Should Israel really be condemned and boycotted?

Sean.3516

1641 wrote: »

So, did the West Bank "belong" to the palestinian state prior to the 1967 war? I believe it was occupied by Jordan. Did they assist in the establishment of a palestinian state?

This is absolutely correct the Palestinian state that was supposed to arise out of the 1947 UN partition never materialised. The Palestinians never declared their independence as they were entitled to the way Israel did. They rejected the entire UN Decision by launching 7v1 war on Israel.

The area of the West Bank that had been carved out for the Palestinian state was occupied by Jordan from 1948 up until 1967. The arabs living here were kept in camps and fed with hate and used as PR by Jordan and never integrated into Jordanian society.

It was only after Israel occupied the area after the 6 Day War in 1967 that arabs in the area starting trying to invoke the 1947 deal they had rejected.

So the UN offered them a state on the condition there was also a jewish state. The rejected it thinking they had the advantage of numbers and tried to wipe out the jewish state. Two decades later once it's clear they failed they ran back to the UN to try and revive the deal they tore up.

Highly convenient.

end of the road

NKante wrote: »

It's interesting that the left would usually applaud and support an indigenous population getting their land back and establishing a state. Well they do, but as long as they aren't Jews.

nope.
i don't think the left (unless there is a small sub-section) have any issue with the establishment of a homeland by the jews native to the area.

we just want israel to go back within it's borders, stop breaking international law, stop colonisation and land theft, stop brutalising the palestinian population and anyone else within occupied land and withdraw from said occupied land.

ILoveYourVibes

end of the road wrote: »

nope.
i don't think the left (unless there is a small sub-section) have any issue with the establishment of a homeland by the jews native to the area.

we just want israel to go back within it's borders, stop breaking international law, stop colonisation and land theft, stop brutalising the palestinian population and anyone else within occupied land and withdraw from said occupied land.

They did and they have.

Nearly two thirds of Israelis today have at least one grandparent from Jews Indigenous to the area.

The left never acknowledges this.

mad muffin

NKante wrote: »

'tis sad that the Europeans had/have a hard on for persecuting Jews. It was the Romans who chased out the Jewish population and ransacked what was a sovereign Jewish state.

Although a constant Jewish presence did persevere.

It's interesting that the left would usually applaud and support an indigenous population getting their land back and establishing a state. Well they do, but as long as they aren't Jews. :rolleyes:

I saw a quote once about Israel's uniqueness in being the only country in the world that bears the same name, has the same religion, speaks the same language and inhabits the same land as it did 3,000 years ago.

That's pretty special.

You know. I would have thought the Irish Catholics would have more of a comradeship with Israel, than the Palestinians. After all the Catholics got kicked out of their homeland by the English and supplanted by the Scottish.

But I suppose they don’t know the history of Israel, and the Israelites. They only know what the mainstream media show them today.

But in the Irish mind the Israelis are the English/Scottish, and the Palestinians are the ones that had their homelands taken.

Again I must point out. The Palestinians could have had a sovereign state back in ‘48 but they wanted it all. Lost the war. And with that lost it all really.

end of the road

mad muffin wrote: »

You know. I would have thought the Irish Catholics would have more of a comradeship with Israel, than the Palestinians. After all the Catholics got kicked out of their homeland by the English and supplanted by the Scottish.

But I suppose they don’t know the history of Israel, and the Israelites. They only know what the mainstream media show them today.

But in the Irish mind the Israelis are the English/Scottish, and the Palestinians are the ones that had their homelands taken.

Again I must point out. The Palestinians could have had a sovereign state back in ‘48 but they wanted it all. Lost the war. And with that lost it all really.

there are a lot more sources then the main stream media showing israel's behaviour.
as i said, countless UN resolutions against it and countless breaches of international, human rights and UN law.

mad muffin

end of the road wrote: »

there are a lot more sources then the main stream media showing israel's behaviour.
as i said, countless UN resolutions against it and countless breaches of international, human rights and UN law.

Yes but resolution by the likes of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and so on is like calling the kettle black. They aren’t real. They just want to get back at Israel by any means. Just like the latest resolution condemning Israel for violation of woman’s rights. It’s just laughable.

