The Israel / Palestine mire (again)

[laxmax613]

The destruction of what Palestinian state? No such thing exists because the people that want to create it are terrorists and are not even willing to consider the possibility of a peaceful resolution.

Not all of the people who support the creation of a Palestinian state are terrorists. In fact, they're a small minority even within Israel and the territories. I bet most people who want a Palestinian state are Jews, actually. Like me, even. It's going to be more and more difficult to determine which elements within Palestinian society (a thing which exists whether you like it or not) are genuinely interested in nation-building, especially as this generation of leadership begins to give way. However, it is clear that Palestinian society needs to find these elements and latch onto them before some other cadre of leaders takes hold.

I really hope that out of strife, Palestine can become a partner in the region for stability and relative freedom as it becomes clear that ideological governments like the Baathists and Brotherhood have proven to be incapable of staying stable, let alone places you'd want to live. Third Way thinkers like Salaam Fayyad need to find their way to the front of the PA leadership squabble as soon as possible, so that whatever future arrangement is found does not bear resemblance to the clusterfucks in Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. And I'm only talking on a domestic level.

The process of coming to an arrangement, agreement, or settlement won't start until Bibi answers for his proto-oligarchical economic policies and strong-arming of the system of checks and balances, not to mention the dissent coming from within his camp about his inability to change the outcome of the Iran negotiations as he promised. No one should be expected to be supportive of continued Netanyahu leadership (except maybe a few of the most powerful families in Israeli business and some mid-level Saudi Foreign Ministry cronies), and so once this Knesset blows itself out, there will be an important window for circumstances to change.

Welcome to the 21st century though - 300 years ago the Palestinians would've been wiped out completely and Israel would've taken over whatever land it wanted, instead of giving away more than half of its territory in exchange for peace that they never received.

But even back then, strong-arming a group of people like that was only really possible for those with the right political capital, something Jews would never have ever had back then. Why wouldn't they have had that political capital? BECAUSE THE TIMES WERE BACKWARDS AND NO ASPECT OF THIS THOUGHT EXPERIMENT SHOULD BE A ROADMAP FOR NAVIGATING CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES. We don't live in the semi-feudal early nation-state period; there are norms for the actions of nations that ought to be reinforced by establishing precedent.

Believe me, I'm frustrated too that overtures like the disengagement were massive clusterfucks, but that doesn't mean that we ought to look at what a different era's ethical blindspots might have excused. We should be looking for partners, especially when Palestinian leadership is in flux.

 

[argatoga]

How fucking disconnected from reality do you have to be to string together that train of thought?

The destruction of what Palestinian state? No such thing exists because the people that want to create it are terrorists and are not even willing to consider the possibility of a peaceful resolution. Welcome to the 21st century though - 300 years ago the Palestinians would've been wiped out completely and Israel would've taken over whatever land it wanted, instead of giving away more than half of its territory in exchange for peace that they never received.

Jesus fucking Christ man.

 

[tigger]

You know, I want to laugh because that's a damn good edit. But then again, goddamnit LeVeL.

 

[LeVeL]

Iran's supreme leader: There will be no such thing as Israel in 25 years.

 

[tigger]

The Ayatollah said something crazy? Oh shit, stop the fucking presses!

If there's any actual news there it's that the Ayatollahs office is intentionally fucking with Iran-US diplomacy. If in a pathetically stereotypical way. Which isn't really news at all. Just like him saying crazy shit isn't news at all.

 

[laxmax613]

I think it's really tempting to reject the Ayatollah wholesale. He doesn't fit into our general conception of who is a decision maker, and he looks like he's just an old man who makes a lot of noise. But the truth is that he occupies a very unique position of authority in the Iranian government.

Yes, the Iran deal has been negotiated and will likely prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear device in the near future. Yes, this is something that many need to come around to. However, those who are hesitant to rely on Iran's word on security matters are usually not doing so for simplistic reasons. Iran's state apparatus really does consist of a number of layers, factions, and institutions that are parallel and compete with one another. Those which the Ayatollah controls (mainly the IRGC and the related Quds Force) are some of the most ideologically oriented and the ones with the most agency. You can see them operating freely in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, and they represent a real threat to legitimate interests.

