Skip to main content

In case you wanted to understand. . .

.
.

.
.
 title=

------
update, an alternative version of the above map

 title=

In case you want to understand. . .
.
.
(black, blue and light blue areas are Israeli Settlements)
(light yellow areas surrounding darker are israeli controlled areas (called area C) that surround the palestinian population centers.)
 title=

Black, Blue and Light Blue are Settlement and Military holdings of Israel.  Bright Red dots are israeli military bases.

This is the current palestinian lands drawn as a series of carribean islands and atolls in a kind of palestinian archipelago
 title=

It was this development that caused Arafat to leave the peace talk negotiations.  Clinton said that he would get no better deal, but it was a political impossibility to negotiate a position where, if you win, your people live in a balkanized/pseudo-apartheid state.

.
.

.
.

.
.
(these are settlements in East Jerusalem, not shown in the above map)
note the segregation wall (red)
 title=

what is not shown in the above picture are the roads around east jerusalem that palestinians are not allowed to use.

.
.

.
.
(Israeli roads in the west bank not accessible by Palestinians)
 title=
(the forbidden roads of the West Bank, forbidden to palestinian foot and road traffic)
.
.

Israel uses a number of means to restrict Palestinian movement in the West Bank . These means, which are part of a single, coordinated control mechanism, which Israel adjusts to its needs, include the following: permanent and temporary checkpoints, physical obstructions, the Separation Barrier, forbidden roads or roads with restrictions on Palestinian use, and the movement-permit regime. By implementing these means, Israel has split the area into six geographical areas: North, Center, South, the Jordan Valley and northern Dead Sea, the enclaves resulting from the Separation Barrier, and East Jerusalem, an integral part of the West Bank. Movement between the sections and within each section has become, in recent years, hard, slow, and complicated. Also, Israel almost completely forbids the movement of Palestinians between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and impedes Palestinians from entering Israel and from going abroad.

These restrictions have significantly affected the daily lives of Palestinians in commerce, in access to medical treatment and educational institutions, and in conducting social activities. Simple actions such as going to work in a nearby town, marketing farm produce, obtaining medical treatment, and visiting relatives entail bureaucratic procedures and great uncertainty. Often, the end result is that the army denies the application for a movement permit.

there, now you should have a pretty good understanding of the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict.

and of the only way to achieve its resolution, without endless war-turned-into-slow-but-steady-genocide.

----------------------

update: from the World Bank 4 days ago

The World Bank recommended "that continued easing of the economic restrictions on the West Bank, and lifting the Gaza blockade, remain a top priority for the government of Israel.

"Specifically, it urges unlocking of the economic potential of Area C in the West Bank," it said, referring to the more than 60 percent of the territory that is under complete Israeli civil and military control.

----------------

Update 2:For Christy

Water Aquifers in the west bank to compare with maps above.
 title=

-------------

update 3: pre-1948 map of palestine, the populated lands of palestine

 title=

---------------

Update 4: some object to the top map, I am going to put in another that attempts to show the Jewish lands as they were pre 1947.

 title=

-----------
Update 5:  thanks soysauce, was looking for this one.

Originally posted to innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:25 AM PDT.

Poll

Does this Diary help you to better understand the I/P Conflict?

64%75 votes
29%35 votes
5%7 votes

| 117 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  I love how you magically go from that 1947 map (12+ / 0-)

      to the 1949 map, without so much as a mention of what might have possibly led to the difference between the two.  And then call this diary a means of "understanding".

      Here's a hint of the actual events that led to those maps changing.  One side accepted the 1947 map (you know, the one with relatively little green) as a permanent settlement, but then every surrounding nation invaded it.

      •  In fact (17+ / 0-)

        one side understandably and entirely legitimate rejected the grossly unfair 1947 map, while the other accepted it as a "stepping-stone" to further expansion.

        •  So I guess rejecting it (6+ / 0-)

          wasn't the smartest move in history.

          Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

          by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:19:11 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Perhaps true, (11+ / 0-)

            but meaningless, for the obvious reason that Palestinians didn't possess the magical ability to see into the future.

            Although even if they could have done so, and rejected it anyway on the grounds that it was grossly unjust, so what? That would change precisely nothing about the state of the conflict today. Illustrating my point about attempts to distract from the fact of Israel's relentless colonisation of what remains of Palestinian territory through irrelevancies like the strategic wisdom of Palestinian decision-making in 1948.

            •  I disagree. (0+ / 0-)

              But I'm more interested in who you are, where you're from, and why, as an Israeli Jew, you have adopted the views you express here?

              Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

              by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:30:21 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm not here to (12+ / 0-)

                talk about myself, thanks. I'm here, mainly, to talk about Israel's occupation - the one subject you, understandably, won't go near.

              •  Those are creepy questions. (8+ / 0-)

                Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:00:31 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  It's conversation (0+ / 0-)

                  Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                  by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:06:27 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  maybe (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Eiron, borkitekt, Terra Mystica

                    you should just take it on faith that, being  an israeli Jew, he has some very good information that you are not privy to?

                    I think it is pretty hilarious that the person who accused this of being an Anti-Israel diary, who wanted me to put up his version of the map next to the ones at the top, and when I did, it was baisically the same map.

                    I dunno. . . I guess sometimes when reacting from a defensive posture, one sees everything as a threat.

                    All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

                    by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:33:36 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I asked Heath about his background (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MBNYC, volleyboy1, innereye

                      because this issue is about so much more than just maps and facts.  There are deep-seated personal feelings on both sides that go back generations.  When one side claims that they are simply factually or morally correct and the other side is just wrong, then there is little hope of advancing the dialogue.  This happens a lot here.

                      Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                      by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:44:36 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Sure, but it is worthless. (6+ / 0-)

                        Equality is the point.

                        No one should have to lose their home, freedom, life, etc., for some vision or sanctuary, or whatever.

                        Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)

                        by borkitekt on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:59:47 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Again, you're rejecting an important element (5+ / 0-)

                          of the debate.  This not just about rights and maps and borders and historical facts.  This is about who the individuals are, and why they feel the way they feel.  Map diaries and history comments aren't going to solve this.

                          Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                          by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 01:05:52 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  How so? (6+ / 0-)

                            It seems like you are arguing that some sort of nationalistic/religious rationale legitimizes what what one side can do against another.

                            If so, I feel the exact opposite.

                            Care to explain?

                            Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)

                            by borkitekt on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 01:29:51 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'm simply saying that (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Captain C, hikerbiker, volleyboy1

                            there are feelings on both sides that need to be understood.  Your reference to "some sort of nationalistic/religious rationale" shows that you don't understand those feelings.  They don't really have to do with nationalism nor with religion.  They have more to do with a fear derived from being a very small minority in a world that has proven itself to be murderously hostile to Jews.  Israel is thus very different from the UK vis-a-vis Northern Ireland, the Afrikaaners, or any other people, whether oppressing or oppressed.

                            Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                            by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 01:41:34 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What would understanding those feelings (3+ / 0-)

                            (of Jews, as you have now clarified) do for the debate?

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 01:46:32 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  um, facilitate civil discussion? (4+ / 0-)

                            move closer to resolution?  Help each side see the other side's perspective?  

                            If you don't see these as valuable goals, then do you propose that the two sides simply argue back and forth in the hope one side will be shown to be "right", and the other will relent?

                            Of course I'm interested in both sides understanding the feelings of the other side.  

                            Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                            by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 01:51:01 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Again, I'm not seeing how understanding the fears (7+ / 0-)

                            of Jews moves anyone closer to a resolution, or helps each side see the other's perspective. I see how it explains--to some degree--the actions of the Israeli government an the inaction of some Jewish liberals. But so?

