What does President Obama get in exchange for snubbing Israel?

I still can’t believe Obama asked him to do that.

yeah what @lucillelucillelucille said. I was shocked actually.

My assumption would be he wants the Israelis to put “anything” on the table as a show of good faith. I don’t think he expects them to actually do it, but if neither side is willing to make sacrifices then we’ll be in the same boat we’ve been for the last… what 50 years?

FWIW he also made some pretty harsh requests of the Palestinians too, basically telling them they can forget about the “right of return” for those displaced by the initial Israeli invasion.

I think if Israel isn’t willing to put anything on the table, it may be time for us to start pulling our 8 billion dollars a year “aid” to them. They don’t need it, they’ve proven time and again they can whoop the entire middle east on their own… Hell the borders Obama is suggesting from 1967, were before a war Israel had with every major muslim country in the region…. in which it obliterated them all in six days.

I genuinely have no idea, but I just wanted to say this. In the press conference I noticed a distinct whistle when he (Obama) spoke. Sounded just like the beaver in The Lady & the Tramp to me. Slightly off topic but it made me laugh anyway :¬D

In politics when you are writing a new law and you know the opposition will not agree to all your terms, you often will include “throw away” provisions. In other words no matter what you present the other side is going to want you to take something off the table so you throw something in you know will be taken off in hopes that the other parts will stay. Obama knows that Israel will not agree to 1967 borders, but he put it in there simply so Israel can take it off the table.
In my opinion it was a necessary tactic to move things forward. Like all deals and bargains, both parties start at the far ends of what they will accept and usually meet some where in the middle.

This is subject I don’t know enough about, and I suspect few do.
Newspapers say this has been the position of previous administraitions, though I don’t recall hearing that.
Just looking at a map of it shows me the problem. You would have a country seperated into 3 different pieces, and, yes, it would be difficult to defend.
I look forward to seeing what Zen has to say about this. Certainly, he would be better schooled on this than most contributers here.

@filmfann I know, can we just have a lecture day on Fluther that explains this whole Israel/Palestine conflict lol?

He didn’t say return to the borders he said to start with those borders as a place to start the conversation, and then make deals and compromises to establish new borders and. Ake sure Israel has secure borders and the Palestinians have a state as well.

After reading a little bit about the Arab/Israeli and Israeli/Palestinian conflicts, I don’t think it matters what Obama said when looking at the bigger picture. That cluster is way past political rhetoric lol.

@JLeslie is right—Obama’s advocating a process of negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians that would use the ‘67 borders as a point of departure.

Here’s how the position was characterized by Aaron David Miller, a former State Dept. Mideast negotiator:

“Presidents Johnson to Carter all endorsed a much more severe formulation with respect to June 1967. Obama has used quite a generous interpretation by referring to June ‘67 as the basis with mutually agreed swaps. That is to say, if the Israelis assert that they need X amount of West Bank territory to deal with security and demographic considerations, they will then compensate the Palestinians, presumably, from Israel proper with territory so that rather creative accounting it all ends up adding up to 100 percent. ”

I think he knows that it not realistic, and he knows that the Israelis know he knows, and he knows the Palestinians know he knows.
But it is a way to get everybody to the negotiation tables none the less.
Israel says No way, but lets talk anyway, Palestine says Great idea, lets talk it over and USA says Great that you all want to talk, lets talk!
But then again, that is me saying what i think about it, and i have to admit that this whole Israel v Palestina conflict is way above my head.
We (me) do definitely need a lecture from zen like @Blackberry suggested (if he wants to do that of course).

I agree with what @LKidKyle1985 and @JLeslie have to say here. The topic at hand is such a long standing dispute that any starting point will be a volatile one. You have to start somewhere and it was a pretty risky and bold move. I doubt he did this without some serious thought what he is doing here as there are twice as many Jewish citizens in the US as Arab people so he has a lot more to lose than to gain from a voting base perspective.

I am all for supporting Israel for being one of the only pro-western countries in the middle-east. However they are not always correct in their policies or democratic in their response to their citizens desires. Israel and Iran are examples of countries that try to form republics based on religion and in that vein, they will fail their citizens until they become more secular.

Israel is made up of people trying to recover from extreme repression by Europe and the Russian Empire. Iran is trying to recover from extreme repression by the European and American empires. Both have become repressive in their own right and the best we can now do is try to support policies that promote real democracy. Unfortunately, while we promote democracy in the middle-east, we repress it in our own country.

1. The borders are a starting point in the negotiations. “With mutually agreed swaps.”

2. This has been standard US policy for generations. Obama just made it explicit.

3. If you don’t think those borders should be a starting point for a two-state solution, then what exactly do you do with the millions Palestinians living there?

If you make them part of Israel and give them the right to vote, then guess what? Israel gets wiped off the map, because Arabs in these territories outnumber Jews.

If you keep them in “Israel” but don’t let them vote—as is the status quo now—you are endorsing apartheid.

…

I am absolutely sick of Israel’s bluster; the gall of Netanyahu to say that he “expects” the US president to kowtow to his militant right wing paranoia about the borders, after flagrantly ignoring all of the peace negotiations and our policy on settlements before his rule.

Here’s what I expect from Netanyahu and Israelis in general: you do what America wants in these negotiations, or we stop giving you billions of dollars of aid, and we stop sticking up for you when the entire rest of the world criticizes your illegal occupation and apartheid state. And I expect American Jews to wake up and stop blindly supporting the right-wing religious fanatics who now control Israel.

I also think it’s hilarious that people think Israel is a democracy. It’s not a democracy if only a fraction of the people living there can actually vote.

And the idea that America gets anything out of our relationship and unequivocal support for this apartheid state is absolutely absurd.

@Qingu amen

And I really want to stress this point, because it’s something I’ve found that a lot of people don’t realize:

Jews are a minority in the place we call “Israel.”

Most of the people living in Israel are Muslim Arabs, i.e. “Palestinians.”

The only reason Israel is a “Jewish state” is because most of these Palestinians do not have the right to vote in Israeli elections—because they are living under military occupation.

If these people had the right to vote in the country they live in, this country would no longer be a Jewish state. Just like South Africa no longer was a “white-ruled” state when blacks there got the right to vote.

When Muslims talk about “wiping Israel off the face of the map,” some of them may indeed be espousing violence or terrorism. But many of them are not. Many of them are simply talking about making this country’s politics reflect the majority of people who live there… which would, of course, entail erasing the country’s current identity as “Jewish.”

I am absolutely sick of Israel’s bluster; the gall of Netanyahu to say that he “expects” the US president to kowtow to his militant right wing paranoia about the borders, after flagrantly ignoring all of the peace negotiations and our policy on settlements before his rule.

Exactly right @Qingu

I once read about the negotiations in a general sense in the middle east. That the Arabs have to feel like they have robbed the other person to feel good. The argument the author was making was that the deal Clinton tried to broker fell apart in the end because the Palestinians felt like Israel was still winning so to speak. When I am bargaining for a price, I just want it to feel fair, like I paid for a fair price and the seller made a reasonable profit. It is a cultural difference. I think probably the Israeli’s fall in between somewhere. My father-in-law, born and raised in Mexico by Israeli parents, is a tough negotiator and will leave something on the table and walk out if for a second he feels taken advantage of. Stems from pride and having to feel he got a better deal than the seller ever intended.

I think Obama probably understands these cultural subtlities. I think Hillary does as well, I am sure she felt similar to Obama. For all we know it is actually a great negotiating manuever having the PM of Israel annoyed by the thought of the 67 borders and annoyed with the American President, it might build trust with Obama and the Palestinians. I never understood why America is the country looked to for pulling off a peace treaty. I can’t imagine the Palestinians trust us at all.

@JLeslie, I think it’s important not to make generalizations about either side.

First of all, I’m sure that many Arabs think a “fair” deal would be for Israel to not exist as a Jewish state. The Arabs were living there, then the Jews came in and, using military force, set up an apartheid state, relegating them to second-class citizens. I mean, you could say the same thing about blacks in South Africa (some of whom, like Hamas, resorted to violence in terrorism). And today we all agree that ending apartheid in South Africa—rather than splitting it up into separate black and white states, with the boundaries of the black state determined by the whites—to be “fair.” We don’t say that the blacks “robbed” the whites in South Africa.

Secondly, many Arabs are fine with a two state solution.

Thirdly, people’s views can change over time. Look at the IRA, an organization almost as fanatical and violent as Hamas is now. West Bank Arabs have largely softened their views and from what I understand many people are also fed up with Hamas’ never-ending jihad.

Finally, Israelis are just as heterogenous as Arabs. Many Israeli Jews sympathize with Palestinians for the same reasons I do. On the other hand, the super-orthodox settlers that form Netanyahu’s right-wing base believe that they are commanded by Yahweh to rule all of Israel and push the Palestinians aside. Some of them would probably be okay with simply killing all the Palestinians on their holy land, because after all that’s exactly what the Bible says they should do. These people are every bit as fanatical and dangerous as Hamas.

@Qingu I agree with everything you said, I tried to buffer the generalization by offering up my Israeli, Jewish, FIL as being just as hard headed as the Arabs I described. I do think there must be cultural nuances with these things though.

I am hopeful. Hopeful, peace and a Palestinian state will be acheived, and Israel can feel secure.

He has already corrected himself. It’s the same old same old. He has to play to both sides.

I’ve been here for years, asked questions and posted answers on the subject, both from an objective standpoint well, tried to and have written extensively about my own personal opinions.

