilian population, so I'd rather not get into that bag of snakes. The only consolation is that international pressure holds the Israeli military to a relatively high moral standard; I shudder to think what would have happened under the military doctrines of the 1900s and before. Finally, very happy to see that there is digital commerce going on in Gaza. Economic development is key to ensuring better lives and hopefully resolving this terrible conflict. So if the surveillance opportunity means that Gaza/West Bank internet traffic is relatively unhindered, that provides one sound channel through which commerce is possible (in spite of the perverted background of control and surveillance).
- ikonst 12y ago
  Well, Israeli actions can breed hatred amongst Jordanians or Egyptians as well, or amongst latte-drinking hipsters in Berkeley for that matter. It's a bit of a stretch to tie this to the people's welfare, that's all I'm saying. The blockade and limitations on peoples' movement actually affects people. The tirades about Israel on popular television (of any arab-speaking country), or the calls for martyrdom by clerics — it's silly to try and appease those. Israel should hold itself to a higher moral standard, as you've said. ... a-a-nd, I think we've gone wildly offtopic for HN, so let's just call people once again to support the Indiegogo campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/save-gaza-s-only-startup-accelerator https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/save-gaza-s-only-startup-...
idiotclock 12y ago
Gaza and the West Bank are one entity, according to the Oslo Accords of 1993 Chompsky writes: "The policies are quite clear. Their roots go back to the 1967 war and they have been pursued with particular dedication since the Oslo Accords of September 1993. The Accords determined that Gaza and the West Bank are an indivisible territorial entity. Israel and the U.S. moved at once to separate them, which means that any autonomy Palestinians might gain in the West Bank will have no direct access to the outside world." http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20130816.htm http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20130816.htm
- blisterpeanuts 12y ago
  >> Chompsky writes: ... I love the variation on his name. Sort of like an all-devouring linguist.
JupiterMoon 12y ago
The UN (and everyone except the USA) considers Gaza de facto occupied.
- JupiterMoon 12y ago
  Not sure why a fact would be be downvoted?
  - blisterpeanuts 12y ago
    Maybe because it's not a fact?
    - JupiterMoon 12y ago
      Virtually every country in the world and in particular the UN considers that as Israel controls the borders to Gaza it is still de facto occupied. This is a fact. I'm not sure what you fail to understand here? EDIT Less than a minute with google provided this. http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2012/01/27/un-we-still-consider-gaza-occupied-by-israel/ http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2012/01/27/un-we-still-con... It also turned up a load of bluster. But that doesn't change the status in international law.
      - blisterpeanuts 12y ago
        You said: "everyone except the USA" considers Gaza occupied. That is not a fact; it's a statement made by you, based on what some member of the U.N. Human Rights Commission said. The UNHRC does not legislate international law, and arguably they do not interpret it very intelligently either; they spend an inordinate amount of their time focusing on Israel's supposed human rights abuses, almost to the exclusion of all the other problems in the world, e.g. China, Pakistan, Turkey, Syria, Africa, S. America, and Russia. As to your statement that Israel controls the borders to Gaza, that is simply not true. Israel and Egypt control the borders, which is a significantly different situation. I don't notice the U.N. claiming that Egypt "occupies" Gaza, yet by your definition and, apparently, the UNHRC's, they do. The fact is, Israel supplies Gaza with electricity and data services, and they allow about 16,000 tons a week of goods into Gaza. They are rightfully afraid of deadly arms being smuggled into Gaza that would be used against Israelis, so they inspect all cargo from land and sea. None of this precludes entrepreneurial activity in Gaza, however, as this woman demonstrates. It would be nice if there were peaceful relations and an open border, but that is up to the Gaza people to figure out, when they are tired of war and would rather negotiate some kind of permanent deal with the Israelis. But to get to that point, they have to put down their guns.