                            Ehud Barak said something today:

                            “The world isn’t willing to accept — and we won’t change that in 2010 — the expectation that Israel will rule another people for decades more,” he said. “It’s something that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world.”

                            If I were to put this through the prism of Jewish fear, would I come out with the idea that "the whole world is against us and they are wrong," or "the whole world is against us because we are wrong?"

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:02:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's not just fear (5+ / 0-)

                            it is desire for a Jewish homeland - and what I and most others mean is a Jewish National State as a homeland.

                            To solve a diplomatic problem you have to understand the other side. So what are you going to do to get all the things you propose?

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:06:51 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's not a "diplomatic (9+ / 0-)

                            problem", for goodness sakes. Israeli officials understand the Palestinians "perspective" better than anyone. See Ben-Gurion, for example:

                            "If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?"

                            Or Moshe Dayan:

                            "Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist."

                            "There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."

                            etc. They know perfectly well what the Palestinians' problem is.

                            When we seek to understand why conflict existed in apartheid South Africa, or between Iraq and Iran, or between the US and Vietnam, etc., we didn't pretend that the fundamental problem was a lack of "dialogue", or a failure to see the other sides' "perspective". The US knew perfectly well what the Vietnamese perspective was, just as Israel knows perfectly well what the Palestinians would and would not be prepared to accept as part of an agreement to end the conflict. The problem is not lack of "dialogue", it's that Israel rejects all Palestinian claims to the occupied territories, and judges - thus far correctly - that it has little to lose by continuing to expand the occupation. That judgement is what we have to change.

                          •  Less clear... (4+ / 0-)

                            ....is why the Israeli population accepts this and continues to vote in political parties that facilitate it.  If there's a role for a psychoanalyst in this discussion I suppose it would be there.

                            Policy, Peace and Progress Before Party

                            by Alec82 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:43:48 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Understanding both sides' perspective (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            fizziks, hikerbiker, volleyboy1, innereye

                            I would think, helps us get past early stumbling blocks in the discussion.  And of course it's the early stumbling blocks that are the problem.  The rest can all be resolved with negotiations.  

                            Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                            by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:09:30 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Can either of you tackle the Barak/fear question (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            borkitekt, Terra Mystica

                            I posed above? I mean, if we're really going to get down into it.

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:21:24 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sure but I have to read Barak's (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, Captain C, hikerbiker

                            quote first. BTW, it is not a prism of Jewish fear it is a prism of how the world has dealt with Jews for centuries and still does deal with Israel. It is not fear - it is reality.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:32:36 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The quote is right in my previous comment, (0+ / 0-)

                            from here.

                            And it's not a prism of fear? You just referred to the IDF as " one of the world's most powerful militaries that are experienced and trained," with a diaspora that kicks ass, too, not to mention that Israel is a nuclear armed state. And yet, everyone (Palestinians?) needs to tell the Israelis that they "would act to defend them from existential annihilation."

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:43:02 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The context of the quote is important (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, Captain C

                            read my response...

                            This is where understanding Jewish people comes into play. This is where understanding Israeli history will help you understand.

                            Now I answered your question how about you answer mine. How are you going to get the Israelis and Diaspora to go along with a One State solution? I am curious to hear your response.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:48:47 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What makes you think I support a one-state (0+ / 0-)

                            solution?

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:04:01 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Comments here and there (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, fizziks, Jersey Jon

                            Am I wrong? It seems to me you either support One State or Two-States but with Palestinian Right of Return to Pre-1967 Israel. If that is wrong please tell me what it is that you do support.

                            See here is a perfect example of how understanding might help. If you believe in either of the two above and try to implement them - good luck ever trying to solve the problem. I assume based on tone of post and your comments that is what you support so I react accordingly. If I think you support what I support - then I am more willing to make compromises. Pretty simple really.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:13:06 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  First off, I don't need to compromise with you, (8+ / 0-)

                            since I am not a Palestinian negotiator, and I assume you are not in a position to negotiate for the State of Israel.  I don't need your luck, either. Ehud Barak gets this part--all it takes is for relations with the United States to continue to sour. That will happen as more Americans take a look at the situation.

                            Second off, my hope is for a two-state solution, comprised of two viable, militarized states, shared Jerusalem, no right of return, but of course, massive compensation, recognition and apology for the Nabka and Occupation. An annual day of atonement, perhaps.

                            This is where my conflict is.  I actually do recognize the need for a state for the Jews, even though it is objectively unjust that any part of Palestine  has been given away by a body that had no right to do so.

                            So since the Palestinians and the surrounding Arab nations have pretty much agreed to a two-state solution at about the 1967 lines, what gets my ire up is when people claim that all will be well when the Arabs recognize Israel's right to exist (since that is offered in the Arab peace proposal), or that all of Jerusalem belongs to Israel, or that "Jews deserve a nation just like the French," or "a land without a people for a people without a land," or that Jews are entitled to be there because Jews ruled the area for 150 years 3,000 years ago, or that Palestinians irrationally hate Israel, or that Israel is the only democracy in the middle east, or Jews deserve to be there because God said so, or because Jews have an attachment to Israel -- all of which is basically meant to assuage Jewish guilt for what they know is wrong, what we know is wrong, but believe is necessary anyway--when really, all they should be saying is "we're sorry," and "thank you," and then they should go home, back over the Green Line.

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:48:04 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I wish I could rec your last para 1000 times. nt (4+ / 0-)

                            Buffy: "Your logic does not resemble our earth logic" Xander: "Mine is much more advanced". BtVS, The Wish.

                            by Fire bad tree pretty on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:51:50 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ok so first of all (6+ / 0-)

                            This is where my conflict is.  I actually do recognize the need for a state for the Jews, even though it is objectively unjust that any part of Palestine  has been given away by a body that had no right to do so.

                            That body has no right as you say to give away Palestinian land - but you say it does have the right to adjuticate over Israelis and tell them what they have to do in terms of a giving land they took in defensive wars? Hmmmm......

                            Second of all the Arab League endorsed a plan based on 1967 borders but the Palestinian Right of Return to pre-1967 Israel is still hanging out there. They did not denounce that. Now, perhaps that is a bargaining chip but if that is part of their recognition of Israel - this conflict will not be settled on those terms.

                            It is interesting you are saying they should say "thank you" and "we're sorry". I would not approach the Israelis with that as your negotiating tactic.

                            Here's the thing - what would YOU do to get this land back? You have not said anything regarding that. What do you recommend? What would you give up and what would you ask the Israelis to give up - based on this? Would would you say to them regarding the Western Wall and the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem? What do you do about the Right of Return for Palestinians?

                            Neither of us are negotiators but we can discuss it.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:58:19 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No Volley, no nefarious intent here. (5+ / 0-)

                            That body has no right as you say to give away Palestinian land - but you say it does have the right to adjuticate over Israelis and tell them what they have to do in terms of a giving land they took in defensive wars?

                            Palestine was not a member of the UN when it was partitioned by the UN. However, Israel was a member of the UN when Israel captured and then occupied the Sinai,  Shebba Farms,  the Golan Heights and the West Bank--all of which is in contravention of international law, by which all UN member states have agreed to abide.

                            As for the Arab peace plan, recognition of Israel is recognition of Israel. It's not recognition of Israel plus no right of return, plus Israel gets to keep this or that, etc. Perhaps it is a bargaining chip, as you say. In any case, it's not the other Arab nations' chip anyway.

                            You're right. Perhaps saying "I'm sorry" and "thank you," would be one of the hardest things for Israel to do.

                            What would I do? You didn't ask me that before. You stated, incorrectly, that I believed in the right of return, which I addressed.