I’m too tired to write any more – just search Israel – and wherever there’s a zen, zen_again, new_zen or zen_ or whatever – that’s what I think. My views haven’t changed much. The only thing that has changed is that now Hammas is in partnership with the PLO. This makes negotiation very difficult. Hammas, recognized by the US, UN and the world as a bona fide terrorist organization a la Al Kaida – and funded by Iran, calls for Israel’s destruction. How to negotiate with them?

Those who agree with qinqu – don’t bother – you’re wasting your time. I don’t even want to try to convince you – and, because you don’t live in Israel – I don’t particularly care what you think – it’s like if I were to say I vote GOP. So?

Those who aren’t sure – or try to be objective observers – as I do of America’s various global excursions an affairs (Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Korea) – are welcome to PM me.

ZEN OUT

@zen, nope, he hasn’t “corrected” himself.

He restated his position—1967 lines with mutually agreed land swaps—at AIPAC.

@Qingu I think he did “correct” himself…
”“By definition, it means that the parties themselves – Israelis and Palestinians – will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. That’s what mutually agreed upon swaps means,” Obama said.”

That’s not a correction. The fact that you think it’s a correction means you weren’t listening to what he said the first time.

Out of curiosity, did you read about this on Fox? I happened to check on Fox’s website the day of his big speech and the headline was something like “OBAMA SELLS OUT ISRAEL, WANTS TO GIVE PALESTINIANS BACK THEIR LAND ALONG 1967 LINES.”

He gets more respect from me. But, it will take a lot more than that for me to vote for him again.

@tinyfaery, really? You would prefer whatever trogolydyte the Republicans nominate?

I’ll vote Green. Obama will win my state with or without me.

God help you if he doesn’t.

Getting back to the original question I don’t think Obama ‘snubbed’ Israel. Obama doesn’t agree with Netanyahu on everything but then who does? It isn’t up to the US to decide where Israel’s borders should be but it is surely entitled to comment as it gives Israel around $2.5 billion a year in military aid to defend those borders.

Unfortunately Obama has no idea how to negotiate. He’s never had to do it. Not during his time in Washington nor his time as a community organizer. His tack has always been to make demands.

If you start the negotiations with the ‘67 borders, Hamas has no reason to give up anything. What does Israel give up to get Hamas to stop spewing rockets into them? What does Israel give up to be recognised as a legitimate country? And what does Israel give up to get a defensible country? With the ‘67 borders as a starting point Hamas already has everything Israel could use as bargaining chips. It is an untenable bargaining position. Anybody with the slightest idea of how to negotiate would never through in all the bargaining chips in hopes of winning back some of them.

When Obama says mutually agreed swaps, what the hell is he talking about? By starting with the ‘67 borders, Israel has nothing left to swap. It’s idiocy.

I shall contribute a bit further as my two esteemed and learned (read: curious) jellies above me – deserve a perspective from someone who lives within said rocket distance from Hammas.

For starters – I agree pretty much with both Netanyahu and Obama. I think Netanyahu agrees with Obama – but doesn’t have the political luxury to just come out and say it – because that would be political suicide. It’s a very complicated political process in Israel – one should at least learn a little about the 20 something different parties, crazy coalitions of left and right, religious and secular – and the fact that these governments disolve on average every 2 years. Every two years: you read correctly.

67 borders. It’s so easy to say. But what is that? I have fought in three wars, but not in that one – I am too young.

Had Israel not been attacked on all sides on that fateful day in June – there would be no 67 borders to talk about.

Now they are a fact – and even more complicated because of the settlements – but also because there was no-one to negotiate with on the other side. Remember Arafat?

Think of all the Arab nations – all of them – any moderate democracies come to mind? Any democracies period? Anyone out there not calling for death to the Jews and Zionists, death to Israel?

Did America try to negotiate with Al Qaida?

Now the co-called Palestinian Authority has teamed up with Hammas – who continues to call for the destruction of Israel.So now is the time Israel should just say: let’s go back to the 67 borders and we’ll all join hands in peace?

It’s only simple, and one-sided for armchair warriors like Qinqu. I have seen too much bloodshed, and, like Netanyahu, also have children in the IDF – to think like that. I’ve paraphrased Golda Meir before; when the Arabs love their children more than they hate the Israelis – there will be peace. I hope it’s soon.

@zen

Implied but not stated in my question is this;

Will Obama will give up Jewish votes in exchange for Arab/Muslim petro money-from the likes of Hassan Nemazee and others who have contributed heavily to Democrats in the past?

The president would like to have $1 Billion for the 2012 election campaign. I suspect he has made a dollars and cents calculation.

The president would like to have $1 Billion for the 2012 election campaign. I suspect he has made a dollars and cents calculation—you are probably right @josie

It seems that U.S. elections have all come down to “he who contributes the most, gets the most votes” I hate that the elections are no measured in dollars instead of votes.

@zen, Turkey is a moderate Islamic democracy, but that’s really beside the point.

If you don’t want to negotiate with the “Arabs” because they’re too savage for your tastes, what do you want to do? Exterminate them? Or just keep them under occupation?

Pro-apartheid whites made the exact same arguments, by the way. How many moderate black democracies were there in Africa during Apartheid?

@josie and @Ron_C, What absolute nonsense! Nemazee, according to Wikipedia, is a “millionaire” ... so where the hell does this $1 billion figure come from, josie? And surely you realize that Jews also heavily contribute to Democrats, and that there are limits on campaign financing… I mean, I don’t even know where to start.

I’m not about to deny that money plays a huge part in politics but for you to assert that some random rich Iranian is pulling the strings behind Obama’s Israel policy is ridiculous and dishonest.

@Jaxk,

“Unfortunately Obama has no idea how to negotiate. He’s never had to do it. Not during his time in Washington nor his time as a community organizer. His tack has always been to make demands.”

This is an insane statement. Even for you.

That has been the basic position of the American government for over 50 years. The 1967 borders with negotiated land swaps is nothing new and is not Obama dumping on Israel. That’s just right-wing Republican big-lie politics.
George W. Bush’s position.
Bill Clinton’s position.
And Here’s the positions that Administrations have takne from 1953 and Dwight Eisenhower forward.

This is a very tricky issue for an American Jew and Obama-supporter like myself.

I’ve never been to Israel before and hope to visit there one day. Despite having never been there, it gives me some peace knowing that it’s there; that there is a place to go if the shit hits the fan.

This might sound ridiculous to most people and it’s not a feeling I grew up with but something I acquired later on. I think I might have had a few relatives on my father’s side who died in the concentration camps, but I don’t even know their names or how many of them there were. I wasn’t raised to be fearful and I’ve experienced virtually no racism against me or my immediate community (unlike my parents, who both grew up in very different parts of the USSR).

This feeling came from reading. Books on the Holocaust, like Is This A Man? by Primo Levi and Maus by Art Spiegelman and many, many others. Books on World War II and Europe and Hitler. All of these documents painted a picture for me that I couldn’t have imagined on my own.

Picture the following: a place where Jewish people enjoy cultural and religious freedom. Where they inhabit every class of society from rich to poor, blue collar to white collar, educated and not. Where Jews are professionals, doctors, lawyers, educators and politicians. Where Jews contribute to their society by voting in elections, paying taxes, fighting as soldiers, creating jobs. Where Jews are in key positions to advance scientific theory, academia and art.

What place would you think I was describing? American Jews in the 21st century? Actually, I am describing Europe, and specifically Germany, in the 1920’s and 1930’s. At the time, Jews enjoyed greater religious and cultural tolerance than they had experienced in hundreds of years. They were dedicated to their communities and their country and felt their position was as secure as it could ever be. And their society turned on them.

As much as I love America, the place I grew up and live now (and expect to live in until I die), I sometimes wonder… What if something happens again? What if the security I feel now is as illusory as the security the German Jews felt in 1922? I don’t expect my country to turn on me; it seems ridiculous to me even as I type this out now! In our age of tolerance and understanding, it seems impossible doesn’t it?

But I guess there is that tiny little iota of fear. And the existence of the state of Israel makes me feel a little better. Just in case, in that one in a billion chance that my country of birth turns on me, I have somewhere to go. An option that 6 million Jews over half-a-century ago didn’t have.

Does this mean I don’t give a damn about the Palestinians or blindly support every action taken by the Israeli government? Of course not. Has Israel made mistakes? Absolutely. The Palestinians deserve to control over their own destinies and the right to life, health, education and prosperity. Likewise, Israel needs the same rights, though being situated in an area surrounded by enemies, it also needs to be able to defend itself. If both sides can work out a plan that satisfies these conditions, things could get better and peace might actually happen one day.

@drdoombot I feel exactly the same.

Did anyone catch Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to the joint sesson of Congress today? It was very moving and gave President Obama a good deal of praise for his efforts to move the peace process. It was clear from his speech that the sticking point is not in Obama’s words about borders. Both men agree in principal on that. THe sticking point is the Right of Return. And until the Palestinians give up the goal of wiping Israel from the face of the Earth, there can be no meaningful negotiations. No Palestinian leader has yet been able to get the hotheads in their own society to see that truth.

@drdoombot I feel the same way exactly. And may I extend an open invitation to you to Israel – I’ll show you around gladly anytime. Next year in Jerusalem?

@drdoombot, while I appreciate your compassion and thoughtfulness, I think it’s sad that so many Jews define their identity in terms of victimhood and paranoia about the next Holocaust.

And I think it’s infuriating that this sensibility is used to justify the existence of an apartheid state.

Also, I don’t even think this makes any sense whatsoever. Let’s say world opinion turns on Jews to the same extent that it did in Nazi Germany. You think Israel would make Jews safer? Israel is a perfect, condensed target for a thermonuclear ICBM. What’s more, it’s clear that the existence of Israel and Israeli policies in ensuring its existence has, more than anything else, turned world opinion against Jews (both fairly and unfairly).