NKante

mad muffin wrote: »

You know. I would have thought the Irish Catholics would have more of a comradeship with Israel, than the Palestinians. After all the Catholics got kicked out of their homeland by the English and supplanted by the Scottish.

But I suppose they don’t know the history of Israel, and the Israelites. They only know what the mainstream media show them today.

But in the Irish mind the Israelis are the English/Scottish, and the Palestinians are the ones that had their homelands taken.

Again I must point out. The Palestinians could have had a sovereign state back in ‘48 but they wanted it all. Lost the war. And with that lost it all really.

It's very odd. You have this small Jewish population on a tiny plot of land no bigger than Wales, surrounded by Arab Muslims (And Iranian Muslims) who conquered their lands by force and who have utterly decimated indigenous non-Muslim populations, leaving just pockets of Copts, Bahai and others. And are still persecuting these minorities to this day.

They inhabit a massive 99.6% of the real estate.

Yet it's the Jews that are the colonialist land grabbers.

You just can't make this stuff up.

Worth noting that I believe Israel has the only growing Christian population in the Middle East.

ILoveYourVibes

mad muffin wrote: »

The Palestinians could have had a sovereign state back in ‘48 but they wanted it all. Lost the war. And with that lost it all really.

Not exactly. There was a movement of pan arab nationalism. Which was sold to them by many other Arab countries.

Now those Arab countries don't really want much to do with that. A lot of Arab militias in the region though are still built upon that ideology.

In the 90's it became more about palestinian nationalism. Before then the PLO had tried to invade jordan and overthrow the royal family there and took part in civil wars in lebannon etc. So they were not so popular.


This isn't the Israeli Army shooting at Palestinians its the Egyptian Army.

again Egyptian Army and palestinians.

Yet you never hear the palestinian or western media on how palestinians are treated by Eygpt or the Jordanians.


This is called a buffer zone when Egypt does it. Egypt cleared palestinian homes from the border.

ILoveYourVibes

No one ever condemns Egypt. Not even hamas.

NKante

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

In the 90's it became more about palestinian nationalism. Before then the PLO had tried to invade jordan and overthrow the royal family there and took part in civil wars in lebannon etc. So they were not so popular.

Ironically, the palestinians set up checkpoints in Jordan.

Jordan absolutely massacred them. The left didn't give a toss though. No Jews, no news.

The palestinians actually kicked off the Lebanese civil war which killed somewhere in the region of 120,000.

Kuwait took many palestinians in and integrated them into the economy. The palestinians thanked them by supporting Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. Kuwait in turn turfed them out.

The palestinians actually have a very brutal history over the past 60 years, but the BBC, CNN, MSNBC, The Guardian etc will never mention any of it.

BloodBath

Sean.3516 wrote: »

So here's how this exchange went.

I made a statement that in the 6 Day War, Jordan attacked Israel, Israel responded by kicking Jordan out of Israel and occupying the West Bank area they had used as their staging ground. Under international law it is legal for Israel (as the one who was initially attacked) to occupy this land until a peace treaty is agreed which has yet to happen.

"End of the Road"'s response was basically: No, Israel attacked Jordan first.

I responded by explaining the full context of how Israel tried to keep Jordan out of the war and even quoted the Wikipedia article on the 6 Day War which included the King of Jordan's response to the overtures "The die has been cast". Jordan then fired rockets into West Jerusalem thus entering the war.
This evidence conclusively disproves "End of the Road"'s claim that Israel attacked first.

His response was: No, you're wrong. Israel attacked first. He didnt address a single point I made or any of the evidence that I brought to the table.

Me: Jordan attacked Israel first.
Him: No you're wrong.
Me: No, I'm not wrong. In fact here is evidence that proves I'm right.
Him: No, you're wrong.

From this I am forced to conclude that "End of the Road" is either not arguing in good faith or lacks the capacity for rational thought and therfore any exchange with him is pointless.

You are wrong though. Jordan had a defensive pact with Egypt. By attacking Egypt, Israel effectively decayed war on Egypt and their allies, i.e. Jordan.

Let's not forget the attack on USS Liberty as well. Who knows what the exact motive was but it's a proven fact that the Israelis knew it was a US ship before, during and after their attack on it.

They were either trying to false flag it and blame it on the Egyptians to bring the US into the war or just to stop the US intercepting their radio comms which would reveal that the Israelis were the aggressors.

