US State dept: Israel is not a tolerant society
- Thread starter nomix
- Start date
AiR
Forum Addict
Well duh. The only real news here is the source, human rights groups and other organisations have said this for years. But sure, it is a small step forwards that this now comes from the official part of the US.
Last edited:
BlaRo
Little Nudger
nomix
True Viking
- Joined
- May 26, 2005
- Messages
- 7,293
- Location
- Norway
- Car(s)
- Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
No, but Israel has its other quirks.
There's no doubt Israel is the most democratic nation in the middle east, but as a declared democracy, I believe Israel has the duty to act as one.
Arabs and christians are second rate citizens in Israel, there is no real doubt about that.
However, it's nothing new. What's new is, as some have pointed out, that it comes from the United States State Department, which is quite good. I'm by no means an opponent of Israel's existance, but I do believe it's time that the United States start putting some pressure on Israel, and this is a good step in the right direction, of that I have no doubt.
There's no doubt Israel is the most democratic nation in the middle east, but as a declared democracy, I believe Israel has the duty to act as one.
Arabs and christians are second rate citizens in Israel, there is no real doubt about that.
However, it's nothing new. What's new is, as some have pointed out, that it comes from the United States State Department, which is quite good. I'm by no means an opponent of Israel's existance, but I do believe it's time that the United States start putting some pressure on Israel, and this is a good step in the right direction, of that I have no doubt.
Last edited:
Cobol74
Forum Addict
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2006
- Messages
- 17,506
- Location
- The banana republic of Ukania
- Car(s)
- Honda Accord 2.2 i-Dtec Sport Estate.Hyundai Ix20
They spied on the US and got caught - twice I believe. They have nuclear weapons - one reason why Iran is so keen on nuclear weapons. They born out of terrorism - King David Hotel bomb, hanging in public the four sergeants whilst the British had the UN mandate in the 40s.
They murdered their best PM (Oslo accords) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Yitzhak_Rabin
They keep building settlements on captured lands making peace almost impossible to obtain.
Now the other lot are not nice either. ...
They murdered their best PM (Oslo accords) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Yitzhak_Rabin
They keep building settlements on captured lands making peace almost impossible to obtain.
Now the other lot are not nice either. ...
Last edited:
nomix
True Viking
- Joined
- May 26, 2005
- Messages
- 7,293
- Location
- Norway
- Car(s)
- Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
The dirty secret with the Middle East is that even the good guys are child-killing assholes. As a result, there are no good guys.
As for jewish terrorism in the pre-Israel years, we're talking primarily about Irgun and some other groups. Irgun is not the same as Haganah, but they probably had pretty much the same followers. Irgun could easily be called a terrorist group.
What's funny with Irgun, is that one of its leaders was Menachim Begin, and he became the prime minister of Israel, as the leader of Likud. And in those days Likud was a lot less compromising. But it also proved one of the proper ironies of the Middle East, one of the most radical right wing leaders Israel had in the 20th century was the leader who in the end signed he peace treaty with Egypt. Just goes to show, you never bleeding know when it comes to this region..
As for jewish terrorism in the pre-Israel years, we're talking primarily about Irgun and some other groups. Irgun is not the same as Haganah, but they probably had pretty much the same followers. Irgun could easily be called a terrorist group.
What's funny with Irgun, is that one of its leaders was Menachim Begin, and he became the prime minister of Israel, as the leader of Likud. And in those days Likud was a lot less compromising. But it also proved one of the proper ironies of the Middle East, one of the most radical right wing leaders Israel had in the 20th century was the leader who in the end signed he peace treaty with Egypt. Just goes to show, you never bleeding know when it comes to this region..
jetsetter
Forum Addict
The dirty secret that there are no "good guys" just lesser degrees of bad guy.
SuperStalin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2007
- Messages
- 1,173
Yeah, but the 'heterosexual and LGBT non-jewish community' isn't as accepted.
Most sad issue here for me is that now in Israel actions against Arabs are similar to what Nazis were doing against Jews. Where the fuck is logic here? Israel is against Jewish-Arab marriage, Arabs have to live in worse part of country, etc.
