Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The thing is, Israel cant withdraw from all it's settlements (if by that you mean expelling all those thousands of people). It would be a humanitarian nightmare for those settlements that are large urban long established areas. But it CAN stop retroactively legalizing illegal ones, it CAN stop expanding them, it CAN stop supporting illegal ones.RE: Boycott Israel
⁜→ Coyote, Shusha, Sixties Fan, et al,
Yes, to the question...
(COMMENT)But you refer to the Jewish People as if they all stand behind this. Do they? Do a majority support the settlements? I do not think so.
The thing that confuses most people's about the End Game. When the dust clears, what is the expectation? Will the Settlements have been a good idea.?
The answer too these simple questions will determine the next steps.
(CURIOSITY)
IF the Israelis decided to withdraw all the settlements; how would that be accomplished? What would a safe and orderly withdraw look like? Remember, the Arab Palestinians kept attacking the Israeli's all through the 2005 withdraw.
Most Respectfully,
R
You are essentially saying that one must oppose all such actions across the world or you are guilty of picking on just one ethnicity.
The policy is a boycott against West Bank settlements, not Jews.
Its not a policy against settlements (else Western Sahara, Northern Cyprus, Tibet, etc ....). Its a policy specifically and exclusively against Jewish settlements in a certain place in the world. Its a policy of boycott supporting the concept that certain places in the world must be kept clean from Jews (because Arabs demand it and not just in the "West Bank").
That is like saying the boycotts against South Africa were not really about Apartheid otherwise they would have boycotted similar systems in other countries such as Rhodesia. You are essentially saying that one must oppose all such actions across the world or you are guilty of picking on just one ethnicity. That means if one opposes a policy settlement building in occupied/disputed territories in Palestine that opposition is an opposition to Jews living there. That is a fundementally dishonest argument. The opposition is to a nation's policy of building large scale communitees that often include questionably legal or even illegal means of obtaining land from resident communitees.
When you make it about Jews then let me flip the question back to you. The settlement program is almost exclusively Jewish. Isrsel is not building non-Jewish settlements in Area C are they? So is it a policy that ONLY Jews are allowed to move in and build settlements?
But, we've had this discussion before. Let me ask you a different question. Given that the Jewish people absolutely see this as antisemitism and "special treatment for Jews" and given that this suggests a need for more protection and security -- rather than less -- what do you think Israel should do in the face of this sort of boycott action?
From THEIR perspective I would do exactly what they are doing. Fighting it, and exposing the antisemitic elements that are attracted to it for what they are in some cases, and working with other nations to end it.
But you refer to the Jewish People as if they all stand behind this. Do they? Do a majority support the settlements? I do not think so.
Regurgitating Al-Jazeerah talking points to the letter...mah
It is about Jews, it's clear as daylight, no matter how much quasi-intellectual trickery You imply.
Yet the settlements are Jewish only.You are essentially saying that one must oppose all such actions across the world or you are guilty of picking on just one ethnicity.
Yes. Exactly this. This is exactly what I am saying.
When one holds a general policy of say, not doing business in places under settlement, but then applies that policy ONLY to Israel and not to all the other places of settlement in the world, you can no longer pretend that it doesn't have anything to do with the special treatment of Jews.
That is a fundementally dishonest argument. The opposition is to a nation's policy of building large scale communitees that often include questionably legal or even illegal means of obtaining land from resident communitees.
All Arab settlements in Areas A and B are Muslims only.Yet the settlements are Jewish only.You are essentially saying that one must oppose all such actions across the world or you are guilty of picking on just one ethnicity.
Yes. Exactly this. This is exactly what I am saying.
When one holds a general policy of say, not doing business in places under settlement, but then applies that policy ONLY to Israel and not to all the other places of settlement in the world, you can no longer pretend that it doesn't have anything to do with the special treatment of Jews.
The policy is a boycott against West Bank settlements, not Jews.
Its not a policy against settlements (else Western Sahara, Northern Cyprus, Tibet, etc ....). Its a policy specifically and exclusively against Jewish settlements in a certain place in the world. Its a policy of boycott supporting the concept that certain places in the world must be kept clean from Jews (because Arabs demand it and not just in the "West Bank").
That is like saying the boycotts against South Africa were not really about Apartheid otherwise they would have boycotted similar systems in other countries such as Rhodesia. You are essentially saying that one must oppose all such actions across the world or you are guilty of picking on just one ethnicity. That means if one opposes a policy settlement building in occupied/disputed territories in Palestine that opposition is an opposition to Jews living there. That is a fundementally dishonest argument. The opposition is to a nation's policy of building large scale communitees that often include questionably legal or even illegal means of obtaining land from resident communitees.
When you make it about Jews then let me flip the question back to you. The settlement program is almost exclusively Jewish. Isrsel is not building non-Jewish settlements in Area C are they? So is it a policy that ONLY Jews are allowed to move in and build settlements?
But, we've had this discussion before. Let me ask you a different question. Given that the Jewish people absolutely see this as antisemitism and "special treatment for Jews" and given that this suggests a need for more protection and security -- rather than less -- what do you think Israel should do in the face of this sort of boycott action?
From THEIR perspective I would do exactly what they are doing. Fighting it, and exposing the antisemitic elements that are attracted to it for what they are in some cases, and working with other nations to end it.
But you refer to the Jewish People as if they all stand behind this. Do they? Do a majority support the settlements? I do not think so.
Regurgitating Al-Jazeerah talking points to the letter...mah
It is about Jews, it's clear as daylight, no matter how much quasi-intellectual trickery You imply.
So how come the settlements are Jewish only?
Nope.That is a fundementally dishonest argument. The opposition is to a nation's policy of building large scale communitees that often include questionably legal or even illegal means of obtaining land from resident communitees.
I think it is you with the dishonest argument.
Are you suggesting that it is totally fine for Israel to build communities in Area C on any land which does not "belong" to the small existing Arab Palestinian communities?
The policy is a boycott against West Bank settlements, not Jews.
Its not a policy against settlements (else Western Sahara, Northern Cyprus, Tibet, etc ....). Its a policy specifically and exclusively against Jewish settlements in a certain place in the world. Its a policy of boycott supporting the concept that certain places in the world must be kept clean from Jews (because Arabs demand it and not just in the "West Bank").
That is like saying the boycotts against South Africa were not really about Apartheid otherwise they would have boycotted similar systems in other countries such as Rhodesia. You are essentially saying that one must oppose all such actions across the world or you are guilty of picking on just one ethnicity. That means if one opposes a policy settlement building in occupied/disputed territories in Palestine that opposition is an opposition to Jews living there. That is a fundementally dishonest argument. The opposition is to a nation's policy of building large scale communitees that often include questionably legal or even illegal means of obtaining land from resident communitees.
When you make it about Jews then let me flip the question back to you. The settlement program is almost exclusively Jewish. Isrsel is not building non-Jewish settlements in Area C are they? So is it a policy that ONLY Jews are allowed to move in and build settlements?
But, we've had this discussion before. Let me ask you a different question. Given that the Jewish people absolutely see this as antisemitism and "special treatment for Jews" and given that this suggests a need for more protection and security -- rather than less -- what do you think Israel should do in the face of this sort of boycott action?
From THEIR perspective I would do exactly what they are doing. Fighting it, and exposing the antisemitic elements that are attracted to it for what they are in some cases, and working with other nations to end it.
But you refer to the Jewish People as if they all stand behind this. Do they? Do a majority support the settlements? I do not think so.
Regurgitating Al-Jazeerah talking points to the letter...mah
It is about Jews, it's clear as daylight, no matter how much quasi-intellectual trickery You imply.
So how come the settlements are Jewish only?
The same way Arab settlements are Arab only. Only difference settlements like Tel-Aviv have lots of Arabs once they're allowed to grow, the Arab settlements are totally exclusive.