                            So what would I do? Exactly what the president of the United States is doing now. And what I believe he will do as the months go on--continue to apply more pressure. Continue to let the American people in on a few more bits of information, like the Petraeus revelation. Everyone has gotten quite used to Israel behaving badly, as if it's normal, but I don't believe that is the character of that nation. That is the character of a country unfettered by natural consequences. I think things will fall into place quite rapidly once there hits a tipping point. As to right of return, Jewish Quarter, Western Wall, Old City--I'm with you.

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:40:20 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sounds like we are on (4+ / 0-)

                            the same side then. I agree with you completely on what to do. Thanks for the response.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:56:57 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well, not on everything-- (4+ / 0-)

                            I actually do think boycotting settlement products and businesses that profit from the occupation (and the publicity that goes with it) is another effective measure. I know you disagree on that one.

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 06:59:52 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I think you are wrong about that (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Captain C, Jersey Jon

                            I know you disagree on that one.

                            Not to speak for someone else, but many of us follow the J Street position that a targeted boycott regime that was just aimed at the occupation profiteers but made an explicit endorsement of a real two state peace and contained a balanced reference to the culpability of all sides in the overall conflict would be supported.  

                            The recent UC Berkeley resolution was not like this.  

                          •  Ok - read it. This one is simple (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, Captain C, Jersey Jon

                            Barak was taking a shot at his Right Wing Coalition mates and their parties. He was saying that the world won't accept the Occupation for much longer and that Israel needs to change it's course - it was in context of relations with United States.

                            That was what he was saying. He was also talking in the context of the Two-State solution.

                            He also was saying that the Occupation is not tolerated in the rest of the world and is a unique situation.

                            Frankly, given his record on this I am surprised he is saying these things.

                            This is internal Israeli political fighting at it's best - and it directly counter to Netanyahu or Liebermann's policies.  

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:41:43 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I know what he said. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable

                            I'd like you to try to answer my question--since it is important to understand everyone's feelings:

                            “The world isn’t willing to accept — and we won’t change that in 2010 — the expectation that Israel will rule another people for decades more,” he said. “It’s something that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world.”

                            If I were to put this through the prism of Jewish fear, would I come out with the idea that "the whole world is against us and they are wrong," or "the whole world is against us because we are wrong?"

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:47:27 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I just answered (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, fizziks

                            what more do you want me to tell you. He said he thinks the Occupation is wrong and that the world and the U.S. won't put up with it. But, since he is unwilling to do anything about it and has furthered the occupation I am not sure why he says this. But it is the latter question you ask is what he is saying.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:51:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  But how do YOU feel about it? (0+ / 0-)

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:03:09 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  me personally? Regarding (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            fizziks

                            what? What Barak said? The Occupation? How it can end? What specifically would you like to know?

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:09:06 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  * (0+ / 0-)

                            Regarding the occupation, is it

                            "the whole world is against us and they are wrong," or "the whole world is against us because we are wrong?"

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:13:15 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Both are right (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, fizziks, Jersey Jon, hikerbiker

                            The world would hate Israel no matter what it does. But in the case of the Occupation - the world is right regarding it's dislike for the Occupation. I just don't think the world gives a flying crap about the Palestinian people - I think they care way more that Israel is oppressing them. And oh yes, I believe Israel is unjustly oppressing the Palestinians.

                            But both statements are applicable. AND if you understood Jewish history, experience and our history of the conflict you would understand that my answer makes perfect sense.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:19:31 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yeah, I'd go with VB's answer (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            fizziks, volleyboy1

                            Everyone knows the occupation has to end.  And if that happens, virtually all Israelis want it to end with two states, not one.

                            Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                            by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:32:42 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  perfect example actually (5+ / 0-)

                            You have demonstrated a perfect example of the dilemma of being an Israeli or a Jew in this world.

                            Whatever we do, people will hate it.  They will accuse us of being too liberal, or too conservative.  Too tribal, or too universalist and international.  Too aggressive, or too weak and pacifist.  Too rich and successful, or too socialist.

                            I think the occupation needs to end.  I think it is a travesty and the Palestinians should have a state of their own.  Two states for two peoples.

                            But I can guarantee you that if Israel were to suddenly withdraw to the 1967 borders tonight and set up a Palestinian state in the WB and Gaza immediately, the number of anti-Israel diaries on DailyKos would remain exactly the same.

                          •  I would sure like for you to be proven wrong on (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            General Choomin

                            the withdrawal scenario.  Or right for that matter.  Or something in between.

                            Netanyahu was brilliant in his tactic of insisting on the "Israel as the Jewish State" wording.  Now this issue isn't about justice, peace, occupation, security, [co]existence, boundaries, etc.  All that now seems to be a distant second to how it feels to be Jewish, specifically in the context of criticism of Israel.

                            btw, you are very wrong about Israel being criticized even should it do the right thing.  

                            "Dega dega dega dega. Break up the concrete..." The Pretenders

                            by Terra Mystica on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:50:23 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Really - let's look at the history of the U.N. (6+ / 0-)

                            Fizziks is dead on here. Israel does a ton of great things from inventions in medicine, sceince, technology, human rights in the M.E. for the GL community. You ever see anything regarding that?... me neither.

                            You may want to be proven wrong and us proven right but for you here in America that means nothing. For us as Jews it is as if the world would collapse if we are proven right. Then all there is, is America and the way things are going with the Christian Right it is just a matter of time when Muslims and Jews are on the outside looking in.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:03:27 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  That's cuz it's mixed with the overwhelming wrong (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Flyswatterbanjo, hikerbiker

                            that Israel is engaged in.  From the UN perspective, it's a vestigial colonial enterprise.  Taking fizziks' hypothetical of withdrawal, you would see a big change.

                            What I want is to see the withdrawal so that I can fight for mutual peace, security, and prosperity.

                            I don't know what this means, exactly.:

                            For us as Jews it is as if the world would collapse if we are proven right...

                            I think it means that if Israel were to withdraw, and the criticism still continued, then you would feel morosely alienated.  I get that.  But that is a different, and combatable, circumstance.  One in which you would find many more friends than enemies.  And btw, Israel as the safe harbor would still exist.

                            Even if Israel did something small, but meaningful and concrete, like simply stop settlement activity, you would see a dramatic shift in the discussion.  New possibilities would open up.

                            What I don't get is the seeming avoidance (probably a bad word) of the obvious wrong, and the huge upside because of the level of criticism.  Maybe that's just the way it is and should be understood as such.  But I think it's also a significant obstacle to be overcome.  

                            Perhaps just agreeing with you would ease your sense of unease on the future, but that would mean overlooking the equally valid Palestinian insecurity in this.  Perhaps I just don't have the words to address it.  I don't know, but the discussion is fracturing and we all need to look inside and find a way to fix it (though maybe increased tension is a sign that something is changing, hopefully for the better).

                            "Dega dega dega dega. Break up the concrete..." The Pretenders

                            by Terra Mystica on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:58:26 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, this is it exactly (5+ / 0-)

                            From the UN perspective, it's a vestigial colonial enterprise.

                            And you could substitute the UN for elements of the far left in America, and the mainstream left in Europe, and the statement would be just as true.

                            And therein lies the problem.  With this attitude in place, "There is no difference between a West Bank settlement and Tel Aviv" as one of peoples' favorite 'anti-zionists' has put it.  That is what people truly believe.  We have reached a point where I don't believe the Arab world or Europe can really be reconciled to the long term existence of Israel.

                            Even if Israel did something small, but meaningful and concrete, like simply stop settlement activity, you would see a dramatic shift in the discussion.  New possibilities would open up.

                            I wish this were true but I sincerely believe that it isn't.  Israel should do small and big things, from freezing settlements to ending the occupation, because it is the right thing to do and the only way they can survive, but I do not believe that doing so will lessen the vitriol with which they are viewed.