I'm leaning towards A as Israel made every effort to sink the ship and kill every man on board before they managed to get radio comms out. But I suppose you believe the Israeli lies that it was a case of mistaken identity despite all the evidence to the contrary.

tayto lover

BloodBath wrote: »

You are wrong though. Jordan had a defensive pact with Egypt. By attacking Egypt, Israel effectively decayed war on Egypt and their allies, i.e. Jordan.

Let's not forget the attack on USS Liberty as well. Who knows what the exact motive was but it's a proven fact that the Israelis knew it was a US ship before, during and after their attack on it.

They were either trying to false flag it and blame it on the Egyptians to bring the US into the war or just to stop the US intercepting their radio comms which would reveal that the Israelis were the aggressors.

I'm leaning towards A as Israel made every effort to sink the ship and kill every man on board before they managed to get radio comms out. But I suppose you believe the Israeli lies that it was a case of mistaken identity despite all the evidence to the contrary.

The Israelis would never resort to dirty tricks like that or use false Irish passports when murdering people. Never.

NKante

BloodBath wrote: »

You are wrong though. Jordan had a defensive pact with Egypt. By attacking Egypt, Israel effectively decayed war on Egypt and their allies, i.e. Jordan.

You're forgetting that Jordan were lied to in order to get them involved in the war.

And little known fact, but the USSR were actually the ones that were pushing Egypt to launch a war on Israel and even fed them false information.

You're also forgetting that Israel gave warnings to Jordan NOT to attack Jerusalem. A warning which Jordan did not heed.

The Soviets actually started to paint their jets in Egyptians colours so they could send Soviet fighter pilots to fight against Israel.

But Israel had won before the paint could dry.

The rest of your post is not worth commenting on.

BloodBath

NKante wrote: »

You're forgetting that Jordan were lied to in order to get them involved in the war.

And little known fact, but the USSR were actually the ones that were pushing Egypt to launch a war on Israel and even fed them false information.

You're also forgetting that Israel gave warnings to Jordan NOT to attack Jerusalem. A warning which Jordan did not heed.

The Soviets actually started to paint their jets in Egyptians colours so they could send Soviet fighter pilots to fight against Israel.

But Israel had won before the paint could dry.

The rest of your post is not worth commenting on.

Jordan could have chosen not to honour the pact and yes they were lied to by the Egyptians. It doesn't change the fact that Israel started the 6 day war. Whether they were justified to "preemptively attack" or not is another matter.

Of course you don't want to talk about the USS liberty attack. How could you possibly defend Israels actions on that 1.

NKante

BloodBath wrote: »

It doesn't change the fact that Israel started the 6 day war. Whether they were justified to "preemptively attack" or not is another matter.

It's not "another matter". Claiming they "started the war" whilst separating it from the fact the Arabs clearly stated they were going to "drench the sand with Jewish blood" as they amassed their armies, is not only intellectually dishonest, it's totally morally bankrupt too.

Of course we all know what would have happened if Israel hadn't won - a second Holocaust. An outcome I'm sure you and others of your ilk might not have been shedding too many tears about.

end of the road

NKante wrote: »

It's very odd. You have this small Jewish population on a tiny plot of land no bigger than Wales, surrounded by Arab Muslims (And Iranian Muslims) who conquered their lands by force and who have utterly decimated indigenous non-Muslim populations, leaving just pockets of Copts, Bahai and others. And are still persecuting these minorities to this day.

They inhabit a massive 99.6% of the real estate.

Yet it's the Jews that are the colonialist land grabbers.

You just can't make this stuff up.

Worth noting that I believe Israel has the only growing Christian population in the Middle East.

it's not the jews that are colonialist land grabbers. it is israel who are as such, as they are the one expanding way outside their borders.
israel is not the jews as a whole and there are quite a number within israel itself who disagree with their government's behaviour.

Sean.3516

BloodBath wrote: »

You are wrong though. Jordan had a defensive pact with Egypt. By attacking Egypt, Israel effectively decayed war on Egypt and their allies, i.e. Jordan.

This is a pretty bizarre agument.

The notion that Israel forced Jordan to start bombarding West Jerusalem by attacking Egypt is strange.