And for me there is similar case with racism. For example there are places in London where white people can't go at night. People who should be first to understand how bad thing is racism became racists.
And for me there is similar case with racism. For example there are places in London where white people can't go at night. People who should be first to understand how bad thing is racism became racists.
nomix
True Viking
- Joined
- May 26, 2005
- Messages
- 7,293
- Location
- Norway
- Car(s)
- Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
That's not true. Being an arab in Israel is a hundered times better than being a jew in the third reich.
The situation gets more similar when you look at Gaza, but it's still far from close.
As the likening of Israel and the third reich is so unfundamented, making it does more to hurt the work for a Palestinian state than it does to help it.
It's like when Michael Moore makes a perfectly valid point, and then makes one small lie, he effing ruins his whole argument and his own credibility.
The situation gets more similar when you look at Gaza, but it's still far from close.
As the likening of Israel and the third reich is so unfundamented, making it does more to hurt the work for a Palestinian state than it does to help it.
It's like when Michael Moore makes a perfectly valid point, and then makes one small lie, he effing ruins his whole argument and his own credibility.
Don't get me wrong. It isn't the same and I'm not trying to say it was that bad because we all know what Holocaust was. But there is some similarity to the first months of anti-jewish repression. Let me explain what I mean.
In third reich it wasn't instant situation when Jews lost all their rights. This year in London I visited imperial war museum and there is very good exhibition about Holocaust. And in one place there are presented laws against Jews which were introduced during first years of third reich. A the beginning there where like there can't be Jewish-German marriage. And then two days after visiting that museum I read that in Tel Aviv government started propaganda against mixed marriage.
Nation with so painful history should not only cry over graves but also draw conclusions and don't divide people on better and worse.
Hope now you understand what is my point.
nomix
True Viking
- Joined
- May 26, 2005
- Messages
- 7,293
- Location
- Norway
- Car(s)
- Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
I get the point, you could just as easily make the comparison between the treatment of arabs in Israel with how the british treated the boers during the early stages of the boer wars. But the point is that you never see that comparison, you see the comparison with how jews had it during the reign of Hitler, and that's done only because Israel's a jewish state.
However, the discrimination we're talking about is something that has been going on for the last six decades, so it's not very likely that it'll become anywhere close to the position of jews in the third reich.
I know why the comparison is made, of course I do, back in the day, I'm not proud to say I made it myself, but it is mostly an irrational comparison without real relevance, which is made because of the emotional impact it might cause (one might interpit it as telling the jews "why are you doing this, did you not learn from your own suffering?").
Along the same lines, I am appaled every time we hear Israel shrug off critisism as anti-semittism, refer to the Holocaust etcetera. First of all, Holocaust does not legitimate ill actions these days, but second of all, I'm provoked by how Israel takes the role as a representative off all jews. Israel is no more a representative for all jews because she is a jewish state than some ultra feminist professor is a representative for all women because she's a woman. I get physicly sick listening to that type of shameful propaganda. It's utterly despickable.
But there is no doubt that Israel has flaws that make it less democratic, in some cases (as with the de facto government actions to make the Old City in Jerusalem more jewish and less Palestinian and less Armenian), not to mention settlements, blockades and so on, Israel digs its own grave.
In the book "Tripple", Ken Follet has a very balanced and good view of the conflict. He gets all parties, be they russians, british, arab or jewish. He also makes a very good point, the arab nations can survive losing a couple of wars. Israel can't lose a single war, that will be the doom of Israel. Israel's only hope of survival is peace. If there's peace, Israel can survive. If there's not, in the long run, Israel will perish, and that will be catastrophic.
These days, it seems like a good idea to clear up where you stand, and for what it's worth, this is where I stand;
I believe Israel needs peace, security and independance. I believe the Palestinians need peace, security, independance and a free and truely independant state. I believe Yasser Arafat was a SOB, while also being a valuable moderate (relatively speaking, we are talking about the middle east) who did accomplish a lot, in the same way Ariel Sharon was a SOB, but also had his good points. This conflict will keep on going until Israel is no more unless there's lasting peace, and I love Israel, so I don't want that.
