Israel to World: "Suck It."

which raises the question: what does john zorn have to say about all this?

you could even say it begs the question

hey, i actually used that phrase correctly upthread, unlike 99% of the times people use that phrase.

so 9000 land grabbers down... just 400,000 to go!

dude I think there are more israelis than that

anyway, don't you mean that Britain illegally land grabbed? since the Israelis got the land legally. well, then there was that war when Israel got attacked and took more land, so i guess that's also land grabbing. anyway, what's your point? should all the Jews move back to their ancestral home of Lower East Side?

Mordy, that's nice news you linked, but let's not exaggerate or anything with that "completely halted":

"Prime Minister Netanyahu has fulfilled his promise of last November to impose a ten-month moratorium on new construction in the West Bank," said AJC Executive Director David Harris. "Let's remember that Israel's bold decision to freeze new construction was an unprecedented good-faith gesture intended to move the Palestinian Authority to resume direct negotiations, yet, despite the Israeli action, President Abbas has still refused to return."

I mean, not trying to be glib or argumentative, but the "good-faith gesture" of a temporary moratorium on something even Israel's staunch allies consider a gigantic problem is like ... I dunno what that's like.

two issues. One is new settlements and one is freezing settlement building in actual settlements afaik. i could be wrong tho.

The Israeli government moratorium, however, does allow for completion of about 3,000 housing units in existing communities that were started before November 26, 2009.

wouldn't any palestinian 'good-faith gesture' also be something that most of us would agree should be something they should be doing anyway?

er too many 'be somethings'

Nabisco, I could be reading it wrong but:

The Israeli government moratorium, however, does allow for completion of about 3,000 housing units in existing communities that were started before November 26, 2009.

means that they're grandfathered in since they were slated from Nov 2009. So existing communities construction got grandfathered in, completely new settlements didn't and aren't going on. But I could be wrong! I'm hunting for answers but it's hard to find data on settlements (probably because many of them are illegal wrt to Israel too! i don't know when the last time the government actually sponsored brand new settlements was!)

okay, apparently i'm wrong, this looks like a government sponsored settlement from last year: http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-begins-new-settlement-despite-u-s-opposition-1.276244

so i take it back.

anyway, i think i'm dropping this thread for awhile. i think the current israeli government sucks in a million ways and i feel like shit every time i try to argue for some nuance in the situation when i'd rather be bitching about how much Bibi sucks. kiwi, i recommend this book: http://www.amazon.com/Operation-Shylock-Confession-Vintage-International/dp/0679750290 -- It might give you some ideas.

xpost - Mordy, all I was saying was that ... if you happen to be of the opinion that settlements are kind of an independent aggressive act that shouldn't be happening, full stop, the idea of a temporary halt to construction as a noble good-faith gesture is a little weird.

And yes, of course the same applies to loads of violence coming from occupied territory.

(In fact, part of why the settlements are interesting to me is that they're an area where Israel, despite having working top-down state authority that Palestinians don't, sometimes seem to lack the political will to do things like restrict settlers or clear out illegal settlements, because it looks bad to the public -- which is like a tiny version of the problem Palestinian leadership has with basically everything.)

seriously israel needs to evict all of the settlers, resettle them in the pre-67 borders, and that's that. there's no way to understand the settlements except as a kind of creeping colonialism. as sharon was fond of saying, changing the "facts on the ground."

i guess the problem is that likud gov't has no interest in doing this, and if liberal gov't did this they would get stomped on in subsequent elections?

lots of good debate itt. refreshing compared to the inflammatory axe-to-grind hatefests I have seen elsewhere.

was thinking same thing, even in the context of ilx

was thinking abt this thread earlier today and what amateurist says about the illegal settlements absolutely having to go as a precondition for any progress whatsoever seems very otm to me.

"you wonder if a one-state solution is possible in the next 70 years."

ppl said same about Northern Ireland 30 years ago. A US prez who didn't cater to Zionist maniacs would be a nice start.

― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, June 2, 2010 3:01 AM (5 hours ago) Bookmark

morbius,,, what the fuck are you talking about?!

seriously, what?

northern ireland isn't a single state now, nor was it thirty years ago. but sinn fein/ira was talking about a single state for *the whole of ireland* that would displace the existing republic. now, that hasn't happened either.

while we're on the subject of terrible things the brits did c. 1922 -- "anyway, don't you mean that Britain illegally land grabbed?" woah, hey, come on, mordy. it was a league of nations mandate, and n e ways who was the land being grabbed from? the ottoman empire, the og land-grabbers in the region. the idea was to set up a jewish state without prejudice to the existing population, yes? whatever, the brits weren't being illegal.

Another way of saying this is: who will Israel blame from now on? Are they essentially hoping that hardline groups like Hamas will fill the spotlight, lending more justification to their activities? Is cutting off Arafat maybe a way of racheting up the conflict, giving them license to do, well, whatever they want?

― [nabisco], Thursday, 13 December 2001 01:00 (8 years ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

nabisco.... otm

Personally never quite understood the obsessive global focus on Israel, a tiny dysfunctional country surrounded by bigger dysfunctional countries in a world full of dysfunctional countries that treat their own people or their neighbors like shit. Settlements should def. stop, but then, in the scheme of things, the settlements are some of the least egregious/atrocious state-supported actions being executed on a regular basis. And yet they're all it takes to stir the pot, or at least this particularly hyper-inflated pot. I mean, are any borders legitimate or less than arbitrary? Can any borders be defended on historical grounds beyond that of "land grab," spoils of war, cartographic meddling or shady dealings?

Anyway, just frustrating. I understand the import of the region, and its relationship to other conflicts, but, like, get in line.

Personally never quite understood the obsessive global focus on Israel, a tiny dysfunctional country surrounded by bigger dysfunctional countries in a world full of dysfunctional countries that treat their own people or their neighbors like shit.

they're white?

Ha, that would explain part of it. Or whiter, at least.

Every ILX Israel discussion seems to go through the exact same motions.

Hey Josh in Chicago; it's 'cause everyone hates the Jews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUwbZ9AlSPI

in the scheme of things, the settlements are some of the least egregious/atrocious state-supported actions being executed on a regular basis.

I can't agree with this. "Expanding settlements" is a classic tactic for rulers to eliminate enemies. It was Saddam Hussein's preferred method of expanding his influence, for example. Just get more and more Sunnis moving onto more and more Shiite and Kurdish land. Eventually either their culture and identity break apart and become subsumed or they get fed up and leave. But where will Palestinians leave to?

Point being, with so many states actively eliminating its enemies in the most horrible way possible (e.g. rape and machete campaigns in Congo or Sudan), Israel's settlements, bad though they may be, produce disproportionate outrage. Does not invalidate the outrage, but it reveals a lack of perspective to compare, say, Saddam Hussein's preferred method of expanding his influence and Israel's own policies. At least at this juncture. Maybe future Israel will transgress to that degree, in which case, kudos on your prognostication.

See also China (xpost)

I think the outrage with Israel stems from it being supported (in different ways) by the United States and the European Union - i.e. by us, or by our governments. Our governments are not complicit in things going on in the Sudan in the same way. So with Israel, there is at least the possibility that we could apply pressure on Israel to make it stop doing the bad things it is doing.

Israel's settlements, bad though they may be, produce disproportionate outrage

Maybe if the Israeli and its supporters didn't strut about ballyhooing about what a free and wonderful democracy Israel is and just admitted it was fairly squalid and scummy little Middle Eastern state then we'd be less inclined to react the way we do.

If their supporters at least admitted Israel was not as impressive a democracy as even Turkey, that'd be a start

Yeah, I can see that. We're outraged because unlike so many other tragedies, we feel more invested and able to evince a change. Even if that's a collective delusion. I mean, "where will the Palestinians leave to" presumes there's a correct place for them to be. But every single national border on the planet was formed either by compromise, treaty or act of attrition.

Turkey experienced military coups in 1960, 1971 and 1980, and had the government forced out by the military in a quasicoup in 1997, so not sure that assertion stacks up at all.

You want to compare a decades-long policy of settlement expansion which fragments and grinds away the identity of a subjugated people with, say, raping and killing a little girl? Why? So you can say "at least Israel doesn't have a policy of raping and killing little girls?" Talk about kudos! Well done Israel! Setting the bar high!! They can assassinate political enemies, maintain a siege on a million-person concentration camp, and "settle" on land that they took by force, but as long as there are no actual machete campaigns my outrage at all this is disproportionate. At this juncture. Interesting. I suppose I should give Israel the benefit of the doubt here. They've earned it, what with not raping and knifing little girls in any obvious, official way. And as for that other stuff - hey, borders get drawn, right? Who among us is without sin? Everybody does it.

Turkey experienced military coups in 1960, 1971 and 1980, and had the government forced out by the military in a quasicoup in 1997, so not sure that assertion stacks up at all.