Jordan voluntarily agreed to be allied to Egypt. Do they bare no responsibility for upholding that pact and facing the consequences there of? In other words King Hussein was a big boy, let's not treat him like a child. When I'm playing Napoleon Total War on PC and a country I have a pact with gets attacked, I still get to make a concious decision whether I help defend them or not.

The reason Israel didn't pre-emptively attack Jordan as they did Syria and Egypt was because their air force wasnt a major threat. The small Royal Jordanian Air Force consisted of only 24 British-made Hawker Hunter fighters, six transports, and two helicopters. It wasn't lost on the Israeli PM their king was merely an egyptian stooge and might back down. He sent him that famous message giving him the chance to avoid being beaten as badly as Syria and Jordan were about to be.

BloodBath wrote: »

Let's not forget the attack on USS Liberty as well. Who knows what the exact motive was but it's a proven fact that the Israelis knew it was a US ship before, during and after their attack on it.

They were either trying to false flag it and blame it on the Egyptians to bring the US into the war or just to stop the US intercepting their radio comms which would reveal that the Israelis were the aggressors.

I'm leaning towards A as Israel made every effort to sink the ship and kill every man on board before they managed to get radio comms out. But I suppose you believe the Israeli lies that it was a case of mistaken identity despite all the evidence to the contrary.

I honestly don't know enough about the USS Liberty incident to comment on it intelligently. But I know that stupidity is 100x more common than malicous intent.

Sean.3516

BloodBath wrote: »

Jordan could have chosen not to honour the pact and yes they were lied to by the Egyptians. It doesn't change the fact that Israel started the 6 day war.

Two things can be true at once

1. Israel started the Six Day War.

2. Israel did not force Jordan into the war.

These statements are not mutually exclusive.

NKante

end of the road wrote: »

it's not the jews that are colonialist land grabbers. it is israel who are as such, as they are the one expanding way outside their borders.
israel is not the jews as a whole and there are quite a number within israel itself who disagree with their government's behaviour.

Expanded to the size of Wales. Expanded into their ancestral lands of Judea. The brutes! expanded to....err under what they were promised in the original mandate.

I guess the Arabs shouldn't have started wars they couldn't win. They got a big cocky. Managed to wipe out everyone else with their barbarism, but the Jews proved to be a tougher nut to crack. Suck it up.

Cheerful Spring2

Sean.3516 wrote: »

This is a pretty bizarre agument.


I honestly don't know enough about the USS Liberty incident to comment on it intelligently. But I know that stupidity is 100x more common than malicous intent.

Believe or not the Israelis were willing to start WW3. They hit the USS liberty with submarine torpedos and fighter aircraft bombs. There was a big apology, later, but they knew what they were up to. If US took the bait they would at be a war with Egypt and the Soviets would have to come in and help them. The American sweeped the incident under the rug and covered this up. The men who died will never forgot and still demand justice for the dead.

end of the road

NKante wrote: »

Expanded to the size of Wales. Expanded into their ancestral lands of Judea. The brutes! expanded to....err under what they were promised in the original mandate.

I guess the Arabs shouldn't have started wars they couldn't win. They got a big cocky. Managed to wipe out everyone else with their barbarism, but the Jews proved to be a tougher nut to crack. Suck it up.

nope. expanded outside their borders as set in 1948. what a book says on the matter has no relevance. any land outside the 1948 borders is not their land, and them being on that land is illegal and land theft.

CrankyHaus

The sad truth is that none of the major players in the Israeli conflicts are blameless. The facile representations advanced in the West on behalf of either side are deliberately misleading fairy tales.

All have treated one another with the utmost bad faith, savagery and unreasonableness.

The Palestinians have certainly suffered the most, and ended up in the worst position. However when they held the whip hand, or thought they did, they passed up chances for a compromise peace in favour of aiming to drive out Jewish settlers entirely. Now the Israelis are in the position of strength and similarly blind to the long-term benefits of conciliation for a lasting peace. Both considered, and arguably still do, ethnic cleansing of the lands they assert ownership over to be a legitimate aim. Neither seems capable of meeting half-way for a workable two-state solution.

The neighbouring Arab nations have behaved little better: using the plight of the Palestinians as a PR weapon while often doing little to help them, engaging in opportunistic military adventurism and betraying one another for petty advantage (like the ruler of Jordan ratting out Egypt and Syria to Golda Meir just before the 1973 War).

