Nonviolent Resistance: or why dont the palestinians try it?

[Chaigidel]

my point is that--- why is it that none of the currently "oppressed" peoples have taken pages from the peaceful nonviolent resistance

i remember one event when ghandi and his followers marched into a crowd of police and they got beaten and beaten and sometimes shot-- but they kept coming

i cant remember the quote but ghandi said something like
"they will grow tired of beating us before we grow tired of being beaten"

probably a really bad quote please correct if you can..

anyway why dont the palestinians attempt this , I know it requires an exceptional leader but i cant see why they wouldnt try at least try to resolve it without sending off their kids to blow themselves up with glee.

fact is long ago if the palestinians were peaceful they would be much better off than they are now because
everyone would be on their side.

[VALIS]

Judging from what i've seen in my short life through TV,internet,magazine,newspapers the Arabs seem to me, to be an inherently violent people.
That might just be me though.

[Mikelus Trento]

Judging from what i've seen in my short life through TV,internet,magazine,newspapers the Arabs seem to me, to be an inherently violent people.
That might just be me though.

They are not born that way, they are just taught that way from birth due to the teachings in their book. The book they have been conditioned to defend as peaceful, but when you start reading the passages you quickly understand just how violent, and outdated, it is.

I am continually bemused by them when we are asked to respect more the ideas from the "cradle of civilization" since it's been around so long, then conveniently forget that theirs is the newest of all the major faiths, and was born during a time we even call the "dark" ages.

[Darth Wong]

The Palestinians are just following the Israelis' example. Before Israel was made into a state in 1947, Israeli terrorists used bombings etc. to try and get their way. It seemed to work for them, so the Palestinians are trying to follow the model. It's not a very good model, but people tend to do what they believe will work. They don't think logically.

[Bwaho]

Judging from what i've seen in my short life through TV,internet,magazine,newspapers the Arabs seem to me to be an inherently violent people.

would you be ok with people making similar statements about blacks and jews?

you know like: jews are inherently greedy

or: blacks are inherently inferior intellectually

?

The Palestinians are just following the Israelis' example. Before Israel was made into a state in 1947, Israeli terrorists used bombings etc. to try and get their way

yes, but the difference is the Israeli terrorists won.

so the Palestinians are trying to follow the model. It's not a very good model, but people tend to do what they believe will work. They don't think logically.

since it worked for the israelies I'd say they are thinking logically

[Lord Bohemond]

The Palestinians are just following the Israelis' example. Before Israel was made into a state in 1947, Israeli terrorists used bombings etc. to try and get their way.

Al Quaeda is just following Europe's example. In the 19th century, European terrorists assassinated or attempted to assassinate many political leaders.

I think this illustrates the problem here. Trying to pin the actions of a tiny minority on a whole nation or people doesn't work too well.

It seemed to work for them, so the Palestinians are trying to follow the model. It's not a very good model, but people tend to do what they believe will work. They don't think logically.

And you know this... how?

These various groups were killing each other long before Israel was created. Can you seriously blame Israel for violence that would be occuring whether or not they were there?

[Enemy of the State]

You could actually get much more if you dont use violence sometimes Especially if you are outnumbered and dont have any chance to win in a war. Such thinking got us our freedom back, as it did for India and many other countries.

[ajm317]

Not all goals are acheivable by non-violent means.

Specifically you can't carve your own state out of Israeli lands by non-violent resistance. You can go on all the hunger strikes you want, the Israelis are probably going to ignore them.

Seriously, what are they going to do? This isn't the civil rights movement, where they could sit in at a lunch counter. This isn't India, where they were resisting oppresive British laws and they could just disobey them. They have to TAKE land from Israel. There's no non-violent way to do that.

[big_feef]

Because of their culture to certain degree; but the main reason is that they are led by people who have way too much to gain from violent resistance that they ever would from a peaceful one. To me, the main reason the Palistinians are in the position they are at the moment is because they have been led by a bunch of oppurtunistic hooligans for a very long time.

It's the same kind of idiocy that's going on in Lebanon; if Hezbollah really wanted a piece of the political pie, they could have it in a peaceful manner. But no, they prefer to take it by force. In showing off their 'military might', they have dragged their entire country into a devastating war with Israel and has garnered nothing but the same kind of contempt that many view the Palestinians with. So what if your people love you; in this day and age, its the international community that you have to deal with if you have any kind of chance of fulfilling the supposed goals of your resistance.

If Hezbollah comes to power in Lebanon, I see the international community slapping the same kind of restrictions on them as they have on the Palestinians when Hamas came to power. Nothing good comes of this except for those in power, those fueling conflict with their personal hatreds.

