Palestine Today

[Shusha]

Does it actually act as a deterrence or does have the opposite effect?

I don't think you will like my answer.

Maybe not.

Wanna try?

Sure - go for it

Framework #1: I disagree with Israel's policy of demolishing the homes of terrorists. Its a bad policy. Its collective punishment. Its morally wrong.

Framework #2: Concerning the idea of the "opposite effect", it is a very common form of victim blaming to cite that if the victim simply appeased the abuser, the abuse would stop. And we are discussing Arab terrorism here -- the Arabs are the abusers. It is entirely the responsibility of the abuser to stop the abuse, not for the victim to change the victim's behaviour in order to prevent the abuse.

THAT SAID, the problem is that it doesn't act as a deterrence. First, it is not STRONG enough to be a good deterrence. And secondly, it doesn't address the real scope of the problem.

My concern is that while there are absolutely ways of addressing the fundamental problem (pretty much the way I encourage my students to deal with abuse), those ways are morally unpalatable in a political setting.

So, the question....What SHOULD Israel do with a hostile population, some of whom resort to violence against innocents?

 

[Shusha]

How is a thread about Palestinians anti Semitic?

Because its largely a troll thread where Tinmore posts memes and propaganda about how "evil" Israel is and how "angelic" the Arab Palestinians are.

Ah. Ok.

Yet there are also threads on how wonderful Israel is and how horrible Palestinians are

Well, if this was a thread that was only on "how wonderful Arab Palestine is", I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I tried a thread like that and it got trolled with how evil Palestinians are

Exactly. And where is that thread now?

 

[Coyote]

Does it actually act as a deterrence or does have the opposite effect?

I don't think you will like my answer.

Maybe not.

Wanna try?

Sure - go for it

Framework #1: I disagree with Israel's policy of demolishing the homes of terrorists. Its a bad policy. Its collective punishment. Its morally wrong.

Framework #2: Concerning the idea of the "opposite effect", it is a very common form of victim blaming to cite that if the victim simply appeased the abuser, the abuse would stop. And we are discussing Arab terrorism here -- the Arabs are the abusers. It is entirely the responsibility of the abuser to stop the abuse, not for the victim to change the victim's behaviour in order to prevent the abuse.

THAT SAID, the problem is that it doesn't act as a deterrence. First, it is not STRONG enough to be a good deterrence. And secondly, it doesn't address the real scope of the problem.

My concern is that while there are absolutely ways of addressing the fundamental problem (pretty much the way I encourage my students to deal with abuse), those ways are morally unpalatable.

So, the question....What SHOULD Israel do with a hostile population, some of whom resort to violence against innocents?

Why would you think I wouldn’t like it?

I largely agree, with some differences.

#1 I agree with.

#2 I am not sure it doesn’t act as a deterrence because it is not strong enough so much as it serves to justify their hatred, anger and sense of injustice. A stronger deterrence might put a stop to it temporarily but only by making a people so terrified they dare not do anything. Temporary though because the underlying issues would still be there ready to explode.

As to the final question, I don’t really know. Home demolitions seem to have zero impact, and I wonder if in fact it might even increase the violence? So why do it if it has no effect and is morally wrong?

 

[Coyote]

How is a thread about Palestinians anti Semitic?

Because its largely a troll thread where Tinmore posts memes and propaganda about how "evil" Israel is and how "angelic" the Arab Palestinians are.

Ah. Ok.

Yet there are also threads on how wonderful Israel is and how horrible Palestinians are

Well, if this was a thread that was only on "how wonderful Arab Palestine is", I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I tried a thread like that and it got trolled with how evil Palestinians are

Exactly. And where is that thread now?

Buried.

Not enough interest

 

[Shusha]

#2 I am not sure it doesn’t act as a deterrence because it is not strong enough so much as it serves to justify their hatred, anger and sense of injustice. A stronger deterrence might put a stop to it temporarily but only by making a people so terrified they dare not do anything. Temporary though because the underlying issues would still be there ready to explode.

But, similar to an abuser, the "wrongdoing" of the victim is not the source of the hatred, anger and sense of injustice. Its nothing more than a veneer of excuses and justifications used for the express purpose of legitimizing their abuse.

The terrorism has to stop. Only the abuser can choose to stop the abuse.

 

[Shusha]

As to the final question, I don’t really know. Home demolitions seem to have zero impact, and I wonder if in fact it might even increase the violence? So why do it if it has no effect and is morally wrong?

The problem, and this is the part you won't like, is that I think the deterrents must be stronger.