Balls, Spain was a fascist dictatorship till 1974, waht does that prove

Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck

34 years ago is a lot longer than 13. And Spain did explicitly turn away from military coups in 1981.

This exchange yesterday I found interesting:

One of my very brightest Jewish friends from school is Israeli-born and heavily invested in Zionism (let's just say a cousin of hers has been in a coma for four years). I am reluctant to discuss it with her because her emotionalism around I/P is completely at variance to how coolly and logically she looks at any other issue.

― I eat truffle fries because my captors say they'll kill me if I don't (suzy), Monday, 31 May 2010 10:59 (2 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I basically feel the same about those heavily invested in anti-Zionisim

― Ismael Klata, Monday, 31 May 2010 11:07 (2 days ago) Bookmark

This flotilla story sums up for me how a) Israel squanders any good will it may have had and shoots itself in the foot with its actions, e.g. the blockade itself b) its democracy does flourish (check the Israeli media) and c) how people around the world do indeed (Josh is 100% right) get disproportionately wound up about it.

otm

Wow, excuse me for getting disproportionate about Gaza. Really, what was I thinking? I guess I need to post about all the other absolutely horrible, grinding atrocities around the world first, so that I can prove I'm not focusing, like, too much on poor old Israel. Lead the way, though, Daniel and Josh. Who else should we be talking about on this thread?

Back to Josh's point about all property being theft, so fuck it - it's true, so many borders were basically drawn with blood. Like the French border with Germany, or the US border with Mexico, or whatever borders American Indian territories have. So I guess we'll just keep on truckin with the violent conflict and genocide model of map-making. It just plain works! We could apply this to other things too. Consider the making of a shirt. For most of human existence, it was women who made them, for free, for their husbands and children. Think of the money we could save on our wardrobe budgets if we just relied on this simple, time-tested mechanism.

otm, I spend too much on shirts

fairly squalid and scummy little Middle Eastern state then we'd be less inclined to react the way we do... If their supporters at least admitted Israel was not as impressive a democracy as even Turkey, that'd be a start

― Wenlock & Mandelson (Tom D.), Wednesday, June 2, 2010 1:17 PM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark

hmm, ok

probably better take this to the "turkey to kurds: 'suck it'" thread

oh no, we don't have one

"Disproportionate" only in a world where history, religion and social/cultural psychology dont exist,if only Moses was found down the Congo instead of the Nile eh!

"Who else should we be talking about on this thread?"

Totally missing the point.

I've come across so many people who don't bat an eyelid when it comes to issues like the Burmese regime, the massacres in Congo and Sudan, for example, yet when the subject of Israel comes up they become extraordinarily agitated. Just talking about my own experience.

Tracer, we should just make war illegal. That would do it, right?

The ironies really do abound. The only reason Israel is held up (wrongly) as a paragon of democracy and human rights is in comparison to its direct neighbors and antagonists. Similarly, Israel may smugly operate with "restraint," but that smug restraint is all that's kept it from "solving" its problems the way they would have been (wrongly) solved in any other era. I truly believe in a Palestinian state, at least as much as I believe in an Israel. But I'm also not willing to believe that given the way things stand, a freshly minted Palestine would not immediately declare war on Israel, or at least continue to fight, which would be their right, were Israel ever willing to cede that right. It's a sea of Catch-22s.

Ultimately, any self-interested state will eventually understand the benefit of stasis and stability, as far as that goes, but no one can force either side to reach that point. Which is of course stating the obvious. But as long as there are either explicitly or tacitly state-supported objectors on both sides who would rather die than back down or compromise, this will play out for decades more. All borders may be drawn in blood, but at some point enough blood is spilled that the players decide enough is enough. The map is drawn when the blood dries.

I've come across so many people who don't bat an eyelid when it comes to issues like the Burmese regime, the massacres in Congo and Sudan, for example, yet when the subject of Israel comes up they become extraordinarily agitated. Just talking about my own experience.

OTM

I'm also not willing to believe that given the way things stand, a freshly minted Palestine would not immediately declare war on Israel, or at least continue to fight

Not, in itself, a reason for Palestine not to exist. Lots of countries start questionable wars

xp

They're still white, btw.

"I'm also not willing to believe that given the way things stand, a freshly minted Palestine would not immediately declare war on Israel, or at least continue to fight"

Not, in itself, a reason for Palestine not to exist. Lots of countries start questionable wars

― May be half naked, but knows a good headline when he sees it (darraghmac), Wednesday, June 2, 2010 2:04 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

super argument