Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678
Results 141 to 153 of 153

Thread: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

  1. #141

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    Well this much is certainly accurate.

    While no army has an entirely clean record with regard to war crimes, your allegation would only make sense if you are conflating collateral damage with the deliberate targeting of civilians.
    Considering the long-standing occupation of Palestinians and the natural animosity that would create, I can easily imagine why Israel is held to higher scrutiny than other countries. Sure, considering just how uncivilized and barbaric the militants and soldiers in the region (including Palestinians) are in comparison, Israel is a model army in its conduct,, but this doesn't absolve Israel of its sins.

    Israel can talk about security all it wants, but that's a problem largely of its own making. Hence why so many people are sympathetic to Palestinians.

  2. #142

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    You can just come forward and tell us why Jews wanted lands near Jerusalem and explain why that somehow gives them legitimacy to claim it as their own.
    No, I have not made an assertion regarding that. You, Setekh, have. If you can not answer for your assertion, trying to change the subject from what you claimed, is not going to work.

    Also asked you two questions regarding your assertion about the turks and Asia Minor:
    "Did not the Orghuz have their own state east of the Caspian? When did that fail?"
    You failed to provide an answer.

  3. #143

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by Love Mountain View Post
    Considering the long-standing occupation of Palestinians and the natural animosity that would create, I can easily imagine why Israel is held to higher scrutiny than other countries. Sure, considering just how uncivilized and barbaric the militants and soldiers in the region (including Palestinians) are in comparison, Israel is a model army in its conduct,, but this doesn't absolve Israel of its sins.
    I don't know why Israel should be held to higher scrutiny, but I don't disagree otherwise. That said, a high degree of animosity predated the Israeli occupation.

    For example, the following occurred in 1920:

    The crowd reportedly shouted "Independence! Independence!" and "Palestine is our land, the Jews are our dogs!"[1] Arab police joined in applause, and violence started.[14] The local Arab population ransacked the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem. The Torath Chaim Yeshiva was raided, and Torah scrolls were torn and thrown on the floor, and the building then set alight.[1] During the next three hours, 160 Jews were injured.[14]

    Khalil al-Sakakini witnessed the eruption of violence in the Old City:

    "[A] riot broke out, the people began to run about and stones were thrown at the Jews. The shops were closed and there were screams. … I saw a Zionist [British Jewish] soldier covered in dust and blood. … Afterwards, I saw one Hebronite approach a Jewish shoeshine boy, who hid behind a sack in one of the wall's comers next to Jaffa Gate, and take his box and beat him over the head. He screamed and began to run, his head bleeding and the Hebronite left him and returned to the procession. … The riot reached its zenith. All shouted, "Muhammad's religion was born with the sword". … I immediately walked to the municipal garden. … my soul is nauseated and depressed by the madness of humankind."[15]

    The army imposed night curfew on Sunday night and arrested several dozen rioters, but on Monday morning they were allowed to attend morning prayers and were then released. Arabs continued to attack Jews and break into their homes, especially in Arab-majority mixed buildings.[1]

    On Monday, as disturbances grew worse, the Old City was sealed off by the army and no one was allowed to exit the area. Martial law was declared, but looting, burglary, rape, and murder continued. Several homes were set on fire, and tombstones were shattered. British soldiers found that the majority of illicit weapons were concealed on the bodies of Arab women.[1] On Monday evening, the soldiers were evacuated from the Old City, a step described in the Palin Report as "an error of judgment". Even with martial law, it took the British authorities another 4 days to restore order.
    It was only after these types of pogroms that the Jewish community in Palestine created what was initially entirely a defensive force.