Arguably Egypt manages to come out "best", as in least bad, certainly once it engaged in peaceful coexistence with Israel after the 1973 War. It suffered more unprovoked attacks and unjustified aggression from Israel (Suez, Six Day War, The Israeli refusal to return the Sinai during the War of Attrition) than it perpetrated against it.

Israel itself has a long list of actions to its name that go far beyond merely "defending itself". The 1982 invasion of Lebanon, masterminded by Sharon who as Minister of Defence deliberately misled the Prime Minister and Cabinet by presenting his longed for showdown with the Syrians as a defensive action, including the Sabra and Shatila Massacre was probably the nadir but by no means out of character for Israel.

Honestly I distrust anyone who espouses strong views in favour of either side; they either know nothing about the subject or are willingly misleading you.

NKante

end of the road wrote: »

nope. expanded outside their borders as set in 1948. what a book says on the matter has no relevance. any land outside the 1948 borders is not their land, and them being on that land is illegal and land theft.

But err, the Arabs (who're now called palestinians) didn't accept 48.

So, that seems to make your point moot.


You do know the palestinians were murdering Jews before Israel was reestablished? and you know they were killing Jews before the 67 conflict? and you know they were killing Jews before a single settlement was built?

So maybe go have a chat to them mate. Seems they might be the problem here.

BloodBath

NKante wrote: »

It's not "another matter". Claiming they "started the war" whilst separating it from the fact the Arabs clearly stated they were going to "drench the sand with Jewish blood" as they amassed their armies, is not only intellectually dishonest, it's totally morally bankrupt too.

Of course we all know what would have happened if Israel hadn't won - a second Holocaust. An outcome I'm sure you and others of your ilk might not have been shedding too many tears about.

Talk about morally bankrupt. I criticise some of the actions of the Israeli government as I have other countries and that makes me a supporter of genocide in your mind? I don't have a problem with the state or people of Israel or it's right to exist. Only some of the actions of it's government.

You are talking as if the war was inevitable. That is a matter of opinion. I couldn't even be bothered speaking with someone who throws out accusations like that at the drop of a hat though.

ILoveYourVibes

tayto lover wrote: »

The Israelis would never resort to dirty tricks like that or use false Irish passports when murdering people. Never.

All intelligence agencies use fake passports.

The CIA uses them MI5 use them etc etc.

The CIA and MI5 have also used Irish passports when traveling in hostile regions.

Irish passports are a spooks best friend. We are neutral.

And yes I am sure they use fake passports to carry out assassinations too.

And yes its very dirty.

There are actually rumours Irish politicians were briefed about this decades ago by those involved.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/taoiseach-briefed-about-forged-irish-passports-in-us-irancontra-scandal-36443222.html

LuckyLloyd

CrankyHaus wrote: »

The sad truth is that none of the major players in the Israeli conflicts are blameless. The facile representations advanced in the West on behalf of either side are deliberately misleading fairy tales.

All have treated one another with the utmost bad faith, savagery and unreasonableness.

The Palestinians have certainly suffered the most, and ended up in the worst position. However when they held the whip hand, or thought they did, they passed up chances for a compromise peace in favour of aiming to drive out Jewish settlers entirely. Now the Israelis are in the position of strength and similarly blind to the long-term benefits of conciliation for a lasting peace. Both considered, and arguably still do, ethnic cleansing of the lands they assert ownership over to be a legitimate aim. Neither seems capable of meeting half-way for a workable two-state solution.

The neighbouring Arab nations have behaved little better: using the plight of the Palestinians as a PR weapon while often doing little to help them, engaging in opportunistic military adventurism and betraying one another for petty advantage (like the ruler of Jordan ratting out Egypt and Syria to Golda Meir just before the 1973 War).

Arguably Egypt manages to come out "best", as in least bad, certainly once it engaged in peaceful coexistence with Israel after the 1973 War. It suffered more unprovoked attacks and unjustified aggression from Israel (Suez, Six Day War, The Israeli refusal to return the Sinai during the War of Attrition) than it perpetrated against it.