@ETpro, shame about that. Abbas and Olmert, according to Wikileaks, were actually very far along in negotiations and Abbas was apparently willing to agree on a merely symbolic right of return, with just a few tens of thousands of people over ten years. Then Netanyahu came into office and completely torpoedoed those negotiations.

Also, let’s talk about what “wiping Israel off the face of the earth” means, because this phrase gets trotted out so often as a scare tactic.

There are undoubtably some insane people who would want to wipe Israel off the face of the planet through violence or ethnic cleansing. Most members of Hamas probably fit into this category.

But for most other Muslims—including even the nutso Ahmadinejad—“wiping Israel off the map” would ideally entail no violence at all. It would simply entail giving Palestinians the right to politically participate in the country they live in. Because—and I don’t think you can say this too many times— Muslim Arab Palestinians form a majority of people in Israel. Israel only “exists,” on the map as a Jewish state, because most Arab Muslims in Israel live under military occupation and cannot participate in the country they live in.

A one-state solution, with full voting rights for Palestinians, would wipe the Jewish state of Israel off the map. And frankly, that seems perfectly fair to me.

@Qingu It isn’t even close to true that Arab Muslims are the majority of Israel’s population. The religious demography is 76% Jewish, 16% Muslim, 4% other being largely non religious, 2.5% Syriac Christian and 1.5% Druze. Currently, Israel has the largest number of Arab Muslims empowered to vote of any Middle Eastern Country. Let’s hope that the arab Awakening will correct that.

Hamas’ stated goals are not only the destruction of the state of Israel but killing Jews where ever they are found.

@Qingu Maybe you were thinking Palestinian Israelis can’t serve in the army?

I’m including the people who live in Gaza and the West Bank, which are not sovereign countries and are currently under Israeli military occupation.

Snubbing Israel? It’s Binyamin Netanyahu snubbing the US President and most of the EU’s country leaders.

@Qingu Gaza and the West Bank are not currently under Israeli Military occupation either. They wouldn’t be firing so many rockets into Israel if they were. Nor would they constitute a majority population if they were. Gaza has a population of 1,604,238 and the West Bank 2,407,681 excluding Israeli settlers. See here. So added to the Arab population within Israel of 1,571,000 that’s 5.57 million and Israel’s Jewish population is 5,79 million.

But nobody on either side is seriously proposing a solution where the whole region becomes one state with both groups living side by side in peace and harmony. What a wonderful world it would be if that could happen. It did at one time.

Gaza and the West Bank are not currently under Israeli Military occupation either. They wouldn’t be firing so many rockets into Israel if they were. Exactly. Plus, Hammas were elected in free, democractic elections in Gaza. Hammas – an internationally, Iran funded terrorist organization. You can’t have it both ways, sorry. If they were under military rule – there would be no elections, and no rocketfire – trust me. It was like that til 2005 – then Israel left. I have felt many a rocket since then – at last count – about 8000.

But there’s no reasoning or debating @Qingu – he doesn’t learn, he doesn’t care. He repeats the same thing year after year. He hates Israel, and is a self-hating Jew. Those are usually the most hateful and dangerous. Like the American soldier that went to join Al Qaida.

@Qingu has admittedly never been to the middle east – and knows nothing about the reality here except for what he gets from the media. Boring.

What solution do you propose, Zen?

@ETpro, I disagree that Gaza and West Bank are not under military occupation; they are cordoned off by the Israeli military; Israel controls their exports and their borders. It’s not an “occupation” in the sense that the places are swarming with IDF, but I don’t think the word means something that specific. Certainly Palestinians and most of the world considers it an occupation.

I actually did not know the demographics put Jews in the (slight) majority, though. Last I checked they were a minority. I guess all those settlers having lots of kids pays off. So I will retract what I’ve been saying about Jews being an ethnic minority. I’ll have to think about how this changes my argument, too.

And I agree that a “one-state solution” is pie-in-the-sky, not least because of the likelihood of Hamas sewing chaos and taking revenge. My problem, though, is that so many Jews and Westerners see it not only as simply impractical but also somehow immoral and beyond the pale.

@zen , I’m not really sure if I should even bother responding to somone comparing me to al-Qaeda. But:

• Hamas was democratically elected, but not in a sovereign state, and their election wasn’t recognized anyway. Similarly, during apartheid South Africa, the whites gave the blacks limited self-rule in cordoned off areas—called bantustans —but these areas were not treated as sovereign countries with the ability to control their own borders—just like Gaza and West Bank.

• The presence of rocket fire does not somehow mean that a place is not under occupation. Americans occupied Iraq for years; the fact that al-Sadr’s militia was constantly laying IEDs and shooting RPGs at our troops and at the green zone doesn’t mean the Mahdi Army was a sovereign nation operating outside US military occupation.

I guess we could quibble about what we mean by the word “occupation.” You and ETPro seem to mean an actual, heavy presence of troops and military hardware in an area, while I mean something more broad—the military effectively controlling an area by cordoning it off, controlling its borders and to some extent its economy. But if you ask the people living in Gaza and the West Bank, they would certainly say they’re living under occupation.

@mattbrowne You know my position, buddy. It hasn’t changed. I would return land for peace gladly, and even divide Jerusalem up for peace. I would even negotiate with Hammas tomorrow – they are no better or worse than Arafat’s PLO in the day – they just have to say something like: Israel can exist. And if not return Gilad Shalit after 5 years – at least let the Red Cross visit him and negotiate. I would release all the Palestinian terrorists for him – as there would either be peace and it wouldn’t matter – or they would simply be rounded up again if necessary.

But I am not in a political connundrum like Netanyahu – and though I may not agree with him on everything – it can’t be easy to keep the coalition together. Israel has many different takes on this – and over 20 different parties. GOP and Dems it aint.

zen, would you agree to go back to the 1967 borders if Hamas recognized the remainder as Israel and the Palestinians guaranteed to enforce Israeli security?

Sure. We’ve given up so much “sacred” land already it doesn’t matter – from Joseph’s tomb (in Hebron – and of course, Hebron itself – yes THE Joseph, son of Jacob and grandsom of Abraham) to many other cities and towns that are already de facto Palestinian. I believe a real peace is far more important than any borders – the width of Israel – the proximity is a joke anyway. Hammas reached Tel Aviv, and Hizballah in Lebanon can hit the other side of Israel with their rockets – which Time recently wrote about their having more than most countries.

Plus the Iranian threat. Borders are a joke. They cannot be defended the traditional way.

Only peace is a viable way to defend borders.

Then I find it strange that you have so much animosity towards me when we agree on this.

Because of how you have been consistantly down on Israel, though never having been here, completely one-sided pro-Palestinian – even during the last war when I was in bombshelters and the way you write. Otherwise, I could care less about you. I don’t know you from Adam.

I’m not one sided. I think Hamas, and too many palestinians besides, are demented savages and I would much rather live in Israel in Palestine. It’s because I think Israel is a more civilized place than the territories that I expect better from them, and from their supporters.

I also don’t see what my never having visited Israel means. Have you ever visited Afghanistan or Iraq? Does that mean you can’t have an informed opinion about the way Americans have fought wars there or interacted with the people who live there?

Any chance for a more moderate Israeli government after the next elections, Zen?

@zen

On a side note, I find it incredibly interesting and informative to have someone that not only has been there but has lived there for some time, making comments. It adds a perspective you just can’t get from Yahoo News.

@Jaxk – Absolutely. Zen is a dear friend of mine and a terrific guy. Sometimes it’s easy to make comments living in countries not surrounded by enemies. But this still means that having more safety long term means turning enemies into friends. It might sound trite, but look what happened with Germany and France. Or Germany and the UK. Or Germany and Poland. Or Germany and Russia.

Israels deserves to be surrounded by friends. The young generation in Israel must get to know young people in neighboring countries. Like the peaceful young Egyptians who want a better future, who want freedom, democracy and opportunities. Saying NO to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. These young Egyptians must be our new allies. And when they have kids they will tell their kids that Israeli kids are their friends. We need student exchanges. We need joint orchestras, sports teams and so forth.

We need a vision. We need a strategy. Binyamin Netanyahu has neither. Just old feelings of hatred and mistrust. Hey, he’s got a foreign minister who’s an outspoken racist. These kind of people are destroying Israel’s future.

Historically, only the right has been able to make peace with the Arabs. Sadly, they are not exactly western thinking.

So what is the vision? The strategy?

Sigh – if only Rabin were still here. When he died, he took a lot of our hopes for peace with him. He was a miltary man, but a peacenik. I can identify.

Strategy? For one, I would adopt Obama’s plan as is. Really. He didn’t say anything at all I disgaree with or fear. Of course, going into negotiations – one cannot put all their cards on the table – but I have a feeling Netanyahu agrees with him too. You might think this strange – but I foresaw the current events in the Arab world – six months ago. I also think that Netanyahu could surprise everyone.

The Muslim Brotherhood might even be okay with recognizing Israel in a two-state solution. The group, like the rest of Egypt, is in flux right now, and its younger members seem much more amenable to moderation. This NYT article (long) gives a good sense of the complexity involved. The fact that nonviolence worked so well against political oppression seems to have shaken a lot of the hardline people dedicated to violent jihad.

I’m also holding out hope, perhaps naively, that Hamas will reform its ways. If Hamas joins with Fatah in saying they are willing to recognize Israel along 1967 lines and renounce violence, then this conflict is basically over, or at least it’s Israel’s to lose. That’s a big if, but I have to believe that at least some people in Hamas (maybe the leftovers from the 700 killed by the IDF in the Gaza War) have cooler, rational heads on their shoulders.