    Quote Originally Posted by Papay View Post
    The ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is deliberate.
    Israel must be deliberately doing a terrible job at it since the Palestinian population in the territories continues to rapidly increase. In 1948, when most Israelis believed losing the war would result in a second Holocaust, many Palestinians fled and/or were driven out and not allowed to return. Though unlike the Arabs, they didn’t engage in a thorough ethnic cleansing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Papay View Post
    The massacres committed are well documented
    There are a handful of incidences, mostly committed by Jewish militias during the 1948 war. In fact, most are not well documented other than Deir Yassin. But you claimed that “israel has slaughtered more innocent civilians than the palestinians have”. The total number of Arab non-combatants killed in all these incidences combined since Israel’s founding is less than a quarter of the total number of Israeli non-combatants killed by Palestinians in the Second Intifada alone, which spanned less than five years of that time. So again, your allegation would only make sense if you are conflating collateral damage with the deliberate targeting of civilians.

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Is Dahiya doctrine classified under collateral damage or deliberate targeting of civilians?
    For those not familiar with the subject:

    The Dahiya doctrine or, Dahya doctrine,[1] is a military strategy of asymmetric warfare, outlined by former Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of General Staff Gadi Eizenkot, which encompasses the destruction of the civilian infrastructure of regimes deemed to be hostile as a measure calculated to deny combatants the use of that infrastructure[2] and endorses the employment of "disproportionate power" to secure that end.[3][4][5]
    Now compare to US military doctrine (which is actually more extreme):

    Shock and awe (technically known as rapid dominance) is a tactic based on the use of overwhelming power and spectacular displays of force to paralyze the enemy's perception of the battlefield and destroy their will to fight.[1][2] Though the concept has a variety of historical precedent, the doctrine was explained by Harlan K. Ullman and James P. Wade in 1996 and was developed specifically for application by the US military by the National Defense University of the United States.[2][1]

    Although Ullman and Wade claim that the need to "[m]inimize civilian casualties, loss of life, and collateral damage" is a "political sensitivity [which needs] to be understood up front", their doctrine of rapid dominance requires the capability to disrupt "means of communication, transportation, food production, water supply, and other aspects of infrastructure",[8] and, in practice, "the appropriate balance of Shock and Awe must cause ... the threat and fear of action that may shut down all or part of the adversary's society or render his ability to fight useless short of complete physical destruction."[9]

    Using as an example a theoretical invasion of Iraq 20 years after Operation Desert Storm, the authors claimed, "Shutting the country down would entail both the physical destruction of appropriate infrastructure and the shutdown and control of the flow of all vital information and associated commerce so rapidly as to achieve a level of national shock akin to the effect that dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had on the Japanese."[10]

    Reiterating the example in an interview with CBS News several months before Operation Iraqi Freedom, Ullman stated, "You're sitting in Baghdad and all of a sudden you're the general and 30 of your division headquarters have been wiped out. You also take the city down. By that I mean you get rid of their power, water. In 2, 3, 4, 5 days they are physically, emotionally and psychologically exhausted."[11]
    If collateral damage that occurs due to the use of such common modern tactics should be considered "slaughtering civilians" on the basis of proportionality (as some argue), then why should Israel be considered particularly guilty?

    Abstract: It has become common to use the term 'disproportionate' to describe the conduct or impact of Israel's military operations. The media's frequent use of this term betrays at least two types of distortions. First, it confuses criticism of ends (the kinds of military objectives Israel pursues) and criticism of means (the forms of military force chosen by Israel). Second, it suggests systematic failure of moral judgment and moral concern on the part of Israel - namely, wilful indifference to the consequences of its actions on civilians - which are no more in evidence in Israel's military operations than in any other state's military operations. This paper analyses the various forms that this kind of criticism has taken in contemporary media discourse and considers the possible origins of the accusations. It describes the norms that govern the conduct of warfare and the principles that inform the law related to proportionality; these do not provide simple criteria for determining legitimate ends and means, and nor do they yield the conclusion that Israel is a persistent violator of international humanitarian law on the basis of 'disproportionate' practices. It concludes with some reflections on the place of these themes within wider currents of antisemitic practices and tropes.
    Israel, 'Disproportionate' Force and the Media: Misconstruing the Laws of War

    In my opinion, not everything that may result in terrible consequences is equivalent to deliberately targeting civilians for the express purpose of maximizing carnage and trauma.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  4. #144

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by Infidel144 View Post
    No, I have not made an assertion regarding that. You, Setekh, have. If you can not answer for your assertion, trying to change the subject from what you claimed, is not going to work.
    Also asked you two questions regarding your assertion about the turks and Asia Minor:
    "Did not the Orghuz have their own state east of the Caspian? When did that fail?"
    You failed to provide an answer.
    You think its a good idea to add carrot in a tomato soup?