                          •  By "enterprise" I meant ongoing expansion, (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Jersey Jon, canadian gal

                            not existence.  But you're probably right about existence in some few, probably irrelevant, circles.

                            The "West Bank is the same as Tel Aviv" is an angry sentiment and equally irrelevant, except maybe as an indication of the downside to a lack of resolution.  Why the extreme views become elevated to insurmountable obstacles to a solution is beyond me.  I think it is to a lot of people here.

                            I understand your last graf.  I hope something happens that can be used to change your mind on that.

                            "Dega dega dega dega. Break up the concrete..." The Pretenders

                            by Terra Mystica on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 06:57:21 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  except that... (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            fizziks, Terra Mystica, Jersey Jon

                            i am not convinced that they are irrelevant circles. or rather, viewed and irrelevant by those in opposition to israel and its policies.

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:16:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Sure, they're not irrelevant (0+ / 0-)

                            they're in charge in Israel, and have been since the occupation began.

                          •  Just bizarre (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Peacenick, Fire bad tree pretty

                            "We have reached a point where I don't believe the Arab world or Europe can really be reconciled to the long term existence of Israel."

                            Sometimes you really have to wonder what the government is putting the water supply.

                            Europe and the Arab League have endorsed the international consensus two-state settlement for over 30 years. Israel's response:

                            "In its 62nd year of independence, as it has every year since March 2002, Israel is taking advantage of its independence to turn its back on the Arab Peace Initiative. This year, too, it is ignoring a plan that offers it normalization in return for a withdrawal from the occupied territories and a just and agreed resolution to the problem of the Palestinian refugees in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194."

                            The only countries unable to see the difference between Tel Aviv and illegal settlements in the West Bank are the US and Israel.

                          •  asdf (3+ / 0-)

                            "Israel does a ton of great things from inventions in medicine, sceince, technology, human rights in the M.E. for the GL community. You ever see anything regarding that?... me neither."

                            Oh give it a rest. I'm sure plenty of good things came out of the apartheid regime in South Africa, but only a disgusting apologist for racism would have gone around praising the apartheid regime for its "inventions" and technological contributions while the apartheid system remained in place. Similarly, while the US was busy destroying all of Indochina, it would have been shameful to go around praising the US for its technological, scientific and other contributions.

                            When Israel stops massacring and dispossessing Palestinians, I'll be happy to praise Maccabi Haifa, hummus, Israeli technological innovations, and so forth. But not before.

                          •  They will live w/out your support..... n/t (0+ / 0-)

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 07:28:31 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Agreed (0+ / 0-)

                            so stop demanding that I (and others) give it.

                          •  I don't demand anything.... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            fizziks

                            I just want to know how you are going to enforce your wishes on them. You know Israelis.... How are you going to set up two states with R.O.R. in one of them and one of them as a Palestinian State? You know that won't happen. SO... how do you intend to get them to go along with that?

                            It's time for us to have that discussion about solutions. It's time for people to show their hands - so to speak.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 07:48:39 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  That's a separate discussion. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Alec82

                            Follow this thread up. My comment had nothing to do with the right of return or anything about "solutions", it was a response to the claim that even without the occupation Israel would come under the same level of criticism, and your similar complaint that the UN never praises Israel for its technological achievement, scientific advances, and so on.

                          •  you misunderstand the situation (6+ / 0-)

                            I think that "Israel as the Jewish state" has a very specific meaning in the context of a final settlement, and it has nothing to do with a dog whistle as you have posited.

                            What it means is that one of the demands of the Arab side with regard to a final status settlement is that refugees and their descendants from 1948 be given the right to settle within Israel.  That is potentially millions of people, and would transform Israel away from being a secular homeland for the Jewish people.  This is an unacceptable condition for a final status agreement.

                          •  What I see is that the extreme hypotheticals are (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Flyswatterbanjo

                            being used to shift the argument away from common ground between people of good faith on this issue.  I don't know why that is happening.

                            The "millions" you mention will never happen.  But some here claim that 20K is too many, a demographic threat, and an insurmountable obstacle because it will change Israel from the Jewish State.  That is ludicrous.  As is the suggestion that with an Israeli withdrawal to the '67 borders, criticism of Israel would continue unabated.

                            So are you saying that if Israel simply acquiesced to reasonable, defined borders that people would keep pressing for unlimited RoR.  A bad precedent/sign of weakness scenario with an inevitable conclusion in your eyes?

                            If so that probably needs to be stated, because the line as it seems to have been drawn is "harsh occupation OK" because some completely avoidable future event might happen.

                            "Dega dega dega dega. Break up the concrete..." The Pretenders

                            by Terra Mystica on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 06:21:05 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't know how much you lurk in I/P threads (6+ / 0-)

                            So we might be coming at this differently in that regard.

                            My experience is that it is not ludicrous, but rather likely that

                            with an Israeli withdrawal to the '67 borders, criticism of Israel would continue unabated.

                            From my now several years of experience in these threads, if we assume that anti-Israel sentiment in these threads is representative of wider anti-Israel sentiment (which I agree is a BIG if) then I see no evidence that ending the occupation will significantly impact perception of Israel.

                            For instance, from these threads, if we take uprates (or lack of HRs in certain situations) as agreement, then a significant number of people believe that:

                            - Israel is a theocracy

                            - In the 50s Israel deliberately settled immigrants from Morocco in areas that would 60 years later be most prone to rocket attacks

                            - Einstein was an anti-zionist

                            - The number of people killed in the Holocaust is possibly much lower than is commonly believed

                            - Various quotes demonstrably falsely attributed to Israeli politicians are actually true

                            - The Iraq war would not have happened if not for Israeli and/or Jewish lobbying efforts (that particular one most recently promulgated by the author of this very diary, I believe)

                            - Jewish Americans are more loyal to Israel than the US.

                            and so on.  There is nothing that will not be believed as long as it is negative about Israel.  IF (again a big if) we take these attitudes as somewhat representative of wider anti-Israel sentiment, ending the occupation will not make much difference.

                            This is my sad conclusion.  It should not be construed as an argument against ending the occupation.  I believe the occupation needs to be ended.

                            Lastly, the Saudi peace plan, IIRC, entailed virtually unlimited right of return, not 20K.  

                          •  If you take all the stupid stuff that gets said (3+ / 0-)

                            in these threads and use that as a basis for shying away from strenuously advocating for change, the status quo wins big.  Much gets said in anger and/or frustration here.  This is an intractable problem in which real lives, lives of people that post here, are being affected.  Both sides.

                            You cite the dim-view-of-Israel things.  It sure does happen.  Some of it is antisemitic, some is not.  Not to get into comparative bigotry, but the list of anti-Arab/Palestinian comments is much longer.  Just in these 400 comments there are four or five uprated "land without a people" or "Palestinians didn't exist" comments.  The negative, generalized, and accepted "Arabs are this way or that" or "raise their children..." comments are too numerous to count.

                            Should the Palestinians here throw up their hands, declare the world's against us, and leave the outcome to the radicals?  I hope not, but would understand if that happened.  Likewise with you, and people with your doubts, but yet somehow still manage to think like you.  I would hope that somehow, someway, that you come to see that the vast majority of people here do want what you want, regardless of the expressed anger or frustration.  I don't know how I can help in that, but if I can I will.

                            There's more than enough shared pain to go around on this.

                            ---

                            I tend to read most of the diaries/comments/links in I/P and related diaries.  So yeah I have some perspective as well.