 

[Shusha]

Because its largely a troll thread where Tinmore posts memes and propaganda about how "evil" Israel is and how "angelic" the Arab Palestinians are.

Ah. Ok.

Yet there are also threads on how wonderful Israel is and how horrible Palestinians are

Well, if this was a thread that was only on "how wonderful Arab Palestine is", I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I tried a thread like that and it got trolled with how evil Palestinians are

Exactly. And where is that thread now?

Buried.

Not enough interest

Right.

So a thread, like this one, which is positive Palestine and demonizing Israel survives. But a thread which is positive Palestine and demonizing Palestine dies. Why is that, do you think?

 

[Coyote]

#2 I am not sure it doesn’t act as a deterrence because it is not strong enough so much as it serves to justify their hatred, anger and sense of injustice. A stronger deterrence might put a stop to it temporarily but only by making a people so terrified they dare not do anything. Temporary though because the underlying issues would still be there ready to explode.

But, similar to an abuser, the "wrongdoing" of the victim is not the source of the hatred, anger and sense of injustice. Its nothing more than a veneer of excuses and justifications used for the express purpose of legitimizing their abuse.

The terrorism has to stop. Only the abuser can choose to stop the abuse.

But is who is the victim that black and white in this case? I don’t think so, but the tendancy is to try and make it that way. And I suspect we won’t agree on this.

 

[Coyote]

Ah. Ok.

Yet there are also threads on how wonderful Israel is and how horrible Palestinians are

Well, if this was a thread that was only on "how wonderful Arab Palestine is", I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I tried a thread like that and it got trolled with how evil Palestinians are

Exactly. And where is that thread now?

Buried.

Not enough interest

Right.

So a thread, like this one, which is positive Palestine and demonizing Israel survives. But a thread which is positive Palestine and demonizing Palestine dies. Why is that, do you think?

Not sure what second sentence means exactly.

Threads that survive are those that demonize some one, be it Palestinians or Israel. They attract attackers and defenders.

Positive threads die. Controversy thrives.

 

[Coyote]

As to the final question, I don’t really know. Home demolitions seem to have zero impact, and I wonder if in fact it might even increase the violence? So why do it if it has no effect and is morally wrong?

The problem, and this is the part you won't like, is that I think the deterrents must be stronger.

In what way?

 

[Shusha]

#2 I am not sure it doesn’t act as a deterrence because it is not strong enough so much as it serves to justify their hatred, anger and sense of injustice. A stronger deterrence might put a stop to it temporarily but only by making a people so terrified they dare not do anything. Temporary though because the underlying issues would still be there ready to explode.

But, similar to an abuser, the "wrongdoing" of the victim is not the source of the hatred, anger and sense of injustice. Its nothing more than a veneer of excuses and justifications used for the express purpose of legitimizing their abuse.

The terrorism has to stop. Only the abuser can choose to stop the abuse.

But is who is the victim that black and white in this case? I don’t think so, but the tendancy is to try and make it that way. And I suspect we won’t agree on this.

I hear you. I'm speaking very specifically about terrorism here. With terrorism it is black and white.

 

[Shusha]

As to the final question, I don’t really know. Home demolitions seem to have zero impact, and I wonder if in fact it might even increase the violence? So why do it if it has no effect and is morally wrong?

The problem, and this is the part you won't like, is that I think the deterrents must be stronger.

In what way?

This is where it gets unpalatable. And I get that it is.

But, the only thing to do with an abusive partner, is to separate. Completely.

 

[Coyote]

As to the final question, I don’t really know. Home demolitions seem to have zero impact, and I wonder if in fact it might even increase the violence? So why do it if it has no effect and is morally wrong?

The problem, and this is the part you won't like, is that I think the deterrents must be stronger.

In what way?

This is where it gets unpalatable. And I get that it is.

But, the only thing to do with an abusive partner, is to separate. Completely.

You are right, I would not agree.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Considering that the denial of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self determination, sovereignty, independence and return to Palestine...

Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

Strongly condemns those Governments that do not recognize the right to self determination and independence of all peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the Palestinian people;

Arrrggggh. So frustrating not to get to you be able to understand that these concepts must be applied equally to BOTH peoples.

Considering that the denial of the inalienable rights of the Jewish people to self determination, sovereignty, independence and return.

Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Jewish people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference.

Strongly condemns those Governments that do not recognize the right to self determination and independence of all peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the Jewish people.

Its the same thing. BOTH peoples.

Post the resolution for the Israelis.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today

⁜→ et al,


Now we are becoming rather philosophical → with the question → Is Israel:

✦ Perfect or Imperfect

✦ Right or Wrong

✦ Good or Evil​

This is (in a round-about way) claiming that the Israeli way of life and culture is fundamentally flawed, because the culture has not been proven to be "perfect," - "right," - "good." And that the culture of Israel cannot be defending because the government, the way of life, the morality/ethics and the justice system is imperfect.

The question of Israel, from the Arab Palestinian perspective:

✦ Views the establish of Israel as unlawful, improper, unprincipled or discordant because the Arab Palestinians were opposed to the process by which it employed the right of self-determination.

✦ It severely criticizes the resurrection of the Jewish National Home when the path set by the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic, which renounced all rights and title - handing-over the territories in question into the hands of the Allied Powers and allowed the future of these territories to be settled by the parties to the Treaty → as an instrument of victory.

✦ The concepts established through the Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void simply because the outcome is not to the satisfaction of the Arab Palestinian.

✦ Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood.

✦ That Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality.

✦ The Jews cannot establish their own nation with an identity of their own.

✦ The Arab Palestinians are entitled to the entirety of Palestine, with the boundaries Palestine had during the British Mandate period.
​

And the Arab Palestine entangles America by claiming the Americans enable crimes and sins committed by the Jews against the Arab Palestinians, and that the Israelis have no right to the terriotrial integrity.

So, in the end, the Arab Palestinians believe that they are entitled something, based on an unknown, over actions taken since the end of The Great War (WWI).

Somehow, the Leaders of the various Arab Palestinian movements argue that sovereignty under their leadership would be - somehow - qualitatively better than that presented by the Israeli.


Most Respectfully,
R

The idea that Israel is not perfect, right, or good is a distraction from the real issue. The real issue is the settler colonial project.

Settler colonialism is when the natives are removed and they are replaced by foreign settlers. It is an aggressive act. This was started before 1948 and continues to today.

That isn’t exactly what happened. Accurate historical numbers are problematic in that region, but by and large it was found that Jewish immigration did not displace native Arab populations. The Jews tended to settle in different areas. With war, things changed, both Jews and Arabs were forced out of various areas, some through violence, some through well founded fear.

The problem with the often repeated meme of Jews as colonists is what does that make the foriegn Arabs who came to region from other countries, looking for jobs, and stayed? Are they colonists too?

Whose war?

There is a big difference between immigrants and settlers.

 

[Coyote]

RE: Palestine Today

⁜→ et al,


Now we are becoming rather philosophical → with the question → Is Israel:

✦ Perfect or Imperfect

✦ Right or Wrong

✦ Good or Evil​

This is (in a round-about way) claiming that the Israeli way of life and culture is fundamentally flawed, because the culture has not been proven to be "perfect," - "right," - "good." And that the culture of Israel cannot be defending because the government, the way of life, the morality/ethics and the justice system is imperfect.

The question of Israel, from the Arab Palestinian perspective:

✦ Views the establish of Israel as unlawful, improper, unprincipled or discordant because the Arab Palestinians were opposed to the process by which it employed the right of self-determination.

✦ It severely criticizes the resurrection of the Jewish National Home when the path set by the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic, which renounced all rights and title - handing-over the territories in question into the hands of the Allied Powers and allowed the future of these territories to be settled by the parties to the Treaty → as an instrument of victory.

✦ The concepts established through the Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void simply because the outcome is not to the satisfaction of the Arab Palestinian.

✦ Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood.

✦ That Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality.

✦ The Jews cannot establish their own nation with an identity of their own.

✦ The Arab Palestinians are entitled to the entirety of Palestine, with the boundaries Palestine had during the British Mandate period.
​

And the Arab Palestine entangles America by claiming the Americans enable crimes and sins committed by the Jews against the Arab Palestinians, and that the Israelis have no right to the terriotrial integrity.

So, in the end, the Arab Palestinians believe that they are entitled something, based on an unknown, over actions taken since the end of The Great War (WWI).

Somehow, the Leaders of the various Arab Palestinian movements argue that sovereignty under their leadership would be - somehow - qualitatively better than that presented by the Israeli.


Most Respectfully,
R

The idea that Israel is not perfect, right, or good is a distraction from the real issue. The real issue is the settler colonial project.

Settler colonialism is when the natives are removed and they are replaced by foreign settlers. It is an aggressive act. This was started before 1948 and continues to today.