    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    I don't know why Israel should be held to higher scrutiny, but I don't disagree otherwise. That said, a high degree of animosity predated the Israeli occupation.
    For example, the following occurred in 1920:
    It was only after these types of pogroms that the Jewish community in Palestine created what was initially entirely a defensive force.
    Israel must be deliberately doing a terrible job at it since the Palestinian population in the territories continues to rapidly increase. In 1948, when most Israelis believed losing the war would result in a second Holocaust, many Palestinians fled and/or were driven out and not allowed to return. Though unlike the Arabs, they didn’t engage in a thorough ethnic cleansing.
    There are a handful of incidences, mostly committed by Jewish militias during the 1948 war. In fact, most are not well documented other than Deir Yassin. But you claimed that “israel has slaughtered more innocent civilians than the palestinians have”. The total number of Arab non-combatants killed in all these incidences combined since Israel’s founding is less than a quarter of the total number of Israeli non-combatants killed by Palestinians in the Second Intifada alone, which spanned less than five years of that time. So again, your allegation would only make sense if you are conflating collateral damage with the deliberate targeting of civilians.
    For those not familiar with the subject:
    Now compare to US military doctrine (which is actually more extreme):
    If collateral damage that occurs due to the use of such common modern tactics should be considered "slaughtering civilians" on the basis of proportionality (as some argue), then why should Israel be considered particularly guilty?
    Israel, 'Disproportionate' Force and the Media: Misconstruing the Laws of War
    In my opinion, not everything that may result in terrible consequences is equivalent to deliberately targeting civilians for the express purpose of maximizing carnage and trauma.
    Let me translate this post of yours: Yes, Dahiya doctrine which have been utilized by Israel is a incredibly bad. It's merely trying to make it fancy to target civilians. Also, look how another state has a similar concept. Israel is not that bad if others do it too, right? /translation
    The Armenian Issue

  5. #145

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    You think its a good idea to add carrot in a tomato soup?
    This is not an answer to questions I asked, about statements you made, Setekh.

    Are you incapable of answering them?

  6. #146

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    I don't know why Israel should be held to higher scrutiny, but I don't disagree otherwise. That said, a high degree of animosity predated the Israeli occupation.
    Collateral damage from a U.S. drone strike is most likely just that, unintentional collateral damage. On the other hand, young Israeli soldiers may be prejudiced by their attitudes towards Palestinians. Not in all instances, of course, but I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption to make. Hence why the scrutiny is higher.

    It was only after these types of pogroms that the Jewish community in Palestine created what was initially entirely a defensive force.
    Considering that Jews immigrated to Palestine with the explicit intention of making the land theirs, the animosity is well deserved. Especially when the year 1920 coincides with the Third Aliyah and the Balfour Declaration. The animosity between the two can be traced further back than that of course, but 1920s as a boiling point is one of the key points in history and this relationship continues to this day. The Jews came, they won, and they became the recognized authority over this patch of land. Asking Israel to responsibly treat the defeated at their own expense is a reasonable request. Israel's refusal to seek rapprochement with a hostile nation is understandable, but not particularly sympathetic considering just how they created their state and how they treat Palestinians to this day.

    I don't think Jews are evil or whatever, and I can certainly understand their security concerns, but I would argue that right-wing parties in Israel were never interested in any kind of a solution. Ever since the late 70s when Likud came to power, the strategy has been to increase the pressure on Palestinians, not to seek a solution.