                            "Dega dega dega dega. Break up the concrete..." The Pretenders

                            by Terra Mystica on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:49:43 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I tipped your comment, but I don't agree (5+ / 0-)

                            with a number of things.  But tipped for respectful attitude and dialog, and hope!

                            Much gets said in anger and/or frustration here.  This is an intractable problem in which real lives, lives of people that post here, are being affected.  Both sides.

                            Many of the things that I am referring to are not said in spur of the moment anger.  They are sometimes diaries, not comments - such as the recent one making claims about the Israel lobby and the Iraq war.  Some are comments that are doubled down on and defended over and over, for months.  And so on.

                            Not to get into comparative bigotry, but the list of anti-Arab/Palestinian comments is much longer.

                            Just flat out disagree with this one.  At least until very recently, comments that are racist against Arabs were universally hidden, while those that are racist against Jews would always get those one or two uprates that would prevent them from being hidden.  (I will agree this is changing lately).  And I do think your numbers are just off.  

                            Here is an interesting metric:  Before I started reading DKos over 6 years ago, being Jewish was a very small part of my identity and a negligibly small part of my political identity.  But it was a real eye opener for me to see such ridiculous half-assed conspiracy theories and Holocaust revisionism  featured on a supposedly liberal website, and over and over.  I had never heard of such websites as wakeupamerica until I saw them linked here.  It turned me from somewhat tuned out of I/P into a political Zionist (Zionist in the liberal Zionist tradition, of course).  Again, it is my feeling that if this stuff is indicative of larger anti-Israel attitudes, then ending the occupation will not go one iota toward ending the conflict.

                            So when it comes to 'strenuously advocating for change', as you put it, I want to see the occupation ended, and for the Palestinians to have a state and the opportunity to live in freedom and develop their land and economy.  I am a member of J Street.  If there was a targeted boycott or sanctions regime that targeted only the occupation and made explicit reference to a two-state peace and Israel's right to exist, I would get behind that.  But beyond those things, I don't think there's much I can do.  I am not going to join the people who, for instance, maintain that there can be no rhetorical defense of Israel against any charge during the two weeks before or two weeks after the anniversary of Rachel Courie's death (yes something to this effect was claimed).  I'm not going to put my lot in with one-staters, or no-staters, or anything like that.

                          •  lol (0+ / 0-)

                            You are putting preconditions on a method to end the occupation when you say this.

                            made explicit reference to a two-state peace and Israel's right to exist, I would get behind that.

                            Which is such an asinine statement.  Why would anyone need to include this load of shit in a simple divestment with regards to companies that sell weapons that directly oppress people?

                            Sorry buddy.  But you sound ridiculous.  Almost like a lukid spokesperson.  Claiming you want peace yet attacking anything that doesn't fill in some ridiculous set of arbitrary preconditions.  Which would only be used in the future to attack said school if they decided to ramp up their activism.  

                            Sad really.  You rather do nothing then the right thing.

                          •  well if you care about ending the occupation (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, canadian gal

                            that is how you can get me (or J Street!) to sign on to a divestment plan.  If me letting you know how you can get my support for a divestment plan makes me a Likud spokesperson, then I suggest you review your knowledge of the political stances of Israeli political parties.

                            But actually thank you for proving my point.  I hope that Terra Mystica is still lurking because you have done so better than I could.  Since you are so quick to dismiss my offer of common ground on a divestment regime because it targets only the occupation, it is clear that your long-term interest is not in ending the occupation, but rather continuing to push against Israel beyond that.

                          •  Common ground is not reached by blackmail. (0+ / 0-)

                            You have no point.  You think you can force your view on the subject by telling people to do this or that asinine thing so that later, if you need it, you can use that statement against them.  What next?  You are going to have a precondition that people eat dirt so that you can use your HUGE influence to help them?

                            Haha no thanks.  From the comments i've seen you uprate in this diary.  I wouldn't want your help in anything.  Since your point is "they need to recognize israel because...".  Which is quite stupid and idiotic since its a fucking college and the resolution is about two companies that make weapons that murder fucking human beings.

                          •  It has to do with recognition plus. (0+ / 0-)

                            A neocon precondition to halt any peace plan.  Since no former peace treaties with it's neighbors had to distinguish with recognizing Israel and recognizing it as the Jewish state.

                            Recognizing Israel as a "Jewish state" is something many Palestinians fear will be used as a future weapon for disenfranchisement or possibly ethnic cleansing.

                            Stop using neocon talking points of recognition plus.

                          •  calling me inaccurate names doesn't make (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, canadian gal

                            me wrong.

                            "Likud"  "Neocon"  "Poopy-head"

                            whatever.

                          •  do you want to add anything about recognition (0+ / 0-)

                            plus?  Or are you going to try to smear the comment by saying it's just petty name calling?  What I said is all factual.

                            But I guess you didn't want to honestly discuss such things anyways.  Thus the "whatever".  

                          •  Don't be silly (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Peacenick

                            "But I can guarantee you that if Israel were to suddenly withdraw to the 1967 borders tonight and set up a Palestinian state in the WB and Gaza immediately, the number of anti-Israel diaries on DailyKos would remain exactly the same."

                            Of course you can't. Putting the word 'guarantee' in itallics doesn't make it any more convincing.

                          •  Without knowing the context... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, canadian gal

                            ...that quote reads to me like Barak is saying that the Occupation will have to end, and sooner rather than later, if Jews want to keep a state that's both Democratic and Jewish-majority, since almost everyone (rightfully) everywhere doesn't support an ongoing occupation these days.

                          •  Really you have to ask that? (4+ / 0-)

                            How are you going to get the Israelis to vacate the West Bank by telling them they are not nice? I mean really, let's have this discussion.

                            How are you going to get one of the world's most powerful militaries that are experienced and trained along with 98% of the world's Jewish population to go along with your suggestion?

                            I would like to see your answer. When Israel was formed they had limited support but the diaspora kicked in big time with support and volunteers. How are you going to stop us when you try to impose a One State solution against our will?

                            Seriously, What do you propose to do?

                            Breaking the Occupation is one thing - Turning the Israel / Palestine situation into a One State solution...... hmmmmm....

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:02:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Um, are we going to get them out of the West Bank (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Terra Mystica

                            by telling them we understand, and really, you're very nice?

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:19:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well they aren't nice (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, JNEREBEL, fizziks, Captain C

                            but telling them (and meaning it) that you understand Israel has to exist and that you sympathize with their right to self defense, and would act to defend them from existential annihilation would help.

                            For one they would sit down and talk with you if they knew you understood where they were coming from - yeah it would help.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:30:09 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So how are you going to get them out (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1

                            I am all for hearing your suggestion.

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:01:31 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Bulldozers (0+ / 0-)

                            I heard Israel has a few of them.  They are armored enough to deflect any of the small arms fire that the settlers could have.

                          •  yes, absolutely (4+ / 0-)

                            A firm commitment from the entire Arab world - and the UN - that Israel has the right to exist in peace within the 67 borders as an ethnic homeland for the Jewish people would do wonders for the pro-peace and anti-occupation forces within Israel.

                          •  How do you expect any Arab entity (3+ / 0-)

                            to recognize the legitimacy of a state that treats the Arabs under its rule like shit?

                            As long as Palestinians have to face injustice at the hands of their Israeli masters, such recognition without any major concessions from Israel would be viewed as appeasement, and rightly so.

                          •  You are absolutely right (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Captain C

                            and this is the problem with the path the coalition is taking. They are trying to destroy the process and create "Fortress Israel"

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:58:42 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I wasn't suggesting they should (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Captain C, canadian gal

                            But in the context of the comment I was responding to,  if the Arab nations (and other nations that have been historically hostile) came out with a plan for a comprehensive peace that included full normalization of relations, not immediately or unconditionally by any means as you are suggesting...

                            but rather in exchange for the '67 borders, an independent Palestinian state in the WB and Gaza, and no right of return to Israel, that would be very compelling for Israelis and friends of Israel everywhere, and would certainly force the government there to the table.

                            As it is though the rhetoric from the Arab world, and much of the rest of the world, is quite the opposite of that, and makes it hard for pro-conciliatory forces in Israel and among her supporters to prevail.  The attitude taken is "they are vowing to wipe us off the map and they deny the holocaust no matter what, so what is to be gained with a peace settlement"?

                          •  The Arab governments, (8+ / 0-)

                            do not have the right to give up the Palestinian right of return. Only the Palestinians do. Thus, it is not their place to make any statements about that.

                            Certainly, the Arab League has stated its preference for what the resolution of this conflict should like, but in the end it will be the Palestinians who make the decisions about which concessions they will accept and not the AL. However, its members have stated that they are fully intent on normalizing relations if a resolution happens. I don't believe Israel can or should expect to get more than this very generous offer.

                          •  Also (6+ / 0-)

                            what with this weird thing where people refer to Israel by the feminine pronoun. Where exactly can one find Israel's vagina and if such a thing exists, is it a major tourist attraction?

                          •  heh. (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Captain C, Jersey Jon, volleyboy1

                            whenever pronouns are assigned to a state, isn't it usually in feminine form?

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:18:36 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Maybe that would work out (3+ / 0-)

                            better than this did.

                            We are out to defeat injustice and not white persons who may be unjust. -MLK Jr.

                            by soysauce on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:20:02 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  People always refer to countries as she (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Jersey Jon, volleyboy1, canadian gal
                          •  srsly? (4+ / 0-)

                            "if the Arab nations (and other nations that have been historically hostile) came out with a plan for a comprehensive peace that included full normalization of relations"

                            They did. It was rejected.

                          •  so dishonest (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, canadian gal

                            why did you cut my quote right where you did?

                            that included full normalization of relations, not immediately or unconditionally by any means as you are suggesting...

                            but rather in exchange for the '67 borders, an independent Palestinian state in the WB and Gaza, and no right of return to Israel

                          •  The Arab League plan (0+ / 0-)

                            doesn't call for a right of return to Israel.

                          •  The Arab world (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Peacenick, Fire bad tree pretty

                            has offered precisely that - not merely recognition, but full normalization of relations. All Israel has to do is withdraw to its legal borders. This really isn't complicated.

                          •  no, the Saudi plan (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, canadian gal

                            also included virtually unlimited right of return in exchange for normalization

                          •  No, it expressly didn't (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            soysauce

                            it could have explicitly called for a full implementation of the right of return, but it deliberately chose not to. Instead it limited itself to endorsing the international consensus, which calls for an "agreed" solution to the refugee question in accordance with UN 194, which provides for return or compensation.

                            This is really basic stuff.

                          •  If that is actually the case (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            heathlander

                            that the Saudi plan does not effectively include massive ROR, then I have been misinformed and I stand corrected.

                          •  I'm hearing dog whistles for (0+ / 0-)

                            population transfer.

                          •  So how is that answer comning (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1, JNEREBEL

                            on what your opinion is and how you plan on solving this issue. You asked me questions and I answered. Will you be impolite and not answer my questions?

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:01:54 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  In answer answer to: (0+ / 0-)

                            So how is that answer comning
                            on what your opinion is and how you plan on solving this issue. You asked me questions and I answered. Will you be impolite and not answer my questions?

                            See this sub-thread above. The comment order has gotten a bit screwy.

                            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:22:48 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  INTEGRATION AND MULTICULTURALISM!!! (0+ / 0-)

                            OVER MY DEAD BODY! - volleyboy1

                          •  I'm sure this wasn't your intent... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, canadian gal

                            ...but this post does read like you are of the opinion that either Jews' views don't matter, understanding said views is not needed in understanding the whole I/P mess, or that in general it's not necessary to understand the views of at least one party to a dispute to understand and solve that dispute.

                            And to answer the question, if you don't understand the viewpoint of the Jews in this imbroglio (or the Palestinians, for that matter), the only way you'll arrive at a lasting solution is through extreme violence, because by (deliberately or honestly) not understanding the viewpoints of each side, you won't have any means to get all parties to whatever otherwise equitable peace you have designed ('you' being used here rhetorically, of course).

                          •  (Just so it's clear... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            ...this is in reply to a comment by Flyswatterbanjo, IIRC, way, way, way upthread.)

                          •  No, I understand perfectly well: (0+ / 0-)

                            feelings on both sides need to be understood.
                            ...
                            They have more to do with a fear derived from being a very small minority in a world that has proven itself to be murderously hostile to Jews.

                            Seems like something is missing- the other side.

                            Creating a murderous world for Palestinians is not the solution, feelings be damned.

                            Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)

                            by borkitekt on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 01:49:16 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes, agreed. I'm eager to hear (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1, canadian gal

                            the other side.  

                            Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                            by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 01:51:40 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  in truth (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Eiron

                            they are actually both fighting for the exact same thing.  It isn't land, exactly.  It is the preservation of their culture and lives and well being of their children and children's children.

                            The beginning of all successful negotiations is based on "common ground"

                            no two peoples in the world share common ground as the Israelis and Palestinian people.

                            All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

                            by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:27:49 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  true true (0+ / 0-)

                        it takes very careful consideration to question assumptions that are ingrained in our schema from our early childhood.

                        it is often very traumatic.  We see a lot of those kind of conflicts here.

                        only a reasoned environment of non-violent communication (i.e. free speech) will allow us to overcome those assumptions and get to the heart of the matter.

                        All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

                        by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 02:22:46 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  All this nonsense (7+ / 0-)

                        about "personal feelings" exists purely to distract from the real issues. This is a political conflict about land and resources, not a group therapy session. When we want to explain why the US invaded Iraq, we don't go off on some imaginative journey into the "psyche" of Americans and Iraqis. We point to the very clear ideological and political factors that underpinned the attack.

                        The case of Israel and Palestine is no different. Sure, there's a psychological dimension, in the sense that people are affected by the conflict. And sure, it plays a role. But fundamentally, Israel is not brutally occupying and colonising a defenceless civilian population out of "fear". Israel - the Israeli state - has for four decades pursued a very systematic, premeditated policy of colonisation and annexation, for political and material reasons. There's nothing obscure about it, and when people respond to clear facts by trying to shift the discussion onto purported psychological "narratives", or by emphasising the need for "dialogue", I can't help but feel that they just don't like what the factual record shows.

                        •  how does one... (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          volleyboy1

                          We point to the very clear ideological and political factors that underpinned the attack.

                          understand the above without understanding the israeli outlook? likewise for palestinians? the answer of course is that it is impossible to the understand ideological and political factors without understanding what is motiving them.

                          "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                          by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:20:08 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  What I'm objecting to (4+ / 0-)

                            is the over-psychologizing of the conflict. State policy isn't a simple reflection of the psychologies of the population. In fact it often directly conflicts with popular sentiments. Israel's occupation policy has been very consistent over a very long period of time. It is premeditated and systematic. It exists because it serves the interests of powerful constituencies within Israel - if it did not, it would have ceased to exist a long time ago. Individual psychologies change; the interests guiding state policy remain relatively stable, as, not coincidentally, has Israel's occupation policy.

                          •  perhaps... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            you mean over-personalizing?

                            i think it would be impossible to over-psychologize. after all any peace agreement is only possible without understanding and mutual agreed upon term. and since there is no better equalizer than humanizing your adversary, understanding what motivates both sides is essential in understanding the conflict.