(maybe the leftovers from the 700 killed by the IDF in the Gaza War) is where we depart ways again. Ciao bambino.

Um, I don’t see what you would possibly find offensive or antagonistic about that statement.

Exactly.

No, seriously… what is your problem with that statement?

Maybe tomorrow. It’s late and I’m tired. Matt?

Sorry, I’ve been very busy for the past few days. I think it’s very important to discuss visions and not just plans. My vision is a secure Israel surrounded by friendly neighboring countries. A strategy is also more than the 1967 borders. It must tell us something how we get closer to the vision. The strategy must include concrete steps describing how Israelis and their neighbor can become friends. The implementation will take decades, but the first steps have to take place now.

I was quite disappointed by some reactions of the Israeli government when the peaceful revolution took place in Egypt. Short-sighted politicians only saw the threat, but not the challenges and the opportunities. I’m aware that when people’s minds are in ‘survival mode’ everything can be perceived as a threat. But Israel will only see a better future when the mindsets of people change. I know that you are open to change. How many do already think like you? How can you convince other Israelis? Do you kids have pen pals in Egypt or Lebanon for example exchanging emails? Are there Facebook groups in which both Israeli and Arab kids take part? What about student exchanges? Do you or your kids personally know a Palestinian, an Egyptian, a Jordanian? Facebook helped bring down dictators? Can’t Facebook be used to bring down hatred and mistrust? I can imagine that especially mothers are sick of all the violence. Like they were in Northern Ireland. Women on both side united telling their belligerent men: no more. No more weeping and mourning. No more killing. Maybe it’s up to the women in Israel and the women in the surrounding countries to make peace.

@mattbrowne Great post – I agree 100%. I am always disappointed by the politicians, as are all Israelis. How do I know this? We disband the Knesset (usually in disgust) on average every two years. Of course, this is also a recipe for disaster, because like a self-fulfilling prophesy, it dooms itself. If the government doesn’t have time to put things in place, how can we assume they wouldn’t? You know what I mean.

Survival mode is a good phrase and a pretty accurate picture of this society. As modern, western and liberal a place as it is – all you need is one terrorist attack or a few rockets to connect for Israel to go all right-wing and anti-Palestinian all over again. It’s sad, but reality.

Ultimately, the next Palestinian regime, whether it’s as a state (in September?) or not – will have to also ask itself some very serious questions – similar ones to what I asked Bibi but got no reply. What if, miraculously, Hammas renounced terror, gave back Gilad Schalit, and recognized Israel’s right to exist. Are you ready for peace and “painful” land and other sacrifices? I think it’s the rhetoric of someone, not ill-meaning or ill-intentioned, but rather a life-long politician who must cater to both left and right, religious and secular – the crazy wonderful bunch of people that make up this very unique society. Or so he thinks.

I would go about it differently.

This is based on fact and personal knowledge of a thing or two – but my opinion only.

First, if all the major players in Israeli defence, including the outgoing head of security (like the FBI) and the outgoing chief of staff Ashkenazi (one of Israel’s most beloved people) have said that there is no military way of releasing Gilad Schalit – then an exchange is absolutely necessary – and should be done immediately.

Hammas would chalk up a win – a lot of Palestinian (terrorists/freedom fighters – I don’t care what you call them) would go home – and Israel would have Gilad back – a nationwide priority here – I can’t tell you how much we want him home. There is a national consensus.

Next – Abu Mazen and Hammas have a partnership – fine. Hammas are terrorist, but they were elected democratically. I can imagine the Arabs aren’t too fond of some of our politicans either. They’d be correct.

I don’t think we have to negotiate with Hammas – they are a faction of Abu Mazen’s government only. If Abu Mazen signs a peace treaty – it should be enough. Remember: Oslo was signed with Arafat. Peace with Egypt was signed with a President – not exactly democratically elected. And look what happenedd to his successor. Peace with Jordan – signed by a King. Not exactly a democracy either. See my point?

Besides – in all honesty – we are not afraid of the Palestinians – neither at war nor at peace. Borders are so slim – Israel is so tiny. Defending them is a joke – only peace can guarantee real safety.

No-one wants 67 borders. They aren’t a reality anymore anyway. Had the Arab nations accepted Israel’s ezxistance in 67 and not attacked from all signs that fateful JUne – there wouldn’t be a need for all this. But the reality is close to 300,000 settlers now live there – and they aren’t moving. That is where land for peace comes in – other land – similar in area. The Palestinians have pretty much agreed to it.

Jerusalem is already de facto Arab in the east. Let them call it whatever they want – Al Kuds – I don’t care.

Refugees. So are my grandparents – and they didnt start their war.

It’s time for the international oil community of 1 billion arabs to help their refugee brothers in the new established land of Palestine – and not try to squeeze them back into Israel – demographically it would be a disaster. I also don’t think many of them could prove where they lived and why they left – there are many who stayed and were neutral. I know some. Besides, that can be negotiated later on. With a real peace, business and trade – who knows, maybe they won’t want to come back to Israel.

Let’s start with Peace first, details later.

I love fluther.

@zen, once again, I think we are in much more agreement than you seem to think we are.

But I think you are underestimating the importance of democracy. Not just in Israel but in all the neighboring countries and the Arab world in general. Because the bottom line, to me, is that there will never be peace in Israel when the majority of people around Israel—and a huge number of people in Israel—despise Israel and see it as a brutal occupier.

Obviously, a lot of those people have come to this opinion unfairly, through conspiracy theories, through scapegoating, through Islam, or any of the stupid reasons that people form opinions. But those beliefs form a real landscape that Israel must navigate through if it is to exist at all. And you can’t change people’s opinions of you for the better by constantly bombing them.

@zen “It’s time for the international oil community of 1 billion Arabs to help their refugee brothers in the new established land of Palestine” I notice that the Arab dictatorship of Saudi Arabia is much more interested in ensuring that their many “Princes” have nice cars and trips to Germany to blow off steam than in helping fellow Arabs. They pay hush money to the religious zealots so that they can stay in power but provide little or no relief for anything that is not related to war and revenge.

Maybe if the is democracy established in Egypt or Syria, the Palestinians will get help. They will never get any real aid or land from the established demagogues.

^ Agreed. 63 years ago – out of the ashes (literally) of the Holocaust, the State of Israel was created – literally on swampland in the north, desert in the south – the whole land less than a few hundred miles from end to end – you can drive it in a few hours. The Arabs attacked on all sides, and from within, as soon as the UN declared the partition and granted Statehood – and never missed an opportunity to attack thereafter – either with suicide bombers, rockets or military attacks (56, 67, 73 etcetera).

Without the Jews helping out around the world, there would never be a state. Without US aid – there would never be a state. And I don’t care that it’s for their own interests – Russia sides with Syria, Iran and Iraq and equipped the Egyptian army – now look who’s allies with whom – in such a short time.

Israel hasn’t occupied Gaza since 2005. Hammas has taken over and launched about 8000 rockets into Israel at last count.

The border between Egypt and Gaza was just opened for the first time this week – and all of 150 Palestinians were let in – Yay! Where the fuck are the mighty Egyptian nation, 80 million strong? Where is all the oil money? Why the fuck is Gaza Israel’s problem?

But I digress.

I am intentionally ignoring Ginqu’s reply because we are still worlds apart – worlds. Constantly bombing them? Show me one link to a story in any paper, including Huff and the other ultra left crap – where Israel is constantly bombing anything. I’m here – I would know. I don’t recall the last time we constantly, or even just bombed a little, anything. I do feel every rocket that lands here – and they come daily. They just don’t make the news.

The last war was in 2009; before that, 2006, against Hezbollah. Both involved major (albeit precision) bombing campaigns.

I understand that you can make the argument that Israel didn’t “start” the war, but my point was that few countries bomb their neighbors as much as Israel.

For sure, few countries get bombed (rocketed) by their neighbors as much as Israel either. But one side needs to have the courage to stop the violent retaliation. And Israel kills far more innocent people with its bombings, regardless of its nobler intentions to avoid doing so.

@Qingu I disagree that the 2006 war in Lebanon involved only precision weapons. In the last days of the ‘war’ almost one million cluster bombs were fired from Multiple Launch Rocket Systems into South Lebanon These cannot be described as precision weapons and they contaminate the countryside to this day.

Operation Cast Lead in 2009 was a major military operation which used precision weapons in civilian areas in ways that ought to cause shock and upset in any right thinking person.

@flutherother, holy stuff, I had no idea the IDF used that many cluster bombs.

And yes, I agree that the idea that weapons are “precise” is cold comfort when they are used in civilian areas and inevitably end up killing civilians.

And my general point was this: you can argue that Israel didn’t ask for these wars, that it tries hard (unlike Hamas) to aim its weapons away from civilians, that Hamas goads Israel into attacking civilians… all of which I’d agree to. But the bottom line is, it doesn’t matter to Palestinians how hard Israel tries to avoid killing them in their bombing campaigns. What matters is that Israel is bombing—has bombed—their cities. And whatever short-term tactical gains those bombings and wars may have brought to Israel, they only ossify grass-roots hatred of the Israeli state among everyone else living in the area, which is certainly bad for Israel’s long-term strategy (and is, I’d argue, exactly what Hamas wants.)

@Qingu All Israel’s wars are defensive but they are fought with overwhelming military advantage and a reckless disregard for the well being of civilians. Any land captured as a result of these wars has to be included in the negotiations for a peace deal in my view.

Like I said – not eactly bombing all the time if the last military campaigns were in 06 and 09.

One million cluster bombs?

All Israel’s wars are defensive but they are fought with overwhelming military advantage and a reckless disregard for the well being of civilians.