by ikonst 12y ago

marvin 12y ago

I don't think the situations in Gaza and the West Bank can be treated as individual and isolated, though. Israeli oppression and annexation (confiscation) of West Bank territory breeds resentment and hatred among all Palestineans, though, and with good reason. I have never seen a good argument for why this policy should be in place. If you forcibly take away people's property and livelihood, of course they will want to defend themselves. Pulling out of Gaza was probably a good move on Israel's side, although it's incredibly sad that this opportunity has not even after a decade resulted in a higher standard of living for the people of Gaza. Hamas, on the other hand, needs to act less like a terrorist organization and more like a mature government. I am certain that this last bit will not happen, but at least there are more sound arguments for why Hamas policy is foolish if Israel's peace-time policies are solid from a human rights perspective. Self-defense against terrorism and guerillia tactics is predictably destructive to the civilian population, so I'd rather not get into that bag of snakes. The only consolation is that international pressure holds the Israeli military to a relatively high moral standard; I shudder to think what would have happened under the military doctrines of the 1900s and before. Finally, very happy to see that there is digital commerce going on in Gaza. Economic development is key to ensuring better lives and hopefully resolving this terrible conflict. So if the surveillance opportunity means that Gaza/West Bank internet traffic is relatively unhindered, that provides one sound channel through which commerce is possible (in spite of the perverted background of control and surveillance).

ikonst 12y ago
Well, Israeli actions can breed hatred amongst Jordanians or Egyptians as well, or amongst latte-drinking hipsters in Berkeley for that matter. It's a bit of a stretch to tie this to the people's welfare, that's all I'm saying. The blockade and limitations on peoples' movement actually affects people. The tirades about Israel on popular television (of any arab-speaking country), or the calls for martyrdom by clerics — it's silly to try and appease those. Israel should hold itself to a higher moral standard, as you've said. ... a-a-nd, I think we've gone wildly offtopic for HN, so let's just call people once again to support the Indiegogo campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/save-gaza-s-only-startup-accelerator https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/save-gaza-s-only-startup-...

idiotclock 12y ago

Gaza and the West Bank are one entity, according to the Oslo Accords of 1993 Chompsky writes: "The policies are quite clear. Their roots go back to the 1967 war and they have been pursued with particular dedication since the Oslo Accords of September 1993. The Accords determined that Gaza and the West Bank are an indivisible territorial entity. Israel and the U.S. moved at once to separate them, which means that any autonomy Palestinians might gain in the West Bank will have no direct access to the outside world." http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20130816.htm http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20130816.htm

blisterpeanuts 12y ago
>> Chompsky writes: ... I love the variation on his name. Sort of like an all-devouring linguist.

JupiterMoon 12y ago

The UN (and everyone except the USA) considers Gaza de facto occupied.

JupiterMoon 12y ago
Not sure why a fact would be be downvoted?
- blisterpeanuts 12y ago
  Maybe because it's not a fact?
  - JupiterMoon 12y ago
    Virtually every country in the world and in particular the UN considers that as Israel controls the borders to Gaza it is still de facto occupied. This is a fact. I'm not sure what you fail to understand here? EDIT Less than a minute with google provided this. http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2012/01/27/un-we-still-consider-gaza-occupied-by-israel/ http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2012/01/27/un-we-still-con... It also turned up a load of bluster. But that doesn't change the status in international law.
    - blisterpeanuts 12y ago
      You said: "everyone except the USA" considers Gaza occupied. That is not a fact; it's a statement made by you, based on what some member of the U.N. Human Rights Commission said. The UNHRC does not legislate international law, and arguably they do not interpret it very intelligently either; they spend an inordinate amount of their time focusing on Israel's supposed human rights abuses, almost to the exclusion of all the other problems in the world, e.g. China, Pakistan, Turkey, Syria, Africa, S. America, and Russia. As to your statement that Israel controls the borders to Gaza, that is simply not true. Israel and Egypt control the borders, which is a significantly different situation. I don't notice the U.N. claiming that Egypt "occupies" Gaza, yet by your definition and, apparently, the UNHRC's, they do. The fact is, Israel supplies Gaza with electricity and data services, and they allow about 16,000 tons a week of goods into Gaza. They are rightfully afraid of deadly arms being smuggled into Gaza that would be used against Israelis, so they inspect all cargo from land and sea. None of this precludes entrepreneurial activity in Gaza, however, as this woman demonstrates. It would be nice if there were peaceful relations and an open border, but that is up to the Gaza people to figure out, when they are tired of war and would rather negotiate some kind of permanent deal with the Israelis. But to get to that point, they have to put down their guns.