  7. #147

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by Infidel144 View Post
    This is not an answer to questions I asked, about statements you made, Setekh.
    Are you incapable of answering them?
    From my perspectiv, your responses/questions from earlier were not in line with what I asked or stated as well. So, you can come clean, stop playing games, state your position, and then expect a response. Otherwise, asking me about Oghuz Turks is as relevant as me asking your taste about tomato soups.
    The Armenian Issue

  8. #148
    nhytgbvfeco2's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    6,398

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    No, I was merely being specific. Given that it was an affair conducted by European Jews I specified them in response to your argument about how it somehow made sense that they built a Jewish state where one existed thousands of years ago. You simply jumped the gun and now you're really grasping at straws here. Such a pedantic approach hurts your position a lot more than you clearly think. I never made the comment over and over again as you suggested without the context warranting for it.
    You could have just said "Jews", but you had to add the "European" part, because you think it lowers the legitimacy of their claim. They have as much claim as do non-European Jews. You can pretend like you're being specific all you want, but the truth is quite obvious. Strange, I did not think you were like this, but after years on this forum it finally comes out.

  9. #149

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by nhytgbvfeco2 View Post
    You could have just said "Jews", but you had to add the "European" part, because you think it lowers the legitimacy of their claim. They have as much claim as do non-European Jews. You can pretend like you're being specific all you want, but the truth is quite obvious. Strange, I did not think you were like this, but after years on this forum it finally comes out.
    I love how you turned, and turned, and came back to what I originally pointed out without the slightest connection to anti-Semitism that you're implying here. You have no ground to stand on, hence you're trying to pollute the well as much as you can to appear walking away with a sound position in the confusion you yourself created. Any sensible person could very well oppose the kind of logic you're trying to pass through here. Self-determinism doesn't mean that you get to rule yourself owning any piece of land you desire. It's disgusting to see people defend the indefensible through such weasel tactics.
    The Armenian Issue

  10. #150
    alhoon's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    24,758

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    @PointOfViewGun:
    Somewhere you showed a source that the "plan" doesn't actually include any part of Jerusalem, just a suburb outside of it.

    Apparently, the so-called plan is act of trolling. I say that seriously. I believe both those guys decided to troll the other side and wave the flag to their hardcore fans.
    alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
    "Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  11. #151
    nhytgbvfeco2's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    6,398

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    I love how you turned, and turned, and came back to what I originally pointed out without the slightest connection to anti-Semitism that you're implying here. You have no ground to stand on, hence you're trying to pollute the well as much as you can to appear walking away with a sound position in the confusion you yourself created. Any sensible person could very well oppose the kind of logic you're trying to pass through here. Self-determinism doesn't mean that you get to rule yourself owning any piece of land you desire. It's disgusting to see people defend the indefensible through such weasel tactics.
    I'm sorry that me noticing offends you so. Maybe use a less obvious dog whistle next time?

  12. #152

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    Somewhere you showed a source that the "plan" doesn't actually include any part of Jerusalem, just a suburb outside of it.

    Apparently, the so-called plan is act of trolling. I say that seriously. I believe both those guys decided to troll the other side and wave the flag to their hardcore fans.
    The plan is Kushner's plan. He's obviously sincere about it.

    Abu Dis is a town in the Jerusalem governate. East Jerusalem is an Israeli creation, its area includes some old Arab villages that are now neighborhoods. When Israel captured the Old City in 1967, there was no urban area to the east.

    As you can see in the background, it was mostly empty space:



    When the Palestinians say they want East Jerusalem as their capital, what matters to them is the Old City.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  13. #153

    Default Re: Meet the "Trump peace plan" for the Israel-Palestinian conflict

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    @PointOfViewGun:
    Somewhere you showed a source that the "plan" doesn't actually include any part of Jerusalem, just a suburb outside of it.
    And what was your response to that?


    Quote Originally Posted by nhytgbvfeco2 View Post
    I'm sorry that me noticing offends you so. Maybe use a less obvious dog whistle next time?
    Sigh... That was a really bad come back. If you were careful with your assertions and not end up making up accusations I think you'd actually have an argument now.
    The Armenian Issue

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •