Has The Israeli Goverment BecomeThe Monster?

[Veritable Quandry]

But can they each agree that the other is a legitimate resident? People on both sides who are pushing a single state instead of a two state solution are doing so by attempting to delegitimize the historic claims of the other group. Those who are looking for a two-state solution, I would argue, are more likely to see and accept the broader history of the region.

 

[BilliJo Aldrin]

I'm pretty sure the Jews didn't start the Seven Days War, which resulted in the Jews gaining control of all the Palestinian parts of Israel.
Jews want peace, Palestinians don't. Until Palestinians accept the right of a Jewish state to exist, there will never be peace. Maybe they could ship all he Palestinians to Madagascar, which at one time was one of the lands being considered for a Jewish state

 

[Cristiano]

I'm pretty sure the Jews didn't start the Seven Days War, which resulted in the Jews gaining control of all the Palestinian parts of Israel.
Jews want peace, Palestinians don't. Until Palestinians accept the right of a Jewish state to exist, there will never be peace. Maybe they could ship all he Palestinians to Madagascar, which at one time was one of the lands being considered for a Jewish state

I see you decided to not stay out of the politics forum. It is ridiculous to claim the Palestinian people don't want peace. They want the right to exist as much as Jews do. A two state solution is necessary for both to live in peace. One cannot live under the control of the other.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

It's safe to say that on both sides a certain amount of people wants war, while the other wants peace. And it's also safe to say that on both sides the wrong people have been staying in power for way too long.

Also: the two state solution is dead due to the illegal settlements Israel did in the West Bank amongst other things. These settlers will not give up their homes, so the place for a Palestinian state is rather limited at best. And for sure not within the borders of 1967.

Regarding founding myths the problem is this: Israel's myth is that "we only came back into the land of our ancestors, and took what nobody wanted to have anyway", meaning they've bought a lot of swamp land and other stuff nobody wanted and cultivated it. It's also this strong myth of "our country was forged in the tides of war" about the 1948 Palestine War.

On the other hand the founding myth or more trauma of the Palestines is Nakba, the deportations of them and taking away land as consequence of the Palestine War.

As long as both sides don't recognise their own wrongdoings in these events, namely Israel about pushing out the Palestines at large while still actively erasing evidence about that and on the other hand the Palestines refuse to realise this happened in great parts as reactions to them, there will never be a real peace.

This is the historic land of eye for an eye, and tooth for a tooth. And it seems more than enough people there are sadly still living by that old fashioned codex.

 

[Casey Pelous]

Any number of Native American nations might have some thoughts on the whole "move the lot of them to Jordan/Egypt/Iran/US" idea ...

 

[Aeon Jiminy]

I'm pretty sure the Jews didn't start the Seven Days War, which resulted in the Jews gaining control of all the Palestinian parts of Israel.
Jews want peace, Palestinians don't. Until Palestinians accept the right of a Jewish state to exist, there will never be peace. Maybe they could ship all he Palestinians to Madagascar, which at one time was one of the lands being considered for a Jewish state

This is incredibly unhinged.

Why should anyone be subjugated under religious rule against their will? It was the Palestinians home before it was your proclaimed Jewish state.

The Israel experiment has been an absolute murderous failure. It's time to stop. There cannot be a two state solution when one of the states has been broken up into a thousand little pieces. A religious state is not more important than the right to live. Stop killing, starving, and torturing human beings. You've got to do that before you can claim a right to any kind of religious state.

 

[Cristiano]

Any number of Native American nations might have some thoughts on the whole "move the lot of them to Jordan/Egypt/Iran/US" idea ...

Conversely, we could always let Israel have Palm Beach County, Florida.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Some part of the Jews evaluated going to a part of Western Australia, but this idea was dismissed back then. The majority wanted to go home into their perceived homeland.

 

[Isabeau]

DTwyman (@dtwyman.bsky.social)

Tonight, more than 750,000 Israelis, are on the streets of israel calling for the immediate release of all hostages & the immediate impeachment of Netanyahu & his government. This is the largest protest in the history of Israel it’s the equivalent of 22.5 million Americans taking to the streets.

bsky.app

Israel’s war on Gaza updates: Army targets homes, kills 33 in single day

Gaza’s Health Ministry says Israeli attacks wounded 145 others over a 24-hour period.

www.aljazeera.com

 

[detrius]

I'm pretty sure the Jews didn't start the Seven Days War, which resulted in the Jews gaining control of all the Palestinian parts of Israel.
Jews want peace, Palestinians don't. Until Palestinians accept the right of a Jewish state to exist, there will never be peace. Maybe they could ship all he Palestinians to Madagascar, which at one time was one of the lands being considered for a Jewish state

The "Madagascar Plan" was a proposal by Nazi Germany.