Israel itself has a long list of actions to its name that go far beyond merely "defending itself". The 1982 invasion of Lebanon, masterminded by Sharon who as Minister of Defence deliberately misled the Prime Minister and Cabinet by presenting his longed for showdown with the Syrians as a defensive action, including the Sabra and Shatila Massacre was probably the nadir but by no means out of character for Israel.

Honestly I distrust anyone who espouses strong views in favour of either side; they either know nothing about the subject or are willingly misleading you.

Good post.

The bottom line is that the only acceptable long term solution is a two state solution and it will involve, in sequence, Israel rolling back from current positions and the Arab world generally making peace with the end point of compromise.

mad muffin

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

All intelligence agencies use fake passports.

The CIA uses them MI5 use them etc etc.

The CIA and MI5 have also used Irish passports when traveling in hostile regions.

Irish passports are a spooks best friend. We are neutral.

And yes I am sure they use fake passports to carry out assassinations too.

And yes its very dirty.

There are actually rumours Irish politicians were briefed about this decades ago by those involved.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/taoiseach-briefed-about-forged-irish-passports-in-us-irancontra-scandal-36443222.html

I’m sure they were. Irish politicians are some of the most corrupt in the world.

JoeCasey

Seems silly to pick sides in a fight between two religious fanatics.
Also strange to boycott one side and not the other, when they both act with total disregard for Life.

NKante

BloodBath wrote: »

Talk about morally bankrupt. I criticise some of the actions of the Israeli government as I have other countries and that makes me a supporter of genocide in your mind? I don't have a problem with the state or people of Israel or it's right to exist. Only some of the actions of it's government.

You are talking as if the war was inevitable. That is a matter of opinion. I couldn't even be bothered speaking with someone who throws out accusations like that at the drop of a hat though.

First of all, I always find it fascinating when someone says "I believe Israelis have the right to exist". Like it's some favour you're doing them. Like they should be grateful you'll permit them to live.

What other country in the world is subjected to the mainly left wing dinner table discussions about whether they should be allowed to exist or not, in such a casual manner? the lives of 8 million people hanging on the thumbs up or thumbs down of some pink-haired leftist student scrote from Europe.

Secondly, if Israel had not won the wars started by the Arabs - it would have been a Holocaust. People like you will have tutted and said "OK, this time Never Again".

You can't separate the two. The fact Israel holds Judea & Samaria (renamed to the 'West Bank' to erase Jewish history) is because they managed to prevent a second, in fact a third Holocaust of the Jewish people. I'm not going to sit in my comfy sofa in the UK and wag my morally superior finger at the Israelis for having the temerity to survive and to hold onto the land used to launch the wars against them. Land that's historically Jewish anyway.

CrankyHaus

NKante wrote: »

First of all, I always find it fascinating when someone says "I believe Israelis have the right to exist". Like it's some favour you're doing them. Like they should be grateful you'll permit them to live.

What other country in the world is subjected to the mainly left wing dinner table discussions about whether they should be allowed to exist or not, in such a casual manner? the lives of 8 million people hanging on the thumbs up or thumbs down of some pink-haired leftist student scrote from Europe.

Secondly, if Israel had not won the wars started by the Arabs - it would have been a Holocaust. People like you will have tutted and said "OK, this time Never Again".

You can't separate the two. The fact Israel holds Judea & Samaria (renamed to the 'West Bank' to erase Jewish history) is because they managed to prevent a second, in fact a third Holocaust of the Jewish people. I'm not going to sit in my comfy sofa in the UK and wag my morally superior finger at the Israelis for having the temerity to survive and to hold onto the land used to launch the wars against them. Land that's historically Jewish anyway.

In the long run Israel, and Jewish people everywhere,are made far less safe by Israel keeping its boot on the Palestinian's neck and acting aggressively towards its neighbours with little regard for international law. This stokes anti-semitism (which in fairness is rampant in the middle-east) and keeps tensions bubbling away in perpetuity at constant risk of blowing up.


There is no guarantee that Israel will keep winning its wars. The best guarantee of lasting peace is to get on well with your neighbours. Military strength and the backing of the US has been a viable alternative for Israel for decades but to rely on this indefinitely is foolish, given both the geopolitical changes that the 21st century will bring and the historical fact that no power has ever maintained military superiority indefinitely. For the latter point see the battle of Jena 1806 where Napoleon easily crushed the Prussian army that had been the greatest in Europe a few short decades before.