BDS is not about the settlements, it's about erasing the Jewish state in any shape or form and assaulting uninvolved Jews around the world.
Yet the settlements are Jewish only.
Wh
Its not a policy against settlements (else Western Sahara, Northern Cyprus, Tibet, etc ....). Its a policy specifically and exclusively against Jewish settlements in a certain place in the world. Its a policy of boycott supporting the concept that certain places in the world must be kept clean from Jews (because Arabs demand it and not just in the "West Bank").
That is like saying the boycotts against South Africa were not really about Apartheid otherwise they would have boycotted similar systems in other countries such as Rhodesia. You are essentially saying that one must oppose all such actions across the world or you are guilty of picking on just one ethnicity. That means if one opposes a policy settlement building in occupied/disputed territories in Palestine that opposition is an opposition to Jews living there. That is a fundementally dishonest argument. The opposition is to a nation's policy of building large scale communitees that often include questionably legal or even illegal means of obtaining land from resident communitees.
When you make it about Jews then let me flip the question back to you. The settlement program is almost exclusively Jewish. Isrsel is not building non-Jewish settlements in Area C are they? So is it a policy that ONLY Jews are allowed to move in and build settlements?
But, we've had this discussion before. Let me ask you a different question. Given that the Jewish people absolutely see this as antisemitism and "special treatment for Jews" and given that this suggests a need for more protection and security -- rather than less -- what do you think Israel should do in the face of this sort of boycott action?
From THEIR perspective I would do exactly what they are doing. Fighting it, and exposing the antisemitic elements that are attracted to it for what they are in some cases, and working with other nations to end it.
But you refer to the Jewish People as if they all stand behind this. Do they? Do a majority support the settlements? I do not think so.
Regurgitating Al-Jazeerah talking points to the letter...mah
It is about Jews, it's clear as daylight, no matter how much quasi-intellectual trickery You imply.
So how come the settlements are Jewish only?
The same way Arab settlements are Arab only. Only difference settlements like Tel-Aviv have lots of Arabs once they're allowed to grow, the Arab settlements are totally exclusive.
BDS is not about the settlements, it's about erasing the Jewish state in any shape or form and assaulting uninvolved Jews around the world.
What Arab settlements have been built in Area C?
Nope.That is a fundementally dishonest argument. The opposition is to a nation's policy of building large scale communitees that often include questionably legal or even illegal means of obtaining land from resident communitees.
I think it is you with the dishonest argument.
Are you suggesting that it is totally fine for Israel to build communities in Area C on any land which does not "belong" to the small existing Arab Palestinian communities?
I have said this before already. Those who lived there when the area was taken should continue on. Outsiders, whether Jewish or Arab, should not be immigrating in until it's status is resolved.
What Arab settlements have been built in Area C?
Seems to be a very small number in East Jerusalum only.All Arab settlements in Areas A and B are Muslims only.Yet the settlements are Jewish only.You are essentially saying that one must oppose all such actions across the world or you are guilty of picking on just one ethnicity.
Yes. Exactly this. This is exactly what I am saying.
When one holds a general policy of say, not doing business in places under settlement, but then applies that policy ONLY to Israel and not to all the other places of settlement in the world, you can no longer pretend that it doesn't have anything to do with the special treatment of Jews.
Many Arab settlements inside Israel are Arabs/Muslims only, as well.
In some cases, though, it is mixed population
Leave or let live? Arabs move in to Jewish settlements | Reuters
But it is Arabs being allowed to move into Jewish settlements, and not Jews being allowed to move into Arab settlements.
The same can be said of all the Christians who are not allowed to live in Areas A and B, the thousands who had to move out of Bethlehem since 1994, etc
Yet the settlements are Jewish only.
Well, no. Its far more complicated than that.
Like ALL OF ISRAEL, both Jews and Arabs live in Area C. They tend to live in segregated towns and the reasons for that are many and complicated: security concerns, intifadas, competing national liberation movements, deeply held discrimination on both sides, agricultural lifestyles vs. urban lifestyles, family ties, religious motivations...I can go on and on and on, but you get the idea.