For examples, look closely at the way Lebanon has been left completely stagnant in the face of governmental decay caused by the IRGC-affiliated Hezbollah political wing. Look at the way that other affiliated groups have become a significant part of the defenses Assad currently has in place to retain rulership of Syria. Look at the carnage caused by IRGC-linked attacks in Argentina, Thailand, and other places.

My point is this: It seems like pulling down criticism of Ayatollah statements is an easy way to discredit anti-deal voices, but the position of the Ayatollah at the head of the expansive Iranian deep state is really important to acknowledge because he represents a player with disproportionate control over very active elements in the regional conflicts.

 

[argatoga]

The Ayatollah may be the super duper head of the state, but in reality he doesn't have much agency. He had to allow a progressive president to be elected as he knows if he keeps a hardline position he will be removed from power. The Green Protests scared the shit out him and his allies.

You're blaming Iran for Lebanon's issues? I guess Israel had nothing to do with destroying that country as well?

 

[laxmax613]

The Ayatollah may be the super duper head of the state, but in reality he doesn't have much agency. He had to allow a progressive president to be elected as he knows if he keeps a hardline position he will be removed from power. The Green Protests scared the shit out him and his allies.

You're blaming Iran for Lebanon's issues? I guess Israel had nothing to do with destroying that country as well?

1. The relatively liberal president and parliament of Iran has no control over these quote-unquote revolutionary agencies. They report solely to the Ayatollah and a cadre of other leaders. They include the IRGC, the Revolutionary courts, and a number of other agencies. This is built into the structure of the Iranian state because it does not have checks and balances in the manner you're familiar with. Yes, most of the state is designed to be operated through parliamentary direction, but this is by no means the entire state. The Ayatollah must respect this, but he has options to conduct most kinds of governmental action on his own (or at least without their interference) through the IRGC and its organs.

2. Lebanon is a very complicated. Israel is an element in what is fucked up about it, but you have to understand that it exercises very little control over Lebanese affairs currently. On the contrary, Hezbollah is a dominant player in Lebanese policy. It holds seats in parliament and is a huge presence particularly in the South of the country. The Syrian conflict has brought Hezbollah far closer to elements in Iran, and while Iran might not be directly responsible for domestic policy issues in Lebanon that have to do with the governance of the country, Hezbollah has recently shown that it can get bogged down in political stagnation.

The problems in Lebanon I'm talking about have less to do directly with conflicts to the east or south of the country, and more with governance. You've probably been following the unrest about the curtailment of basic government services like sanitation. You cannot blame that on Israel, and you cannot blame it directly on Iran either. However, it is clear that the state of Lebanese parliament has a lot to do with the way Hezbollah has been interacting with the rest of the political field. These actors, representing non-Shia interests (do not misinterpret that to mean interests sympathetic to Israel, because they are not), have been marginalized by Hezbollah's increased support from Iran due to the Syrian conflict. And it has fucked Lebanon.

 

[argatoga]

1. The relatively liberal president and parliament of Iran has no control over these quote-unquote revolutionary agencies. They report solely to the Ayatollah and a cadre of other leaders. They include the IRGC, the Revolutionary courts, and a number of other agencies. This is built into the structure of the Iranian state because it does not have checks and balances in the manner you're familiar with. Yes, most of the state is designed to be operated through parliamentary direction, but this is by no means the entire state. The Ayatollah must respect this, but he has options to conduct most kinds of governmental action on his own (or at least without their interference) through the IRGC and its organs.

As I said, they have great governmental power, but not the agency to use it. If they clamp down hard, or get into an unpopular war, they will no longer be the heads of state.

2. Lebanon is a very complicated. Israel is an element in what is fucked up about it, but you have to understand that it exercises very little control over Lebanese affairs currently. On the contrary, Hezbollah is a dominant player in Lebanese policy. It holds seats in parliament and is a huge presence particularly in the South of the country. The Syrian conflict has brought Hezbollah far closer to elements in Iran, and while Iran might not be directly responsible for domestic policy issues in Lebanon that have to do with the governance of the country, Hezbollah has recently shown that it can get bogged down in political stagnation.