All the wars are defensive. Period. Reckless disregard for the well-being of civillians? You don’t know the Israeli army. Even Goldstone apologized and recanted his stupid report. But what would you know, armchair warriors.

Overwhelming military advantage? Like the US and Britain and Nato in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and probably Syria sometime soon? Do I have to apologize for that too – or did you just forget the first part of your sentence that all of Israel’s wars are defensive. Should Israel allow a few more soldiers to be killed to even the score? Maybe Israel should have civillians stay outdoors every time there is a rocket attack – so some Israeli civillians will be killed – then you’ll all feel better watching CNN report on Israeli casualties.

Get your facts straight. Actually, I don’t ever think I can convince any of you anyway – so I’ll be over there – in the anywhere else thread.

I thought Israel warned civilians where they were going to bomb so they can vacate?

—With leaflets and phone calls. Every war has collateral damage, sadly. But Hammas is recognized as a terrorist organization, and always hides behind women and children for that added bonus of asying civillians were killed to the media, playing it up. They are also considered martyrs, and will get their 72 virgins. You must have seen how the mothers dress their children as jihadists and strap toy vest bombs to their little chests? This is their “philosophy” – we are the ones giving it western terminology. This is one of the main problems with these wars, in all arab countries. The philosophy is very different. When is the last time there was an American or Israeli suicide bomber?

@zen What do the women get in death?

I’m still waiting to find out, too. Don’t hold your breath.

I think this conversation can easily turn to a broader debate about the way assymetrical wars are fought. Because zen is right—these critiques don’t just apply to Israel, they also apply to what the US is doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I’ve said before that I do believe that Israel tries hard to limit civilian casualties. But my problem is that they try hard to limit civilian casualties in the context of fighting classic wars of attrition in civilian-dense areas. And no matter how hard you try, tactically, your strategic decision to engage in such wars, in these places, will inevitably lead to a lot of dead civilians.

What is Israel supposed to do instead? I’d offer the new American strategy in Afghanistan—counterinsurgency—as a possible example. Americans, in the past couple years, have secured Marja and Kandahar—two Taliban strongholds—with very few civilian casualties, by embedding themselves with the locals, limiting airstrikes (though Petreaus has unfortunately been doing more airstrikes than McCrystal), and in general using an extremely light hand. Offensive actions, when they occur, are more likely to be special forces “night raids” that skirt the boundary between military action and SWAT team arrests.

That kind of warfare would probably be a lot more difficult in a place like Gaza than in Marja or Kandahar. And the downside: it entails a medium-term occupation of the place. But it also would offer the Israelis (like the US) a chance to, if not befriend the locals, at least dispel some of the local myths about them. And most importantly, it would kill a lot less civilians.

And asymmetry is also important to consider when discussing suicide bombings. You asked why there aren’t American suicide bombers… in part it might be because American culture doesn’t prize violent martyrdom—and I’m the first to criticize the barbarism of conservative Islamic culture—but it’s also probably because Americans don’t need suicide bombers because we have Hellfire missiles and UAVs. In many wars, the losing, technologically outmatched side resorts to suicide attacks. Western culture, and our children, also celebrates war heroes who made suicidal forays into enemy territory—maybe if such people were fighting in urban combat with remote-detonator technology against a technologically advanced enemy, they would also blow themselves up for the good of the cause.

Just jumping into the middle of this here.

@Qingu Do you really think the use of white phosphorus weaponry is consistent with your statement that “Israel tries hard to limit civilian casualties”?

@Qingu What is Israel supposed to do instead? I’d offer the new American strategy in Afghanistan—counterinsurgency—as a possible example. Americans, in the past couple years, have secured Marja and Kandahar—two Taliban strongholds—with very few civilian casualties, by embedding themselves with the locals.

Did you just suggest Israel occupy Gaza and the West Bank and embed itself there?

And how’s that strategy working out for America? At last count, over 6000 soldiers killed. Very sad source

If it were so easy, it would’ve been over a long time ago. But thanks for the tip – I’ll pass it on. I have duty coming up in September.

Edit: @fire – Just jump right in and say whatever you want. Don’t bother backing it up – or putting anything into any kind of context. Like Goldstone’s report: until he retracted it and personally apologized to Israel.

But it’s so much fun to just bash Israel – I wish I could join in.

And Qingu, Western culture, and our children, also celebrates war heroes who made suicidal forays into enemy territory—maybe if such people were fighting in urban combat with remote-detonator technology against a technologically advanced enemy, they would also blow themselves up for the good of the cause.

Remind us again how old you are and your personal knowledge and experience in warfare?

@FireMadeFlesh, no, I don’t, nor cluster bombs. I’m not sure to what extent those are the exception or the norm in the IDF. From what I’ve read of the 2009 Gaza war, though, they did make a lot of effort to limit civilian casualties.

@zen, here is what I’m suggesting: if Israel feels the need to actually go to full scale war with Hamas—and the issue of whether they should do this is entirely separate of how they should do this—I think yes, they should do counterinsurgency and occupy the place rather than fight a standard war of attrition. And yes, this would put more IDF soldiers at risk. It would also save more civilian lives, which would pay off in the long-term. The idea that you shouldn’t try as hard as possible to save civilian lives because it will put more of your soldiers at risk is, I think, rather immoral.

I also think modern, Western militaries ought to equip themselves with less lethal weapons, if they’re going to be fighting in civilian areas.

@Ron_C – You probably meant more than 1 billion Muslims. Correct? There are about 300 million Arabs, most of them are Muslims, a few are Christian.

Maybe we need to have a lot of Palestinian exchange students come to America and spend a few months of time seeing how everyone can live together. Maybe countries should spend some money making Palestine (the land Israel is easily willing to say is Palestine) fantastic and modern, and schools, and create jobs. I can’t imagine people who are prosperous would want to be killing and dying. Instead of war kill them with kindness. Isn’t that why Hezballah is effective? They give people some of the basics or something like that?

I know, it’s a very girly, simplistic, naive view probably.

Hamas also operates schools and charities, @JLeslie. And yeah, that’s why they enjoy some measure of popularity and legitimacy.

In my opinion we won’t have peace between Israel and all its neighbors including Iran, which are part of the big picture as well, for the next 15 years. Most Hamas adults (active members and voters) today won’t learn how to become friends with enemies. Most ultra-conservative Israeli adults today won’t learn how to become friends with enemies. The same applies to ultra-conservative Iranians and Hesbollah. The same applies to ultra-conservative Saudis, ultra-conservative Muslim Brothers in Egypt and so forth.

So in my opinion we need to focus on younger adults with kids or soon with kids. Moderate Israelis, young peaceful revolutionaries in the Arab countries and young peaceful Iranians (who have not succeeded in their revolution yet, but who are open minded and want a different life).

All adults have to raise their kids in a different way and organize contacts between their kids in different countries. Teachers are key too. I would guess there are few ultra-conservative teachers in Israel. Unlike in some Arab countries. So that’s a real challenge. In addition, Arab school books with very few exceptions glorify Islam and Arab countries excessively and depict Jews as evil. Arab school books do foster hatred. This is why this important charter also signed by Muslim scholars

http://www.fluther.com/113697/would-you-support-the-following-charter-for-compassion/

contains the part ‘ensure that youth are given accurate and respectful information about other traditions, religions and cultures’.

That is really key. All these young open-minded Egyptians have to demand that their school books get changed. Hamed Abdel-Samad (born in 1972 in Gizeh, Egypt) is a German-Egyptian political scientist currently writing his dissertation “Image of the Jews in Egyptian textbooks”. He has been invited to talkshows in Germany many times. According to him the most dangerous long-term bombs are Arab school books, not the bombs smuggled into Gaza.

We have to stop kids being exposed to those kind of books or teachers with that kind of mindset. No more Hamas teachers.

If we can do this, we can have peace in 2030 when the generation being full of hatred retires and a new generation of adults decides how to run countries surrounded by friendly countries.

@JLeslie – I would set this up in Cyprus, sponsored by the EU and other willing sponsors. A campus that covers a bit of land on both the Greek and Turkish side. With students from both parts of Cyprus, Israel and Palestine and all the other surrounding countries. An international junior high and high school as well as a university.

@mattbrowne I agree with most of your assessment – but one thing keep in mind – and this is where Qingu is way off when he wrote (where does he get his information and then wirte it with such confidence?!) Hamas also operates schools and charities, @JLeslie. And yeah, that’s why they enjoy some measure of popularity and legitimacy.

They were elected democratically. That means they rule. Period. That is not some measure – that’s the vast majority.

Hammas calls for the destruction of Israel in its charter.

All textbooks call for the destruction of the zionist pig entity.

Hammas raises its children to believe in jihad.

Is this clear enough?

How is the war against Hammas, in their land, any different from the fight against Al Qaida?

I don’t see Obama calling for negotiations with Bin Laden. Oh, that’s right – he assassinated him – and still occupies and fights in at least three Arab countries.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m all for it. But what is the difference.

By the way – the reason why everyone is so tranquil and calm there now – is because of the hudna – look it up. It’s when Hammas cries uncle – then tries to arm itself again for the next round of rockets. They won’t actually negotiate peace – because they don’t believe Israel has a right to exist. So, it’s a cease-fire for now. Or have you heard differently? Is Israel bombing anyone now – or in the last few months? I just have to look out the window, you?

You also didn’t mention your age or military experience – or where you get this information. Any friends in Palestine or Israel?

I’m only bothering to reply here because of my respect for Matt and because I know Leslie enjoys reading about this too. I hope others will get the other side of what you write, too, though I am a firm believe that people do not change their beliefs readily.

@zen, are you disputing that Hamas runs schools and charities?

Or that this is the source of some of their legitimacy/popularity?