However, the discrimination we're talking about is something that has been going on for the last six decades, so it's not very likely that it'll become anywhere close to the position of jews in the third reich.
I know why the comparison is made, of course I do, back in the day, I'm not proud to say I made it myself, but it is mostly an irrational comparison without real relevance, which is made because of the emotional impact it might cause (one might interpit it as telling the jews "why are you doing this, did you not learn from your own suffering?").
Along the same lines, I am appaled every time we hear Israel shrug off critisism as anti-semittism, refer to the Holocaust etcetera. First of all, Holocaust does not legitimate ill actions these days, but second of all, I'm provoked by how Israel takes the role as a representative off all jews. Israel is no more a representative for all jews because she is a jewish state than some ultra feminist professor is a representative for all women because she's a woman. I get physicly sick listening to that type of shameful propaganda. It's utterly despickable.
But there is no doubt that Israel has flaws that make it less democratic, in some cases (as with the de facto government actions to make the Old City in Jerusalem more jewish and less Palestinian and less Armenian), not to mention settlements, blockades and so on, Israel digs its own grave.
In the book "Tripple", Ken Follet has a very balanced and good view of the conflict. He gets all parties, be they russians, british, arab or jewish. He also makes a very good point, the arab nations can survive losing a couple of wars. Israel can't lose a single war, that will be the doom of Israel. Israel's only hope of survival is peace. If there's peace, Israel can survive. If there's not, in the long run, Israel will perish, and that will be catastrophic.
These days, it seems like a good idea to clear up where you stand, and for what it's worth, this is where I stand;
I believe Israel needs peace, security and independance. I believe the Palestinians need peace, security, independance and a free and truely independant state. I believe Yasser Arafat was a SOB, while also being a valuable moderate (relatively speaking, we are talking about the middle east) who did accomplish a lot, in the same way Ariel Sharon was a SOB, but also had his good points. This conflict will keep on going until Israel is no more unless there's lasting peace, and I love Israel, so I don't want that.
Steve Levin
Master of Disaster
I agree completely. The scale of the two events isn't even close. Virtually 100% of Jews in the effected regions were systematically exterminated during the Second World War.
There is no systematic extermination taking place, nor is the Palestinian population in danger of being eradicated.
Steve
Last edited:
nomix
True Viking
- Joined
- May 26, 2005
- Messages
- 7,293
- Location
- Norway
- Car(s)
- Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
Well, yes and no. Before, during, and in the years after the war in 48, there were notable massacres of Palestinian civilians by both the Haganah and Irgun. It's quite understandable that some found it quite disturbing that the Irgun were de facto integrated into the new jewish state.
However, there is no extermination camps in Israel, arabs don't have to wear badges and so on. But that does not excuse that Israel is know for extensively using torture (particularily in the Ramleh prison, but also during previous conflicts in Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza), Israel also holds political prisoners, Israel actively seek to make daily life a pain in the but for arabs crossing through check points, and the end result will be catastrophic for Israel.
No, that's just superficial. Israel gets away with a buckload of crap because Israel has had a more or less unconditional friend in the United States, expecting - and getting - unconditional support, near as make no difference.
To put things a wee bit in perspective, Israel has broken, and is breaking a lot more UN resolutions than Iraq has ever done. I'm not calling for an invasion of Israel, but one might consider wether Israel aught to be subjected to surtain sanctions.
As an ecconomist once said about the USSR, hit them where it hurts, in their wallet.
Steve Levin
Master of Disaster
There were unpleasantries committed on both sides, where armed forces swept into villages and killed lots of innocent people. Far more Jews were killed than anyone else.
Secondly, on a matter of scale...none of that comes close to the Holocaust. The Nazis were killing more people in a day than the 1940's actions did in their entirety.
I think Israel -- and the rest of the world -- is awaiting something that is more than "well, don't do anything, and honest, hopefully the other guys will stop shooting rockets and sending car bombs into your civilian areas."