The problems in Lebanon I'm talking about have less to do directly with conflicts to the east or south of the country, and more with governance. You've probably been following the unrest about the curtailment of basic government services like sanitation. You cannot blame that on Israel, and you cannot blame it directly on Iran either. However, it is clear that the state of Lebanese parliament has a lot to do with the way Hezbollah has been interacting with the rest of the political field. These actors, representing non-Shia interests (do not misinterpret that to mean interests sympathetic to Israel, because they are not), have been marginalized by Hezbollah's increased support from Iran due to the Syrian conflict. And it has fucked Lebanon.

Hezbollah didn't exist until Israel occupied their country. Israel can be blamed directly for that, they and the PLO fucked over what was a stable state. I'm not defending Hezbollah. Iran is giving them aid because Israel is seen as a threat to Iran. Funding Hezbollah, distracts Israel.

 

[laxmax613]

As I said, they have great governmental power, but not the agency to use it. If they clamp down hard, or get into an unpopular war, they will no longer be the heads of state.

I would say that being the direct artery of funds, expertise, and equipment from Iranian sources to battlefields in Syria and Yemen would demonstrate a remarkable degree of agency for a wing of the government many mistakenly regard as a figurehead.

Hezbollah didn't exist until Israel occupied their country. Israel can be blamed directly for that, they and the PLO fucked over what was a stable state. I'm not defending Hezbollah. Iran is giving them aid because Israel is seen as a threat to Iran. Funding Hezbollah, distracts Israel.

irrelevant. What I'm talking about is the fact that it is occurring, not the basis for its occurrence. To blame the gridlock in Lebanese parliament on Israeli actions in '82 is like blaming the Soviets for the Taliban's offenses against the fabric of Afghan society. The Taliban formed to combat the threat of Soviet interference, but you can't blame the USSR for burqas. It's not logical.

 

[argatoga]

I would say that being the direct artery of funds, expertise, and equipment from Iranian sources to battlefields in Syria and Yemen would demonstrate a remarkable degree of agency for a wing of the government many mistakenly regard as a figurehead.

I'm not calling him a figurehead. The Shah had a lot more power, but he was toppled for using too much of it. Unlike the Shah, the Ayatollah knows he needs to back down when it comes to actions. He can say a lot of bullshit, but domestically he is limited, he can't start a war without fear of losing power, not can he go too far against the US' wishes without having an external threat to his power. Throwing a bit of money and weapons at groups abroad is about as much as he can do. I haven't looked it up, but I doubt Iran is giving much money to Hezbollah. Iran's domestic needs are too important to spend too much money abroad.

irrelevant. What I'm talking about is the fact that it is occurring, not the basis for its occurrence. To blame the gridlock in Lebanese parliament on Israeli actions in '82 is like blaming the Soviets for the Taliban's offenses against the fabric of Afghan society. The Taliban formed to combat the threat of Soviet interference, but you can't blame the USSR for burqas. It's not logical.

Then blame Hezbollah then for their problems, not Iran.

 

[LeVeL]

This is a video I found on facebook so I don't know how to embed it but here's a link to try: link.

This was the caption:

On the eve of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish new year, this video surfaced of a young Jewish boy with a tallit (prayer shawl) being chased through the old city of Jerusalem as Arabs trip him and throw things at him.

This behavior should never be tolerated. It's time to set aside our differences and unite for peace.

 

[prizrak]

This is purely anecdotal but I do happen to know a Palestinian, who is a very nice girl in general, however if you ever talk Israel with her, her stance is "the state is illegal and needs to go away". She doesn't go as far as to say all the Jews need to be killed but she does not support a two state system in any way, same goes for pretty much all of her Facebook commenters as well. If this attitude is even somewhat pervasive in Palestine, there really is no peaceful solution.

 

[argatoga]

This is purely anecdotal but I do happen to know a Palestinian, who is a very nice girl in general, however if you ever talk Israel with her, her stance is "the state is illegal and needs to go away". She doesn't go as far as to say all the Jews need to be killed but she does not support a two state system in any way, same goes for pretty much all of her Facebook commenters as well. If this attitude is even somewhat pervasive in Palestine, there really is no peaceful solution.