[ajimenez3]

You can't kill Jews using non-violent tactics.
If they were really fighting for a homeland/to free their country they would be attacking military, govt. and infrastructure instead of civilians.

[LoZz]

my point is that--- why is it that none of the currently "oppressed" peoples have taken pages from the peaceful nonviolent resistance

i remember one event when ghandi and his followers marched into a crowd of police and they got beaten and beaten and sometimes shot-- but they kept coming

i cant remember the quote but ghandi said something like
"they will grow tired of beating us before we grow tired of being beaten"

probably a really bad quote please correct if you can..

anyway why dont the palestinians attempt this , I know it requires an exceptional leader but i cant see why they wouldnt try at least try to resolve it without sending off their kids to blow themselves up with glee.

fact is long ago if the palestinians were peaceful they would be much better off than they are now because
everyone would be on their side.

ghandi was diffrent. the british wheir in the minority in india, ghandi had a few 100 million people behind him.


the people of palestine are in the minority, most of ther land has been givin to the jews after word war 2 in the form of the state of isreal.
they have had their land stolen from them (something i think the british are resoncible for, who actualy set isreal up anyway?) their anger is understandable

[ajm317]

Hypothetical scenario:

You are a Cherokee living in the U.S. You would like to have your native homeland, Georgia, which was stolen from you illegaly by the U.S., back.

Outline a strategy of non-violent resistance which returns Georgia to Cherokee rule.

[Mikelus Trento]

Hypothetical scenario:

You are a Cherokee living in the U.S. You would like to have your native homeland, Georgia, which was stolen from you illegaly by the U.S., back.

Outline a strategy of non-violent resistance which returns Georgia to Cherokee rule.

1. Research how widespread among all Cherokees the sentiment runs.
2. Research how widespread among non-Cherokees the sentiment runs.
3. Read everything I possibly could on Gandhi and his methods.
4. Wait for the next World War and try to earn a promise for independence from those owning the land in return for giving the blood of Cherokee soldiers.
5. After the conflict, remind the power of the promise they made, and if they blow it off, begin organizing among the Cherokee and non-Cherokee sit-down's, rallies, etc, to make as much "noise" about the cause as possible.

It still would never work tho unless the percentage of those agreeing with the cause were in the majority, as the Indians were. So your attempt at anology is like comparing an apple with an orange.

oops, sorry, 2 in a row. combine if you would please mods. thanks.

[Falconius]

Well the first reason is that they are not fighting for freedom, they are fighting in order to impose their will on others. That 'will' being the destruction of a Jewish presence in the Middle east.

As for Darth Wong's assertion of Jewish Terrorism succeeding, he is plain wrong. It is the legitimate organizations formed under the British (such as Jewish security forces to stop the Arab pogroms that had been occurring for years) and all the negotiating and years and years of planning and lobbying in British parliament in peaceful ways that eventually allowed the Jews to form their country. The 'terrorism' actually hindered it and was loudly condemned by the other Jewish organizations. Indeed the dissolution of such organizations after obtaining a state clearly shows that such methods were not welcome to the Jewish people as a whole (compared that to electing a Hamas government) Nor was that 'terrorism' aimed at defenseless innocents. They bombed British administrative targets, who they warned before they blew them up so that the people could get out if they so chose. Which is quite different from walking into a Pizzeria or a mall with **** strapped to your chest and killing mothers and children and disco goers along with yourself. Of course if you choose to see the two as equivalent that is your own failure of moral reasoning...

[enoch]

Well the first reason is that they are not fighting for freedom, they are fighting in order to impose their will on others. That 'will' being the destruction of a Jewish presence in the Middle east.

As for Darth Wong's assertion of Jewish Terrorism succeeding, he is plain wrong. It is the legitimate organizations formed under the British (such as Jewish security forces to stop the Arab pogroms that had been occurring for years) and all the negotiating and years and years of planning and lobbying in British parliament in peaceful ways that eventually allowed the Jews to form their country. The 'terrorism' actually hindered it and was loudly condemned by the other Jewish organizations. Indeed the dissolution of such organizations after obtaining a state clearly shows that such methods were not welcome to the Jewish people as a whole (compared that to electing a Hamas government) Nor was that 'terrorism' aimed at defenseless innocents. They bombed British administrative targets, who they warned before they blew them up so that the people could get out if they so chose. Which is quite different from walking into a Pizzeria or a mall with **** strapped to your chest and killing mothers and children and disco goers along with yourself. Of course if you choose to see the two as equivalent that is your own failure of moral reasoning...

building off the above

another problem is that non violence only works when you have moral superiority, in the sense that you need powerful forces in the world to believe that your moral standpoint is not only correct, but also that the opposing side's views are morally repugnant

the two well known examples in our timeline are Ghandi's indian revolution
and the US Civil Rights, in particular MLK.