@mattbrowne All of it sounds really good. Then I think of the American south and the many many many years it has taken, and still going on to try and make things equal for black Americans, and what a dissappointing struggle it has been in some ways. 2030 with your plan might finally bring peace (no more bombing) but I doubt it would completely equalize and intergrate people, if that is the goal?

@zen Just to be clear, I was not trying to suggest I had the answer to the problem, which is why I ended by saying I know what I wrote was simplistic and naive; it was never meant as a challange. I do love learning about Israel from you, all of Israel, her wars, her people, her reality as you know it. And, I like to hear what others have to say of course, the different thoughts and attitudes regarding the situation over there.

Wouldn’t Hamas running schools and doing other services have helped them get elected?

@zen oh, and I do think America can be extremely hypocritical.

I will continue when you reply to my questions. I answered yours. Am I disputing that – au contraire – I think they run all the schools and most of the charities which is why they were elected. So? How about the rest of the stuff I wrote. Ignore it – and write crap – and I’ll just give up again – methinks you are afraid to actually respond.

I’m assuming these are the questions, so I’ll answer them…

Q: Is this clear enough? (That Hamas wants to destroy Israel and raises kids to be virulently antisemetic)
A: Yes, I never disputed any of that.

Q: How is the war against Hammas, in their land, any different from the fight against Al Qaida?
A: I think you answered this yourself. Hamas was democratically elected. Even if they weren’t, Hamas was always a local resistance group. They do have a similar ideology to al-Qaeda (Salafi-style fundamentalism), and both groups are terrorism. But al-Qaeda is different in that it is not a localized actor; it is an international terrorist group.

A better comparison to Hamas, I think, would be the Taliban.

And I think what you are doing here is rather obtuse. You should not conflate Hamas with all Arab terrorist groups, especially not all Arabs. Hamas fought a brutal civil war against another Palestinian resistance group. These distinctions are important.

Your other questions appear to be direct to Matt, unless I am mistaken.

I don’t see why democratically elected necessarily means anything. Wasn’t Hitler elected?

Good point. Some would say that Syrian President Assad was democratically elected. I think he’s very close to being in Khaddafi’s place. As soon as the US is finished in Libya. They’re spreading a little thin these days. Reminds me of the game Risk. You don’t want to spread too thin. I have newfound respect for Obama though.

Hitler was also different from bin Laden; the Nazis were very different from al-Qaeda, despite both being “evil.”

So is Assad. Any de-facto leader of any country, or territory, or local resistance group is different in important ways from al-Qaeda.

In pointing out that Hamas was democratically elected, I wasn’t trying to make the argument that “therefore they aren’t that bad.” They really are (zen, please pay attention to this, because sometimes I think you think that I’m okay with Hamas). But because they’re democratically elected, and not this unrooted international terrorist group, that means you have to deal with them differently than you would al-Qaeda.

I don’t think al-Qaeda should be the model of our engagement with Hamas. The model should be the IRA and possibly the Taliban, and even so it’s important to keep in mind important differences between these groups.

@Qingu I think @zen has said Israel should negotiate with Hamas for Peace. At least try.

I know—we’re actually very much on the same page, and sometimes I’m not even sure what we’re arguing about.

@mattbrowne you are right 1 billion Muslims and I was thinking of putting 300 million Arabs in the same sentence but managed to combine both into an inaccurate statement. Thanks for the reminder.

I still think that if the Arab countries concentrated more on helping their coreligionists and less about punishing Israel for being in a war that they didn’t start, matters could have been resolved by now. It isn’t a matter of Israel’s existence as much as the need for an enemy to distract people from their leading dictators.

It is the same reason that the U.S. right wing start wars for fun, profit, and distraction.

I don’t think it’s useful, as Westerners who are allied with (and fund) Israel, to dwell on what Arabs should have/should be doing. Criticizing them is like shooting fish in a barrel.

Criticizing Arabs is like shooting fish in a barrel? Do you ever think before you write? Do you ever read what you write? Criticizing Jews is fine – but criticize anything to do with Arabs – all 1 billion of the Muslims – and Arabs in general is wrong? And what’s with the fish in the barrel – that usually means it’s very easy to do. So it’s easy, and wrong, to criticize Arabs – but feel free to criticize Israel, Israelis, Jews, Zionists – anything else. Very mature. Very smart. Very objective. Very, well, Arab.

@JLeslie – Yes. The American South is a good example of how wide-spread hatred can be transformed into mutual respect and friendship. At least for the majority of the population.

Politicians should make the mindset of teachers and school textbooks a top priority in my opinion. This includes textbooks used in Jewish and Israeli schools as well. Here’s a highly enlightening review from the

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine-Israel_Journal

which is a an independent, non-profit, Jerusalem-based quarterly that aims to shed light on and analyze freely and critically, the complex issues dividing Israelis and Palestinians. The Journal’s goal is to promote rapprochement and better understanding between Palestinian and Israeli people, and striving to discuss all issues without prejudice or taboos. The Journal is a unique joint venture promoting dialogue and the quest for a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Journal operates on the basis of cooperation, understanding and equality between the Israelis and Palestinians who comprise its joint staff.

”How the Arabs were represented in Hebrew textbooks in Jewish and Israeli schools over one hundred years: (highlights)

This review is important because school textbooks provide an illustration of the shared societal beliefs, especially in democratic societies. That is, they constitute formal expressions of a society‘s ideology and ethos, its values, goals, and myths.

All the history books from 1900 focused on justifying the exclusive rights of the Jewish people to the country, disregarding the rights of the Arabs to the country, and rejecting recognition of their national rights, while noting but also denying their religious rights. The books emphasized that this country, the Jewish homeland, was conquered by different peoples including Arabs, was neglected through the centuries and waited to be redeemed by Jews. Only after 1930, as the violent conflict escalated, did there appear detailed references to Arabs, describing them uniformly as robbers, vandals, primitives and easily incited. All Arabs had common characteristics of backwardness and ignorance.

Following the establishment of the State of Israel and until the 1970s, school textbooks continued to present a very negative picture of the Arabs. On a general level, Arab society was presented as primitive, backward and passive. Arab farmers and shepherds did not try to improve their condition of life or the way of farming. Their houses were described as poor, neglected and crowded and, in some readers, their clothing was described as dirty. The secular readers provided more extensive pictures about Arab culture and life, noting positive features like hospitality, and a few books included stories about friendship between Arabs and Jews.

During the 1950s and 1960s, the books presented the glory of the ancient past, the destruction and negligence when the Jewish people went into exile, and the renewal and revival of the landscape with the help of the Zionist movement. Bar-Gal noted another characteristic of geography books, namely their disregard of the tragedy experienced by the Arabs during the 1948 war when hundreds of thousands became refugees, and many Arab villages were destroyed. However the books also presented positive traits such as Arabs‘ hospitality, their combativeness, their pride and their habit of working hard. Also, Arabs were viewed as a heterogeneous society, which includes different elements.

During the 1970s, the Ministry of Education initiated a major shake-up of the curricula, which led to changes in the content of textbooks. The new policy diminished the role of the national objectives in designing school curricula. These books permitted the acknowledgment of the existence of Palestinian nationalism, used less pejorative terminology in the description of violent Arab resistance to Jewish immigration and settlement, and began to present a more balanced picture of the origins of the Palestinian refugee problem. In general, Arab intransigence was presented as the norm, as well as Jewish willingness to compromise.

In the late 1970s, the Ministry of Education also published two new books: We and Our Neighbors (1979) for elementary and junior high schools, and Living Together for high schools. The first book described neighboring Arab countries in reconciliatory tones, and the second openly presented issues related to the Arab minority in the State of Israel. The latter book was revised and published in 1988 under the title The Arab Citizens of Israel. It represents major progress towards the presentation of a balanced description of the Arab citizens of Israel.

According to Brosh, the books tend to depict the primitive side of Arab society, without any attempt to differentiate between various religious groups. The issues and problems with which Arab society in Israel has to cope are not presented. The descriptions of Jewish-Arab contact are simplistic, and are not placed in the context of overall relations between the Arab minority and the Jews in the State of Israel, or between Israel and the Arab world.

In textbooks of the 1980–1990s it was found that most of the readers have very few stories about Arabs or Jewish-Arab relations. Even then, the references to Arabs appear in the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict, while the textual item focuses on the Jews. Most of the books, when relating to Arabs, stereotype them negatively, with a tendency to present Arabs as primitive, uneducated, passive people, without a will of their own, and as poor farmers or shepherds.

It should be noted that a change of major significance with regard to history school textbooks took place in the mid-1990s. In the last few years, books of the “third generation” in the State of Israel were published. Many used newly released archival material, which shed a more balanced light on the Arab-Jewish conflict and allowed for more openness, pluralism and criticism. In these books, Arabs are presented not only as mere spectators or as aggressors but also as victims of the conflict. For the first time, there appears to be a genuine attempt to formulate a narrative that not only glorifies Zionist history but also touches on certain shadows in it.

Arabs are still usually presented as a threat to Jewish existence and this stereotype is assumed to arouse feelings of insecurity, fear and hatred. Positive stereotyping is rare. The books almost never present Arabs of middle class, professionals, or intellectuals. This is especially puzzling in view of the fact that the Arab professionals, citizens of the State of Israel, occupy a noticeable place in Israeli society, for example in hospitals as doctors or auxiliary personnel, or in schools in the role of teachers.

The negative stereotyping, which is still evident, and the delegitimization, which was common in earlier periods, are transmitted to the students from the first early years of their formal education in the elementary school up to their last classes of high school, when they are in advanced adolescence.

This review of the school textbooks suggests that, over the years, generations of Israeli Jews were taught a negative and often delegitimizing view of Arabs. The parents and the grandparents of the present generation were provided with the same negative image of the Arabs in their school textbooks as we see today, within the context of the prolonged Jewish-Arab conflict. One might add that it takes many years to rewrite school textbooks and a few generations to change the societal beliefs about the stereotyping and delegitimization of the Arabs.”

http://www.pij.org/details.php?id=884

I think all of this is really worth exploring. It holds one of the keys for peace between Israelis and Arabs of the next generation.

If school books are not changed, what we will see is fragile peace at best.

@Qingu I agree that we shouldn’t be telling the Arabs what they should do. The West is largely allied with Israel, and as such the first step towards peace should be to stop provocation on our end. During the 2008 ceasefire, Hamas did not fire a single rocket. This shows, in my opinion (zen, I have never visited the Middle East, and fully realise the limitations this places on my point of view) that if Israel were to cease all military operations, suspend settlement building, and shut down a few checkpoints here and there, the road to peace would open before them.

Back to the original question, I think the reason Barack Obama made these comments was to deter the Palestinians’ application to the UN for statehood. If they saw an opportunity for a negotiated peace, maybe they wouldn’t continue seeking statehood. The US has repeatedly said that they are unwilling to see the formation of a Palestinian state, and making such comments may just stall the process. It looks particularly appealing to the Palestinians if Israel gets angry as well.

The root cause of these conflicts is a lack of empathy. Because the Palestinians don’t empathise with the Israeli situation, they make wild comments that go far beyond realistic demands and forge links with radicals. Because the Israelis don’t empathise with the Palestinian situation, they continue to kill civilians and perform regular kidnappings across the border. If the negotiators could sit down and recognise that their fellow humans deserve to live in peace and safety, and forget the bullshit notion of holy land, maybe it would make the allocation of land easier.

@zen, I think you’ve misinterpreted what I said. Though you do have a point about overgeneralizing Arabs.

I criticize Jews more than I criticize Arabs (and Hamas in particular) because we all already agree that Hamas are a bunch of savages and Islamic culture is largely backwards and xenophobia-promoting. Those are not points that many people in this conversation would dispute, hence “shooting fish in a barrel.”

Also, as a Westerner, I have little control over what Arabs do or think. My discourse into Arab politics and culture is that of a total outsider. Whereas, Americans do have a lot of influence over Israeli politics and culture, and my family is Jewish.

Finally, as the more “civilized” culture, I think Israelis actually bear more responsibility to act morally in this conflict.

@Qingu Are you equating technological advancement with civility?

Well, not exactly, though I do think they are strongly correlated.

I am generalizing though. Certainly there are many Jews who are just as “savage” as Hamas; I am thinking of the orthodox settlers who believe the land is theirs because a magic sky god gave it to their ancestors after telling them to commit genocide against the inhabitants. Also many Palestinians are peaceful and civilized folks who are justly reacting to occupation and oppression.

Isn’t civility is a matter of perception? The term implies moral standards, which are clearly debatable. I agree Israel bears more responsibility to act morally, but only because they have the technological ability to do so.

I think some moral standards are clearly better than others. A culture which respects Osama bin Laden, executes “collaborators,” and brings up their children to emulate suicide bombers, for example, is particularly morally deficient.

@FireMadeFlesh – You said that the root cause of these conflicts is a lack of empathy. I agree. More empathy would lead to new and better school books seeing the human beings in other nations and ethnic groups as outlined above.

@Qingu – You made very good points. I think Western societies should talk to extremists for the sole purpose of understanding their anger and hatred. Not for the purpose of having a debate. Not for the purpose of finding solutions. It’s no use. It doesn’t work. Therefore as you said, we need to talk to the non-extremists who are a large majority in Israel and have as many debates as possible. Good debates fuel progress.

My point is we also need good debates with non-extremists in all countries surrounding Israel. We should tell people like Wael Ghonim and Mohamed ElBaradei and Amr Moussa to demand changing Arab school books. Ghonim, a Google manager for the Middle East, said that

”... the Egyptian revolution was like Wikipedia. Everyone is contributing content, but you don’t know the names of the people contributing the content. This is exactly what happened. Revolution 2.0 in Egypt was exactly the same.”

“No turbaned ayatollah had stepped forth to summon the crowd. This was not Iran in 1979. A young Google executive, Wael Ghonim, had energized this protest when it might have lost heart, when it could have succumbed to the belief that this regime and its leader were a big, immovable object. Mr. Ghonim was a man of the modern world. He was not driven by piety. The condition of his country—the abject poverty, the crony economy of plunder and corruption, the cruelties and slights handed out to Egyptians in all walks of life by a police state that the people had outgrown and despaired of.”

This is what we need.

New content. New thinking. And handling criticism with honesty and grace.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wael_Ghonim

Ghonim said that he has signed “Revolution 2.0” book deal with US & UK publishers.

I’m looking forward to reading his book.

After reading @Qingu recent post it reminded me again of @drdoombot‘s answer way at the top regarding Jews, me included, liking the idea of a place we Jewish people can go where we can feel accepted, safe, and be citizens, considering all of the crazy oppressive murderous shit the Jews have gone through in history. If we can go back to this idea for a moment, do the Palestinans have this problem? Do the Arab countries willingly take them in if they want to go? I understand they want their own country, and I support it, but is it a matter of life and death with a history demonstrating the world all too often hates them, wants to enslave them, and kill them? I mean Jews got nothin’. We have America, but then we look at Germany and what happened there, and figure it can happen anywhere, and we are such a very very small minority population in America. Do people from Jordan, Saudi, Lebonan, see each other as very different, see Palestinians as different? Or, do all the Arab nations feel a certain bond?

@JLeslie That sounds a bit like what the Irish call ‘putting on the poor mouth’.

@JLeslie, I think Palestinians would ask why they should be expected to relocate from their homes in the first place—regardless if some other country is willing to take them.

And I disagree with the way you are framing Jewish history. Yes, Jews—in the 1930’s and 40’s—were the victims of the worst genocide in human history. Yes, Jews throughout history have been oppressed and suffered discrimination. None of that means that this group of people should get to force another group of people to relocate, in order to establish a sovereign country on their religion’s mythical homeland.

I also think it’s downright pathetic to vest so much of Jewish culture’s—or any culture’s—identity in victimhood.

Finally, it’s difficult for me to look past the hypocrisy of a religious group focusing so much on their own struggles with genocide and annihilation—using this victimization as the basis of establishing Israel—when this religion’s holy text explicitly condones and commands the genocide of rival ethnic groups (see Deuteronomy 13:12, 20:16, and the entire book of Joshua)—ethnic groups living in the “promised land” of Israel, no less. The whole justification and religious basis for the modern state of Israel strikes me as creepy, stupid, and morally self-contradictory at best, and outrageously immoral and pro-genocide at worst.

Oh, and before zen calls me an antisemitic self-hating Jew or whatever… my views on many countries’ histories and founding—including my own, America—are also pretty critical. I think the doctrine of Manifest Destiny, for example, is almost indistinguishable from Nazism from a moral standpoint.

@Qingu If I were Palestinian I would feel exactly as you stated, I would wonder why I have to move my home, so I do not disagree with you.

First and foremost I support Israel, because I feel it was given in a legitmately back in the 40’s. I am not a zionist, I don’t feel the Jews get thay land, because we hadit first 5,000 years ago. Many Jews were already living in Israel, before 1948 (I think that is the year it became modern Israel?) just like Palestinians live on the land as well.

Wanting Israel as a safe haven is a totally selfish wish, and not a reason for the country to be created in my mind, I am just glad it is there. I do not lay down my life or fight for Israel, and so I realize having it as some sort of plan B for myself, and other Jewish people, is well, I don’t even know what to really say. Today, in 2011, all I can say is Israel does exist, I think it deserves to exist, and Israel has every right to protect her borders as any country would.

I would have been fine with locating a home for the Jewish people in a safer part of the world. I am sure Jews who already lived in Israel would not have been happy, but what percentage of Israelis have moved there from other countries in the last 60 years? If they were moving anyway what is the difference. Now, I say this having never been to Israel, and people I know who have been there say it is incredibly moving, and say once there one wants to perserve it, Jews especially seem to want to perserve it for the Jewish people. I have heard this so much, it must be true. I think the US and UN liked that they would have an ally in the middle of the hot bed of the middle east, another somewhat selfish act, I do not believe Israel was created just to help the Jewish people, but also as a clever geopolitical move. European countries now had a place their Jews could go, meaning they would leave the country, and I think countries liked that idea too. I am very cynical about The whole thing.

@mattbrowne I agree, the education given in schools shapes whole generations of society. We need to be very careful with what we teach our children.

@JLeslie If you think it is important for Jews to have the state of Israel, would you support a new war in Iraq to create a homeland for the Kurds? Do you support the Chechnyan militants? Should American Indians be given a state of their own somewhere within the US/Canada?

@FireMadeFlesh As I said, selfishly as a Jewish person. I am not saying the Jewish people really deserve it more than any other religion or ethnicity. It feels to me like we are hated all too often, but maybe that is true for many groups. Maybe the Native Americans should have been given a state in America. They do have reservations all over the country where they are exempt from many US laws and tax obligations, and their children can go to many universities for free, but the communities struggle for the most part from what I understand.

I wish the Jews had been given a state instead of Israel. What I really really want is for countries to be founded on freedom of religion and for none of it to matter. I want a United Earth like Gene Roddenberry, but alas that will not happen any time soon.

Why a new war in Iraq? Israel in the 40’s was not created by a war, well not directly.

I honestly don’t get the Plan B/Safe Haven argument for Israel (even though you’re not really making it as an argument, to be fair).