                            as to your characterization of the occupation, which has indeed been systematic - is not the borg though. the occupation happened as a result of political and ideological factors that drove it, which thus stem from the psychology of its government and populace.

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:42:21 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ugh. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            please do let me know if none of this makes sense.

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:43:56 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It doesn't (6+ / 0-)

                            because there is such a thing as over-psychologizing, and your engaging in it, frankly.

                            The competition for water, for example, has nothing to do with psychology except for the human psychological characteristic of self-preservation, in other words, concern over what will happen if the other side gets more control over water resources. This is in no way something unique to Jews because of their history.

                            Jerusalem is simply a holy city to both groups and has important significance in the culture of both Jews and Palestinians. The fight over it is for the preservation of their ability to control the history and narrative of city and its place in their culture. Again that isn't something unique to either side of this conflict.

                            Psychology would be interesting only in the sense of how these aspects of the conflict are framed and discussed. But there is no special Jewish or Palestinian psychological make-up. The conflict is fairly rational and unsurprising in its twists and turns.

                          •  agree... (0+ / 0-)

                            with both you examples.

                            however i do not think this is a fairly rational and unsurprising conflict. in fact, i would say that its quite the opposite, which has, amongst other factors, contributed largely to the lack of resolution.

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 06:07:13 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well, (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            heathlander, soysauce

                            it depends on what you're referring to. If you're talking about the minutae, such as the fact that Hamas resorted to suicide attacks as opposed to some other form of terrorism, then, I suppose one could make the argument that there have been irrational actions.

                            But in terms of the general contours of the conflict (what is being fought over, the pattern of alliances, the contradictory behavior, etc.) I would say that that's all quite rational.

                          •  it seems to me... (0+ / 0-)

                            that what you characterize as the 'general contours' of the conflict are guided by the minutiae.

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:14:16 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What minutiae (7+ / 0-)

                            determine Israel's position on maintaining control over a stable source of drinking water? What minutiae determine Israel's position about maintaining control over a city so central to its culture?

                            We can needlessly overcomplicate this and say it has to do with the minutiae of Jewish and Palestinian psychologies (if such things can be said to exist), or we can talk about the realist behavior and motivations of both sides, who are interested in having as much power and security as possible.

                            I would rather follow the principle of occam's razor on this.

                          •  i think we are both right. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            yes the outcomes and behaviour certainly are of a more pressing and important nature in the here and now, particularly for the palestinians.

                            but the main objection i have here is dismissing the minutiae or the psyche, or whatever we want to call it as irrelevant.

                            to me, this isn't about (at least in the populaces) peoples who are interested in having as much power  as possible, security maybe, but not power. and if fear and other factors in a long in painful history hinder the changing the outcomes and/or behaviour, then i think its important to focus on promoting understanding and cooperation to offset this.

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:35:12 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well, (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            canadian gal

                            I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying because I didn't say that all the other stuff is unimportant.

                          •  indeed i have n/t (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            unspeakable, volleyboy1

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 09:42:31 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Clearly (5+ / 0-)

                            both sides have motivations. But they aren't reducible to things like "fear", "mistrust", and other personal emotions that might be central to a dispute between two people but become far less useful when analysing the conduct of the agglomoration of powerful interests we call states.

                            State policy tends to reflect the perceived interests of the dominant constituencies in a society. These interests tend to be relatively stable over long periods of time, meaning the policy tends to be relatively stable too (as is the case with the occupation of the West Bank). It's true that the perception of self-interest is always ideological, but it tends at root to revolve ultimately around material gain.

                            So take, for instance, the US invasion of Iraq. Sure, we could look at the psychological state of the American people at the time, full of "fear" and "hate" and so on, but it would be wrong to then try and explain the invasion in terms of those psychological states. The invasion was not a product of "fear" and "hate". It was a calculated policy designed to further the perceived material self-interest of the dominant groups shaping US foreign policy. Analysing the invasion in terms of the increased power, wealth, control, etc. its protagnists sought gain thereby takes us a lot further than analysing it in terms of "fear", "mistrust", mismatching "perceptions", lack of "dialogue", and so forth. The same is true in the case of the Israeli occupation.

                          •  you make... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sofia, heathlander

                            a persuasive argument.

                            i would just add that i still believe that it is impossible to the understand ideological and political factors driving a state without understanding what is motiving them vis a vis the 'psyche.' perhaps now though this is context of your larger point.

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 06:05:23 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  what do you think of Hamas? (0+ / 0-)

                            Please humanize them.  This is what you want right?

                            Anyways, you are wrong in how peace is achieved.  It is through an open and equal platform of mutual respect and trust that peace can be achieved.

                            What you typed:

                            after all any peace agreement is only possible without understanding and mutual agreed upon term.

                            Is completely wrong.

                          •  hamas... (0+ / 0-)

                            indeed are made up of humans general.

                            humans that have and continue to act violently to ends that are morally and politically wrong.

                            as to this:

                            It is through an open and equal platform of mutual respect and trust that peace can be achieved.

                            i think we are saying the same thing.

                            "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

                            by canadian gal on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 09:20:17 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Good well you keep believing that (3+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          livosh1, JNEREBEL, Captain C

                          and tell me how that works for you. As long as you approach the Israelis and diaspora community like that - have fun...

                          See, you may see things that way, and that's fine - you may quote Ben-Gurion and Dayan out of context and that's fine as well. BUT... the factual record shows things as a lot different from what you report.  

                          Now I personally would like to stay at DKos and I am seeing first hand what being a supporter of the existence of the State of Israel gets you when you go against the zeitgeist of the things in I/P. So, I will not comment further. I like this community and the people in it for the most part.

                          So, please don't take my silence as agreement or concession to your argument. I can't discuss things historical here from my perspective and think I can stay on site - so I will walk away from this discussion with you.

                          Suffice it to say - your view of history like that of your friend Dr. Finkelstein is highly questionable in my book. I don't accept your interpretations of events or the people involved.

                          Of course there is much more than "fear" involved. We know from history what happens when Jews don't have their own country. Pretty much the world tells us that.

                          NONE OF THAT JUSTIFIES THE OCCUPATION. ALL OF THAT JUSTIFIES THE EXISTENCE OF ISRAEL.

                          "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                          by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:24:00 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

            •  that is truth! (0+ / 0-)

              so what? That would change precisely nothing about the state of the conflict today.

              Lets keep our conversations civil. I absolutely believe in a peaceful resolution with both peoples.

              All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

              by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:31:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  also you are spamming the site by posting (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jersey Jon, volleyboy1

      a nearly identical diary twice.  http://www.dailykos.com/...

      This is clearly against the rules.

  •  Excellent Job, Really lays out visually the fraud (14+ / 0-)

    that Israel is perpetrating in claiming to be a good faith negotiator.

    Good luck with your diary, the pro apartheid crowd will be along shortly with their lies to shit on it.

    Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

    by absdoggy on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:32:50 AM PDT

  •  Ya. We know but (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    borkitekt, innereye, canadian gal

    its really time to start talking about solutions.

  •  Do you write about understanding China and Tibet? (9+ / 6-)

    Do you have similar charts for China and Tibet?  Or is this just a fixation on Jews and Israel?

  •  No mention of Iran arms shipments to Hamas? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jersey Jon

    Sorry, but your article is very one sided, there is no proof that the maps are accurate or that the logic is not spurious.  Seems like very one sided criticize Israel but the Arabs are always right propaganda to me.  And by the way I support Obama's policy as well as Bill Clinton's two-state solution plan.  

    •  you are right, (14+ / 0-)

      here is no proof that the maps are accurate

      The most detailed map at the top of the diary section (not the intro) from 2002, I am sure the palestinian land situation is much worse now.