That isn’t exactly what happened. Accurate historical numbers are problematic in that region, but by and large it was found that Jewish immigration did not displace native Arab populations. The Jews tended to settle in different areas. With war, things changed, both Jews and Arabs were forced out of various areas, some through violence, some through well founded fear.

The problem with the often repeated meme of Jews as colonists is what does that make the foriegn Arabs who came to region from other countries, looking for jobs, and stayed? Are they colonists too?

Whose war?

There is a big difference between immigrants and settlers.

Not really.

 

[Shusha]

As to the final question, I don’t really know. Home demolitions seem to have zero impact, and I wonder if in fact it might even increase the violence? So why do it if it has no effect and is morally wrong?

The problem, and this is the part you won't like, is that I think the deterrents must be stronger.

In what way?

This is where it gets unpalatable. And I get that it is.

But, the only thing to do with an abusive partner, is to separate. Completely.

You are right, I would not agree.

Exactly. Which leads me back to the question.

What SHOULD Israel do to address/deter/respond to terrorism?

 

[Shusha]

Considering that the denial of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self determination, sovereignty, independence and return to Palestine...

Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

Strongly condemns those Governments that do not recognize the right to self determination and independence of all peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the Palestinian people;

Arrrggggh. So frustrating not to get to you be able to understand that these concepts must be applied equally to BOTH peoples.

Considering that the denial of the inalienable rights of the Jewish people to self determination, sovereignty, independence and return.

Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Jewish people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference.

Strongly condemns those Governments that do not recognize the right to self determination and independence of all peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the Jewish people.

Its the same thing. BOTH peoples.

Post the resolution for the Israelis.

Fundamentally, do you agree or disagree that rights should be equally applied to all people? Its a yes or no question.

 

[Shusha]

There is a big difference between immigrants and settlers.

Well, yes. And returnees.

Why don't you take a shot at defining each?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today

⁜→ et al,


Now we are becoming rather philosophical → with the question → Is Israel:

✦ Perfect or Imperfect

✦ Right or Wrong

✦ Good or Evil​

This is (in a round-about way) claiming that the Israeli way of life and culture is fundamentally flawed, because the culture has not been proven to be "perfect," - "right," - "good." And that the culture of Israel cannot be defending because the government, the way of life, the morality/ethics and the justice system is imperfect.

The question of Israel, from the Arab Palestinian perspective:

✦ Views the establish of Israel as unlawful, improper, unprincipled or discordant because the Arab Palestinians were opposed to the process by which it employed the right of self-determination.

✦ It severely criticizes the resurrection of the Jewish National Home when the path set by the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic, which renounced all rights and title - handing-over the territories in question into the hands of the Allied Powers and allowed the future of these territories to be settled by the parties to the Treaty → as an instrument of victory.

✦ The concepts established through the Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void simply because the outcome is not to the satisfaction of the Arab Palestinian.

✦ Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood.

✦ That Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality.

✦ The Jews cannot establish their own nation with an identity of their own.

✦ The Arab Palestinians are entitled to the entirety of Palestine, with the boundaries Palestine had during the British Mandate period.
​

And the Arab Palestine entangles America by claiming the Americans enable crimes and sins committed by the Jews against the Arab Palestinians, and that the Israelis have no right to the terriotrial integrity.

So, in the end, the Arab Palestinians believe that they are entitled something, based on an unknown, over actions taken since the end of The Great War (WWI).

Somehow, the Leaders of the various Arab Palestinian movements argue that sovereignty under their leadership would be - somehow - qualitatively better than that presented by the Israeli.


Most Respectfully,
R

The idea that Israel is not perfect, right, or good is a distraction from the real issue. The real issue is the settler colonial project.

Settler colonialism is when the natives are removed and they are replaced by foreign settlers. It is an aggressive act. This was started before 1948 and continues to today.

That isn’t exactly what happened. Accurate historical numbers are problematic in that region, but by and large it was found that Jewish immigration did not displace native Arab populations. The Jews tended to settle in different areas. With war, things changed, both Jews and Arabs were forced out of various areas, some through violence, some through well founded fear.

The problem with the often repeated meme of Jews as colonists is what does that make the foriegn Arabs who came to region from other countries, looking for jobs, and stayed? Are they colonists too?

Whose war?

There is a big difference between immigrants and settlers.

Not really.

There is a big difference. Immigrants move to a country to join the existing population and become a part of that society.

Settlers move to a country to live separate (in colonies) from the existing population with the plan to remove them and take over for themselves.

There is a complete difference in the purpose.

The Zionist Project - 1948