Yes it is anecdotal, and she is not in Palestinian. The majority of all humans want to eat, fuck, and have a comfortable life. If you offer people convincing proof that can happen things will calm down. Prosperity is the greatest enemy to radicalism and violence.

 

[prizrak]

Yes it is anecdotal, and she is not in Palestinian. The majority of all humans want to eat, fuck, and have a comfortable life. If you offer people convincing proof that can happen things will calm down. Prosperity is the greatest enemy to radicalism and violence.

Thing is, if the people in charge believe that it's really all it takes.

 

[argatoga]

Thing is, if the people in charge believe that it's really all it takes.

There is a reason they are in charge.

The best way to deal with it would be for Israel to stop their illegal settlements and to encourage businesses to start opening factories. Would some of the money end up with Hamas? Yes, but overtime Hamas wouldn't find much support from people living a comfortable life.

This isn't a fast solution, and it may take generations, but it is the best way I see. Bombing the fuck out of people and storming mosques with tear gas and rubber bullets doesn't improve the lives of the Palestinians. You smack a dog and corner it and it will bite back hard.

 

[laxmax613]

One thing that makes it difficult to implement development programs in Palestine (aside from the red tape imposed by Israel) is that many of the leaders in the pro-Palestinian world subscribe to ideology that regards such efforts as neoliberal subjugation. They argue that the creating of opportunities for advancement would only serve to entrench the status quo and normalize hierarchy. If leadership from the outside, who are really the ones responsible for the tone of Palestinian rhetoric (not because the Palestinians are weak, but because these outsiders (Ali Abunimah etc.) are so loud), could try to focus on improving circumstances for actual Palestinians, the circumstances probably would change a lot.


I am firmly believe that this is a misguided approach, and that investment and opportunities to develop the local economy through the rejuvenation of infrastructure and the easing of access would be instrumental in creating an equal and livable reality in Palestine. It was what allowed Jews to flourish on the Israeli side of the Green Line, and it will work for Palestine too.

It is a shame that Salam Fayyad was sidelined from the PA, because he really believed in this. I can only hope that as Abu Mazzen fades away he is replaced by someone who shares this perspective.

 

[prizrak]

There is a reason they are in charge.

The best way to deal with it would be for Israel to stop their illegal settlements and to encourage businesses to start opening factories. Would some of the money end up with Hamas? Yes, but overtime Hamas wouldn't find much support from people living a comfortable life.

This isn't a fast solution, and it may take generations, but it is the best way I see. Bombing the fuck out of people and storming mosques with tear gas and rubber bullets doesn't improve the lives of the Palestinians. You smack a dog and corner it and it will bite back hard.

Problem is that in the eyes of Palestinians (or at least the people in charge of them) the entire country of Israel is an illegal settlement.

Imagine if you will, you have a two car garage, you go away for say a year and someone takes over your garage. Upon return you find that the person who took over will give half of the garage to someone else and half to you, you say fuck no it's mine and I want all of it back. However you don't have the ability to take it back and you are forced to keep using only half of it. Would you really accept only half of what you believe is yours? Of course not no one would, this is really the crux of the issue here, Palestinians see it as their land.

Mind you I am not supporting either side here but simply pointing out that the root of the conflict is that one side believes that the other is illegally occupying their land and like I said above the only way this will be resolved is when one side is completely wiped out (highly unlikely) or GTFOs elsewhere (not happening at all).

 

[LeVeL]

Problem is that in the eyes of Palestinians (or at least the people in charge of them) the entire country of Israel is an illegal settlement.

To add to that, Palestinian leaders have repeatedly and officially called for the complete destruction of Israel and the murder of all Jews worldwide.

 

[prizrak]

To add to that, Palestinian leaders have repeatedly and officially called for the complete destruction of Israel and the murder of all Jews worldwide.

Nah man, they are all peaceful people who just want to coexist, it's the evil Jews that pushed them into it!