There is absolutely nothing, in law, preventing Arab Israelis from buying a home, a piece of land, an apartment or an entire city-sized parcel to build in Area C.
What Arab settlements have been built in Area C?
It is my understanding that there are several places where growing Area B communities have encroached upon Area C. Why is no one making a fuss about those "illegal settlements"?
How was it it dishonest? It was my opinion.Nope.That is a fundementally dishonest argument. The opposition is to a nation's policy of building large scale communitees that often include questionably legal or even illegal means of obtaining land from resident communitees.
I think it is you with the dishonest argument.
Are you suggesting that it is totally fine for Israel to build communities in Area C on any land which does not "belong" to the small existing Arab Palestinian communities?
I have said this before already. Those who lived there when the area was taken should continue on. Outsiders, whether Jewish or Arab, should not be immigrating in until it's status is resolved.
Right. So your previous argument was dishonest. It has nothing at all to do with questionable or illegal means of obtaining land from resident communities.
Lived in the area when it was "taken" when? And why that specific time period?
Nope.That is a fundementally dishonest argument. The opposition is to a nation's policy of building large scale communitees that often include questionably legal or even illegal means of obtaining land from resident communitees.
I think it is you with the dishonest argument.
Are you suggesting that it is totally fine for Israel to build communities in Area C on any land which does not "belong" to the small existing Arab Palestinian communities?
I have said this before already. Those who lived there when the area was taken should continue on. Outsiders, whether Jewish or Arab, should not be immigrating in until it's status is resolved.
Right. So your previous argument was dishonest. It has nothing at all to do with questionable or illegal means of obtaining land from resident communities.
Lived in the area when it was "taken" when? And why that specific time period?
Yet the settlements are Jewish only.
Well, no. Its far more complicated than that.
Like ALL OF ISRAEL, both Jews and Arabs live in Area C. They tend to live in segregated towns and the reasons for that are many and complicated: security concerns, intifadas, competing national liberation movements, deeply held discrimination on both sides, agricultural lifestyles vs. urban lifestyles, family ties, religious motivations...I can go on and on and on, but you get the idea.
There is absolutely nothing, in law, preventing Arab Israelis from buying a home, a piece of land, an apartment or an entire city-sized parcel to build in Area C.
A very small number of what?? in East Jerusalem.Seems to be a very small number in East Jerusalum only.All Arab settlements in Areas A and B are Muslims only.Yet the settlements are Jewish only.You are essentially saying that one must oppose all such actions across the world or you are guilty of picking on just one ethnicity.
Yes. Exactly this. This is exactly what I am saying.
When one holds a general policy of say, not doing business in places under settlement, but then applies that policy ONLY to Israel and not to all the other places of settlement in the world, you can no longer pretend that it doesn't have anything to do with the special treatment of Jews.
Many Arab settlements inside Israel are Arabs/Muslims only, as well.
In some cases, though, it is mixed population
Leave or let live? Arabs move in to Jewish settlements | Reuters
But it is Arabs being allowed to move into Jewish settlements, and not Jews being allowed to move into Arab settlements.
The same can be said of all the Christians who are not allowed to live in Areas A and B, the thousands who had to move out of Bethlehem since 1994, etc
There are Christians living in Area B and C.
What Arab settlements? The settlement movement and settlements have a pretty specific meaning:
Wikipedia
Israeli settlements are civilian communitiesinhabited by Israeli citizens, almost exclusively of Jewish ethnicity,[1][2] built predominantly on lands within the Palestinian territories, which Israel has militarily occupiedsince the 1967 Six-Day War,[3] and partly on lands considered Syrian territory also militarily occupied by Israel since the 1967 war. Such settlements within Palestinian territories currently exist in Area C of the West Bank and in East Jerusalem, and within Syrian territory in the Golan Heights.
So when you talk about Arab settlements it would seem that the equivalent would be Arab Israeli communitees built on Palestinian lands occupied by Israel.
What settlements are those?