A great first step would be for the UN, etc., to shame the Arab nations into acknowledging Israel's right to exist. And yes, I throw the USA right into that shameful arena (they do so about Taiwan, as well, another highly shameful situation).
Steve
I think comparing israels actions to the holocaust is a tad over the top,but one can not avoid seeing alot of the same retoric and actions being at least similar.
In the same way the Israelis use the holocaust/anti semitism card just as often when just or unjust critisism is voiced.
But I can attest to the racism and opression,even russian othodox jews are looked upon as being second rate jews.
I had the pleasure of having a jewish teacher once and he would actually talk openly about his visits to Israel and he would always admit to there being a class system of how religion and standing in society would count in to how for instance the justice system treated you.
But that is not uncommon in other places in the world either,just about time the US had the guts to stand up to the jewish lobby and actually tell the truth.
Regards
waffe
In the same way the Israelis use the holocaust/anti semitism card just as often when just or unjust critisism is voiced.
But I can attest to the racism and opression,even russian othodox jews are looked upon as being second rate jews.
I had the pleasure of having a jewish teacher once and he would actually talk openly about his visits to Israel and he would always admit to there being a class system of how religion and standing in society would count in to how for instance the justice system treated you.
But that is not uncommon in other places in the world either,just about time the US had the guts to stand up to the jewish lobby and actually tell the truth.
Regards
waffe
nomix
True Viking
- Joined
- May 26, 2005
- Messages
- 7,293
- Location
- Norway
- Car(s)
- Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
The losses from the 1948 war would seem to be somewhere between 4-6000 jews, and 8-15000 arabs.
Though, the larger civil conflict in the years leading up to the war did have a larger loss in jewish life (a difference around 1000 cassualties). However, looking back through the 40s and 30s, the conflict had pretty much similar results on Palestinians and Jews.
Well, I agree that making the Israeli cities safe is a major concern. However, if we're to look at loss of life, Palestinian losses (ie. since the start of the intifada) wastly beats Israeli losses, and by those losses, we are looking primarily at civilians. We also need to ask the question why the attacks are coming. It's not hard to understand attacks against illegal settlements on the West Bank, and attacks from a blockaded Gaza.
As for the settlements, settler murders on Palestinians are hardly ever prosecuted, Israeli soldiers are obligated to protect Israeli settlers throwing stones on Palestinian school children (there's a detachment of international priests and clerics who monitor the activities of the IDF and the settlers on the West Bank, I've had the pleasure of talking to one of them), Israeli soldiers protect settlers who go out in the middle of the night to cut down Palestinian olive trees, not to mention that settlers also do a fair bit of sniping against civilians outside their settlements.
And that's before we look at the undeniable fact that the Palestinians have been under Israeli occupation since 1967 (and arab occupation since 1948, I'm not praising their arab neighbours if that's what you think).
As for the need for the arab nations to recognize Israel, Egypt's done that, Jordan's done that, Syria pretty much does (but like Lebanon denies you entry if you've been to Israel). Lebanon will take the longest, as they've been invaded by Israel a few times.
What's crucial is to get rid of illegal settlements, they are a thorn in the side of the occupied population, they effectively block any progress what-so-ever. Furthermore, Israel need to acknowledge the need for an independant and sovreign Palestinian state (the PLO has acknowledged Israel, and Hamas will do so given time and a few Israeli concessions).
Israel is in fact the party that has not been able to meet expectations visa vi their Palestinian counterparts, looking at the large picture, the PLO has done that for two decades, and Hamas long since moved away from the idea of pushing the jews into the sea. The Hamas states that they are willing to accept a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders.
Remove the illegal settlements, stop treathing the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza as animals, stop the violence on both sides, guarantee a Palastinian state, Hamas must acknowledge Israel publicly (even if they de facto do so by policy changes away from pushing the jews into the sea, leaning towards just a Palestinian state), make Jerusalem an international city, and you're on the road to peace.
Keep on doing what's being done today, keep on being anal and hard up, and the conflict will keep going for a hundered years, or until Israel perishes. I do doubt that Israel can live a hundred years with conflict. I think that's hard to do.