I mean, let’s say the Fourth Reich emerges as a superpower and wants to kill all the Jews again. I can think of no better target for Nazi thermonuclear ballistic missiles than a tiny country filled with Jews and surrounded on all sides by brown people.

@JLeslie ” It feels to me like we are hated all too often, but maybe that is true for many groups.” I suppose that’s my sticking point. I struggle to understand the concept of racial tensions, because I’ve never been exposed to it much. Some people do hate Australians, but usually only because we’re allied with the US, UK etc. The world sees us as laid back jokers, so we’re liked pretty much all over the world.

But the real point is that I am a human first, and an Aussie second. Getting on with my fellow humans is more important than patriotism or holy rite (which of course I don’t believe in). Certainly I can understand why certain races want independence, particularly in the case of the Tibetans – I would never want to be ruled by the Chinese. What I cannot understand though, is why Israel would feel threatened by a Palestinian state. What is to stop the next generation, given appropriate schooling as @mattbrowne suggestts, from actually making friends with each other?

My mother grew up in apartheid South Africa. When she was young she used to play with the black children, and considered them friends. Their friendship was only stifled by adults telling them it was not the done thing, and spreading lies about each other. Humans essentially want to get on – we are social animals. I am convinced that if those in the Middle East intermingled more and actually made friends on an individual level, the tensions would evaporate.

@FireMadeFlesh, I don’t think Jews (or, to be accurate, some Jews) are threatened by the Palestinians so much as they’re threatened by everyone in the region and, more generally, by the human race’s potential to turn against them.

I was arguing about this on Facebook and some pro-zionist dude linked me to this, which to me really epitomizes Jewish paranoia:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytWmPqY8TE0&feature=youtu.be

Granted, they have been attacked a bunch of times by enemies in the region, but there you have it. The Jews want to keep Palestine occupied so they have a buffer zone of defense against cartoon enemy fighter jets and jihadist foot soldiers.

@Qingu How do you expect me to react when you put civilized in quotes. I know it’s hard for you to say anything positive about Israel – it pains you – which is why I always feel like I am wasting my time with you.

I criticize Jews more than I criticize Arabs (and Hamas in particular) because we all already agree that Hamas are a bunch of savages and Islamic culture is largely backwards and xenophobia-promoting. Those are not points that many people in this conversation would dispute, hence “shooting fish in a barrel.”

Finally, as the more “civilized” culture, I think Israelis actually bear more responsibility to act morally in this conflict.

How am I supposed to respond to that? Putting something in quotes means that Israel is, in fact, not more civilized. So why do you expect Israel to behave differently? Don’t answer that. Please.

And you still haven’t answered my questions. You know what they are. I take this conversation very very lightly due to the fact that you “hide.” See: quotes, where they should be.

@matt – wonderful answer and research about the education system – I learned a lot!

@fire – you made some good points and are on the right track. I tend to agree with that kind of thinking. It would only be post Palestinian Statehood – and another generation of kids who are proud of their countries, themselves and study about people – geography, history – including Israel and the Jews. How can a child, raised in Shahida, believing Israel doesn’t exist – in its stead is a zionist enemy who is occupying their land (all of Israel – according to the textbooks) and that Jews are pigs – make peace with us? It’s virtually impossible. In fact, if I were to teach any of these things – perhaps just one – even to my enlightened, peace-loving children – they might fear the Arabs – and certainly not think of learning about the enemy’s culture and language.

We only talk about peace – it’s in our culture and language. We say Peace when we come and when we leave. We sing about it in our national anthem – and we mean it. We teach it in the schools – and we believe it is possible. The day after each of the wars, we dream about it and do our best to make it happen.

The problem is, like with America in its wars, and Britain in its wars – politics.

The people of Israel want peace. Now.

@Qingu That video is interesting, thanks. I find it strange that they reference the six-day war, when Israel took on several countries at once and won decisively, as proof that they need more defensible borders. Defence becomes somewhat of a side issue when their military is so far superior to all the surrounding countries.

@zen If the people of Israel want peace, and it is politics that gets in the way, why do settlements get built? Surely no one who actually wanted peace would voluntarily move into contested land.

@FireMadeFlesh The settlements have been built since 67 – first for strategic reasons (we did not start the June 67 war – we were attacked on all sides) and some for ideological reasons. I won’t go into history – look it up – but let’s say that a very vocal minority of about 20% of the population – maybe more – truly believe it is part of Israel – as it was in history. Why are they being built? Politics. They are far less of an obstacle as the media portrays it – and far less hysterical. It’s just good tv. The land itself is not holy to the Palestinians – in fact – they could care less about it. As long as they are “reciprocated” – they are happy. Thus, land for peace.

I cannot speak for them, I disagree with them.

If you simply listen to the media – lots of things get distorted. America is involved in at least 3 wars right now – far, far, far away from its homeland. So how could this tiny strip of historical land – occupied by Jews and Musilims and Christians – fought over for 5500 years – not be complicated.

You have a simple answer? You have a simple solution? Let’s hear it – I’ve heard them all. Starting with: stop settlement building. What a load of crap.

@Qingu Thank you for understanding that I am not really making it an argument. And your point about Israel being a perfect target for those who want to kill Jews, I feel that way for a fleeting moment every time I walk into a syngagogue.

@FireMadeFlesh You speak of the Arabs around tiny Israel, I speak of antisemites around the world. @Qingu mentioned a Fourth Reich in his response to me, Jews were an integral part of a modern society in Germany, it would have seemed impossible for such a thing to happen. There are neo Nazi’s in America still, KKK still lives on, but for now they are a small minority of people who are just an annoyance typically. Just about a month ago a jelly asked a question about moving to South Africa from the UK, because she worried about the racism, which she feels is wrong. Her SO, who is from there, talks about the black people there being different, and his whole family seems to be racist. You and your mom might feel safe, but do the black people in South Africa now feel completely safe and free from oppression? I want the world to be how you perceive it. A place where if we just stop teaching our children hate everything will correct itself. I think changing school curriculum is a good plan, but it won’t cure everything, at least not right away. In America everything is supposed to be equal, and we certainly don’t teach in our schools that black people are bad or evil, but yet we continue to have some racism. It mostly has to do with xenophobia, ethnocentrism, cultural clashes, and poverty in my opinion. Those things don’t dissappear so fast. And, we have this upsurgence of hate towards Muslims, which makes me sick.

I don’t know anyone personally who hates the Palestinians just for existing. Most people I know want the Palestinians to live well, have their own country, and prosper. If not for altruistic reasons, then for the rationale that happy Palestinians won’t want to make violence and war. My Palestinian-American friends are wonderful, so are the Lebonese people I know, Pakestani, and Iranian. But, here in America we get a narrow sampling probably. All of the Arabs and Persians I know are educated, want to live in a generally Western culture.

Agree with him, or not; he is the Primie Minister of Israel – and son of a great historian, brother of hero Yoni Netanyahu (who was killed at Entebbe). A graduate of MIT, and an economic consultant – he did very well as the Finance Minister in Israel as well.

Here he is at age 28 talking about the Palestinians. Don’t miss it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lixYEZ9M_dU&feature=player_embedded

@zen I never said I have a simple solution. All I am asking is this: If the people in general want peace, who are the people who move into the settlements? People who truly want peace wouldn’t do anything to antagonise their neighbours if it could be helped.

Everyone wants peace, but not under unfavourable conditions. Israelis want peace, but not if it means going back to the ‘67 borders (I am not advocating this). Palestinians want peace, but not if it means living under blockades and without international recognition. This is where the complexities arise. I raised the issue of settlements only to say that people don’t want peace quite as much as they want the fulfilment of their demands. I willl now go and read more on their history.

@JLeslie True, I did forget about the Mel Gibsons of this world.

@zen Very enlightening video, thanks. I’m still not sure I agree with everything he said, but it does add much perspective.

@JLeslie I’m sorry, I missed most of your post there for some reason. In South Africa, as far as I can tell there is mutual fear. Blacks fear whites, and see ghosts of the past everywhere. Whites fear blacks, because many of them are still racist, and the black majority has allowed the violent minority to perpetrate some awful acts against whites. As with any change, these things go through phases. The pendulum swings to both extremes before it comes to rest in the centre.

@FireMadeFlesh I am not even sure I think Mel Gibson is an antisemite. I don’t know enough about him, just that he blurted out some antisemetic stuff at a cop while in a drunken stupor, and that his interpretatioin of the crucifixion is Jews were responsible? I don’t fear him killing me, that’s for sure. I don’t feel like he is trying to lead people to hate the Jews. Maybe that is naive. I would fear a skin head down the street with a swastika tattooed a lot more than Mel Gibson who has worked with Jewish people his entire career.

@Qingu – The vicious cycle of displacement following by displacement must end. The events in 70 CE led to the displacement of Jews, caused by the Romans. The same happened again and again over many centuries. Take the Spanish expulsion around 1500 CE. Take czarist and soviet Russia and Ukraine. Take Nazi Germany.

Then it was Palestinians who got displaced in the 20th century.

All displacements are wrong.

Today radical Arabs and Persians want to displace Israelis. Have them drowned in the ocean. People who were born in Israel and who grew up in Israel. The Golden Rule says we should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated. Therefore the people in Israel have a right to live in peace. The neighbors of Israel have a right to live in peace. Undoing displacements by creating new displacements are wrong. They accomplish nothing. They destroy everything.

No more displacements.

Large parts of Poland used to be German. But that was a long time ago. Today these areas are Polish. People were born there and grew up there. And that’s fine. It’s foolish to demand land back. It would only lead to pain and sorrow.

No more displacements.

@mattbrowne GA.