You know how that ended.

Any plan that includes the idea that "group X should just move to Y to finally solve problem Z" is just an intermediate step to genocide and I wish people would stop making these posts on this forum.

 

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Holy shit, a post in favour of an actual Nazi playbook.

 

[Bill Fletcher]

Conversely, we could always let Israel have Palm Beach County, Florida.

Don't they already? I recently moved from there to Lake County and its nice to be back in the United States

 

[Soen Eber]

While there is historical precedent for displaced populations being given leave to settle unoccupied, war-ravaged, or frontier (border) areas within a kingdom or empire, the world was a much smaller place back in those times and I can't wrap my head around that being either acceptable nor practical in today's world. The goal then was to form a sort of buffer between two hostile regions or to exploit hitherto underutilized land (impossible now with 8 billion people on the planet). Anything approaching "let's move them to "X" is a ludicrous unethical fantasy, and as detrius has said, a prelude to genocide or other massive crimes against humanity.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

However, there's a complexity to all this that I haven't yet resolved to my satisfaction.

If a country genuinely believes that a minority in a neighbouring country is being subjected to genocide/ethnic cleansing, should it -- as I have seen it argued when I've asked why neighbouring countries won't take refugees from Gaza -- close its borders to them because that would be "colluding with genocide"? It might be colluding with ethnic cleansing, I guess, but if the genocidaires are serious enough, then all it achieves is putting them to the inconvenience of actually murdering their victims.

Were Tanzania and other neighbouring countries really "colluding with genocide" when they allowed Tutsis in who were fleeing the Hutu genocide in Rwanda? Would the more principled stand have been to close their borders?

I can understand that the receiving countries may well have justified concerns that, if they accept the people fleeing persecution, they'll only encourage the persecutors to redouble their efforts to rid themselves of an unwanted minority but, if they genuinely think the victims face death if they aren't allowed asylum, and refuse them nevertheless, that's contrary to the UN Convention on refugees.

When I've ask this question on Twitter X it generally gets me blocked.

 

[Veritable Quandry]

We are already at a point where neighboring countries have refugees who fled generations ago and have had mixed success at integrating into the host countries. There is a real fear that Palestinians would become permanent refugees needing support and making political demands. While also continuing military acts against Israel. This is a long term problem, and pushing out the Palestinians would change the facts on the ground while only deepening hostility and instability in the region. It is a mess no matter what happens.

 

[Argent Stonecutter]

We are already at a point where neighboring countries have refugees who fled generations ago and have had mixed success at integrating into the host countries.

Have the countries involved actually tried to help them integrate or given them special status that all but guarantees that they never can? I think Egypt at least chose the latter course.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

However, there's a complexity to all this that I haven't yet resolved to my satisfaction.

If a country genuinely believes that a minority in a neighbouring country is being subjected to genocide/ethnic cleansing, should it -- as I have seen it argued when I've asked why neighbouring countries won't take refugees from Gaza -- close its borders to them because that would be "colluding with genocide"? It might be colluding with ethnic cleansing, I guess, but if the genocidaires are serious enough, then all it achieves is putting them to the inconvenience of actually murdering their victims.

It's quite simple: Egypt and Jordan have peace treaties with Israel in place, which is a political thing their population never appreciated so much. They refuse to take in Palestines from Gaza strip a) due to fear that these will act as catalyst to radicalize their own population, b) Iran will covertly try to increase his influence, c) the fear that if they do leave settlements in Gaza, Israel will take them back and never give them to the Palestines again.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I fully understand the neighbouring countries' concerns.

But, at least if they are serious in accusing Israel of perpetrating genocide, it seems to me that by refusing to allow the victims of a genocide to escape to safety because of the undoubted inconveniences that would follow, while claiming to be refusing them sanctuary because saving them would amount to complicity in this genocide, plumbs the depths of hypocrisy.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Well my best explanation about why they don't is that different cultures might lead to different outcomes. Aside that what we also don't know is if Hamas would allow the people flee at all, or kill them while trying.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

The Palestines have finally a seat in the General Assembly of the UN. They are allowed to submit proposals and amendments, but cannot vote due to the veto of the USA in the security council.

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/09/11/palestinians-take-new-seat-at-un-general-assembly_6725549_4.html