both times we see an unfairly oppressed people being "enslaved" "kept down" by an "immoral" force which uses violence and economics to maintain their power base

the problem for the Palestinians is they were, from the very beginning, offered a near equal state, but they wanted the whole pie, and after WW2 the map was being redrawn all over the place, not just in palestine, which was never a state anyway pre WW2, so the Palestinians really have no moral highground to make a suitable claim through peaceful agitation
Hamas and islamic fundamentalism obviously exasperate the problems and make the palestinians even more morally repugnant

to think the palestinians are copying some Jewish model is just plain anti semiticism and FALC's more complicated viewpoint is far closer to the truth of the Jewish "terrorists" of the post WW2 period

[thecactusman17]

The issue is mostly to do with the fact that a huge majority of people in Israel and their supporters see Israel and Jerusalem specifically as a holy land which is guaranteed to them by God, and which he has commanded them to hold by force if necessary against any foreign control. This means that any form of non-violent resistance is to be treated as any form of violent resistance: a direct threat against Judaism. Of course, most Muslims feel the same way, seeing as some of their most holy sites (such as the Dome of the Rock) are currently under Israeli control. We see that cooler heads have mostly prevailed on both sides in allowing foreigners to practice their faiths at those locations, but the hardcore believers in all of them are going to continue violently opposing the control of other faiths over "their" territory.

[Falconius]

The issue is mostly to do with the fact that a huge majority of people in Israel and their supporters see Israel and Jerusalem specifically as a holy land which is guaranteed to them by God, and which he has commanded them to hold by force if necessary against any foreign control. This means that any form of non-violent resistance is to be treated as any form of violent resistance: a direct threat against Judaism. Of course, most Muslims feel the same way, seeing as some of their most holy sites (such as the Dome of the Rock) are currently under Israeli control. We see that cooler heads have mostly prevailed on both sides in allowing foreigners to practice their faiths at those locations, but the hardcore believers in all of them are going to continue violently opposing the control of other faiths over "their" territory.

You couldn't be any more wrong if you tried, the vast majority of Israelis are totally a-religious or anti-religious. They think nothing of G-d and couldn't care less about his directives in more then a traditional/historical way if at all. Not to mention the million or so Arab-Israelis or the immigrants form Russia. Hell, most Israelies arn't even Zionist anymore

[thecactusman17]

You couldn't be any more wrong if you tried, the vast majority of Israelis are totally a-religious or anti-religious. They think nothing of G-d and couldn't care less about his directives in more then a traditional/historical way if at all. Not to mention the million or so Arab-Israelis or the immigrants form Russia. Hell, most Israelies arn't even Zionist anymore

"Vast Majority" may, admittedly, have been an overstatement regarding the general population, but not the many practicing Jews and Christians around the world who see Jerusalem specifically and Israel in general as the the ultimate focal point of their faiths. There are many specific statements throughout the Bible and the Torah that state that the land given to Israel by their God is to be held by the Jews against all others as a holy place. Some of these people believe that violence is the answer to keeping Israel, a great many do not. But ultimately the end result is the same: complete and unwavering control over Israel is a religious perogative. As such, no amount of peaceful protest by a competing group which believes the same thing is going to change minds on either side. And sadly, this leaves only violence or the complete dissolution of one or the other faiths as the only remaining alternative. As you can suspect, no side in this is particularly accepting of the latter if it applies to them.

By the way, you can say "god" without giving the word reverence. Blanking it out like that just makes you sound insulting and offensive. I can say "Allah" or "Zeus" or "Odin" without believing in them, is it really that hard for you to say a word that in English refers to any generic wholly spiritual being?

[TAG]

Religious people don't serve in the IDF or government. So how is it that the majority, the vast majority, of Israel is religious; that compulsory military service exists, making that vast majority members of the IDF? Illogical. How is it possible that Sharon - a Jew - ruled Israel? How is it possible Olmert - a Jew - rules Israel? Hm...

Most of the Israelis are not religious , some traditional.
about 15% are Orthodox who are not serving in the army and some of them even deny the existence of Israel until the return of the messiah.

what were you saying about Sharon ?? i don't get it.
if you mean Sharon being Jewish ? sure he is , but maybe you confusing Jewish religion and Jewish ethnic group.

And by saying must have Jewish majority its not about religious majority

[Bwaho]

The 'terrorism' actually hindered it and was loudly condemned by the other Jewish organizations

Yitzhak Shamir was involved in the assasination of Folke Bernadotte yet he later became prime minister of Israel... oh yes the jews were so disgusted by the acts of terrorism