The conclusion is, if Israel wants to survive, she needs to do as she's told. Simple as that.
Edit: The russian orthodox jews are looked upon as second rate citizens largely because they (and now I'm generalizing) don't do anything, they just live on welfare. They're also a source of organized crime. As for ultra orthodox jews, they largely consider all those who are not ultra orthodox jews as rats. No matter if they're jews, christian, muslim, buddhist or just secular.
Edit2: Oh, and Stewe. You know one of the articles that can't be taken into Gaza? Macaroni. You know why? It's high on carbs, it's easy to transport, it's very easy to make as a dinner. Think about that for a moment or two.
Last edited:
Steve Levin
Master of Disaster
I appreciate that viewpoint, but as I've said before, it's entirely Arab-centric. Let's look at the Israel-centric version of the same events.
You speak of occupation since 1967. As if Israel one day merely rolled tanks into Gaza and the West Bank.
What really happened is that Israel was attacked on all sides with an attempt to "drive the Jews into the sea."
And that, by the way, the same thing was attempted again in 1973 -- on Yom Kippur, no less.
And that those territories were not "owned" by Palestinians prior to 1967. There was no Palestinian state. Those regions were part of Syria, Jordan, and Egypt, respectively. And those countries, in the roughly 20 years after 1948, had expressed zero interest in developing any Palestinian state or even granting the self-created refugees citizenship in their countries.
And in all the years of Israel's existence there has been a virtually continuous bombardment of the country. Not a single year has passed where there has not been shellings, bombing, and rockets fired into Israel's civilian population.
Yet despite this, Israel has made significant, forward change; agreeing to peace with Egypt and returning the Sinai, up through agreeing to granting Palesntinians their own self-governance and territory, and making a number of real steps forward on that. Not perfect, but certainly large strides forward.
Yet the behaviour from the Palestinian world hasn't changed. The shellings, the bombings, the rockets don't slack off. So why would more concessions make it any different?
If the violence from the Palestinian Authority regions would simply stop, the floodgates of aid would burst open. There are tremendous resources simply waiting to improve the lives of those in the PA if they would simply end the violence. The violence is why the PA gets no aid -- it is bad enough that Israeli civilians are still attacked on a constant basis, but who in their right mind provides the tools to make it even worse?
There's plenty of reason to believe that if the violence stopped the aid and prosperity would come. There's little reason to believe that with more concessions anything will change.
Steve
You speak of occupation since 1967. As if Israel one day merely rolled tanks into Gaza and the West Bank.
What really happened is that Israel was attacked on all sides with an attempt to "drive the Jews into the sea."
And that, by the way, the same thing was attempted again in 1973 -- on Yom Kippur, no less.
And that those territories were not "owned" by Palestinians prior to 1967. There was no Palestinian state. Those regions were part of Syria, Jordan, and Egypt, respectively. And those countries, in the roughly 20 years after 1948, had expressed zero interest in developing any Palestinian state or even granting the self-created refugees citizenship in their countries.
And in all the years of Israel's existence there has been a virtually continuous bombardment of the country. Not a single year has passed where there has not been shellings, bombing, and rockets fired into Israel's civilian population.
Yet despite this, Israel has made significant, forward change; agreeing to peace with Egypt and returning the Sinai, up through agreeing to granting Palesntinians their own self-governance and territory, and making a number of real steps forward on that. Not perfect, but certainly large strides forward.
Yet the behaviour from the Palestinian world hasn't changed. The shellings, the bombings, the rockets don't slack off. So why would more concessions make it any different?
If the violence from the Palestinian Authority regions would simply stop, the floodgates of aid would burst open. There are tremendous resources simply waiting to improve the lives of those in the PA if they would simply end the violence. The violence is why the PA gets no aid -- it is bad enough that Israeli civilians are still attacked on a constant basis, but who in their right mind provides the tools to make it even worse?
There's plenty of reason to believe that if the violence stopped the aid and prosperity would come. There's little reason to believe that with more concessions anything will change.
Steve