      All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

      by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:48:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  "the Arabs are always right propoganda" (12+ / 0-)

      So your criticism is:

      1. No proof that the maps are accurate (but no suggestion on your part that the maps are inaccurate, tellingly).
      1. No mention of Iranian arms shipments to Hamas.  For that matter, the diary doesn't the arms trade at all.  So this is a bit of a non sequitur.  Why should the diary discuss any arms trading?

      Does that about cover it?

      Policy, Peace and Progress Before Party

      by Alec82 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:49:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Apparently, before someone can write a diary they (5+ / 0-)

        must first write diaries on every other topic to establish credibility and impartiality.

        Isn't this one of the AIPAC "talking points" for how to disrupt any criticism of Israel, or Likud?

        The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

        by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:22:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well if there were paid... (5+ / 0-)

          ...AIPAC or other right wing organizations contributing to these threads, I would hope that their posts were more coherent.  

          Policy, Peace and Progress Before Party

          by Alec82 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:37:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Most of the AIPAC army consists of volunteers. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Alec82, volleyboy1

            I'm surprised there isn't more discussion here of the AIPAC support of the Likud's apparently intentional coordinated plan to undermine President Obama's initiative and credibility.

            With even half the Democrats signing letters asking him to back down and what he declares is a national security issue for the US.

            The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

            by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:27:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  HR'd for saying pro-Israel people here... (0+ / 0-)

              are the "AIPAC army".  Unless you don't have a problem being referred to as the KKK army?

              •  He didn't mention any posters here (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                weasel, Eiron, HoundDog

                He's referring to activism generally.  I don't think an HR is appropriate.

                Policy, Peace and Progress Before Party

                by Alec82 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:39:30 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  And of course not, *wink* *wink*... (0+ / 0-)

                  And in referring to the KKK army, I wont be talking about any of the posters here.  And i'm sure I won't be HR'd, accordingly :-)

                  •  He's referring to... (0+ / 0-)

                    ....AIPAC supporters generally, and those with similar views (at least, I assume).  If he was stating that anyone here was working for AIPAC (compensated or otherwise), it wasn't evident in his post.

                    Policy, Peace and Progress Before Party

                    by Alec82 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:51:15 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  You would be HR'd to (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    livosh1, Gatordiet, canadian gal

                    oblivion but that is what happens here. We don't have to be like the other side. Look, I just lost my T.U. status and I had only like 10 HR's compared to major mojo. Many others with tons more HR's still have T.U.

                    I don't know what happened, it's probably a technical glitch but it happened after the Berkeley argument. Go figure - I guess.

                    "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                    by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:03:12 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Yes yes how unfair (4+ / 0-)

                      Because AIPAC is surely comparable to the Ku Klux Klan.  As offensive as I might find being called an AIPAC supporter, President Obama has never given a speech in front of the KKK, to my knowledge.  It's a lame comparison and we all know it.

                      As far as the "what about the other human rights abuses every where else in the world" routine, you've been around too long and you know better.  The accusation that Israel is unfairly singled out for human rights abuses is a common distraction tactic.  It was even one of the reasons cited for opposition to the recent divestment bill.  

                      Policy, Peace and Progress Before Party

                      by Alec82 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:27:03 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  I suspect it (0+ / 0-)

                      could have something to do with telling General Choomin to lie down on train tracks.  It is against the FAQ to even joke about someone's death.  When this was pointed out to you, you refused to retract or apologize.

                      We are out to defeat injustice and not white persons who may be unjust. -MLK Jr.

                      by soysauce on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:23:05 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Nope - Meteor Blades told (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        livosh1, Red Sox

                        me there was no administrative penalty. BTW, that is a fairly common expression - and it means "get away you pest" it DOES NOT mean "go kill yourself".

                        Geez soy - you really believe that? I mean honestly you think I was saying that? That would be ridiculous and a complete misunderstanding of general American colloquilisms.  

                        "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                        by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:43:28 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Maybe where you come from. (0+ / 0-)

                          You still suggested to me to go commit suicide because you did not want to further the discussion.  That is rather low and rude to suggest to a person to go and die because you dislike them.  

                          Saying I am a pest just adds more insult to what you did.  As if I am some sort of bug to be crushed to accomidate your point of view.

                          Anyways, you probably got TU pulled because someone posted a garbage racist comment that a number of Pro-P users hiderated.  Which then had the affect of a number of Pro-I users uprating said comment to get it out of the hiddens.  I don't know if you uprated it or not, but MB said that anyone who uprated it would get their TU removed.

                          Perhaps you uprated said comment.  I don't know.  I just know you wish me dead.  Which, personally, I have a problem with.

                •  Thank you Alec82. I did not even use the (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Terra Mystica, Alec82

                  words "pro-Israel" in my comment.  I try to be extremely careful not to be offensive, or use offensive stereo-types.

                  I have to go off to attend to some errands for a few hours, but I promise to return and respond to every single comment or criticism, and will apologize, if I've made an error, in painting AIPAC with too broad a brush.  

                  I recognize that AIPAC does much excellent work, in supporting many humantarian, and Jewish community groups.  

                  But, can we at a site dedicated to electing more and better Democrats totally ignore, what has been described in writing by many mainstream writers, and even J-Street proponents, as AIPAC's pressures on our Democratic administration?

                  I've consistently criticized American neocons for at least five years here.  If the Likud government uses the same arguments to try to undermine our Presidents and nations foreign policy I beleive it is fair to address this specifically.

                  Also, I believe it is valid to insist that writers recognize the differences in meaning of the words "anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, and policy challenges to the current Likud government.

                  To me, the logic behind this HR would be metaphorically equivalent to saying all Kadima Party members who question Likud policies are anti-Israel.  

                  Am I missin someting?

                  The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

                  by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:53:48 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You are missing that you were saying that (0+ / 0-)

                    a poster here was using an AIPAC tactic.

                    •  That may be true. I did not realize that is a HR (0+ / 0-)

                      worthy incident.

                      Numerous reports allege AIPAC and other pro-Likud elements have launch an agressive campaign to undermine President Obama in the Novemeber elections, including an effort to replace as many Democratic Congresspeople as possible to force Obama to back down to his opposition to the settlements.

                      I just read two authors who have set up a Jews for Palin political action committee and they suggest their strategy is to delay Netanyahu's response to President Obama's new foreign policy initiatives until after the November elections so the new Republican majority can block any further pressure to stop the settlements.

                      On that basis, I believe progressive Democrats need to rise to a more aggressive defense.  

                      I will need to reread my previous comment more carefully Gatordiet.  I just came back from a several hour trip and can not remember the specifics of what we are discussing.  If I innappropriately stereotyped an upstream commenter  But, if it is against the rules to notice that the very tactics that we read about, seem to be used here, it would seem odd?

                      The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

                      by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:32:17 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Gatordiet, I understand from reading elsewhere (5+ / 0-)

                      that you withdrew your HR of my upstream comment, and I appreciate this as I believe it may be the fist HR I received in five years here and thousands of comments.  I'm coming back to these conversations from the comment editor so sorry if this response is redundant to my other responses, or in the wrong place.

                      In the same generous spirit, of community building you've shown me, I would like to re-acknowledge your point that if my comment seemed like allegation that a poster was merely being an "AIPAC stooge" (words I never used), it would be crossing a line, and I apologize if the lack of clarity in my writing even allowed for that as a misunderstanding.

                      I fully support Israel's right to exist within secure and peaceful borders, and also highly value, appreciate and respect, the many progressive Democratic Jewish, and pro-Israel voters in our Party and want to do everything possible to both achieve peaceful solutions for all parties in the Middle East, as well, as maintain the best possible coalition of all Democratic Party voters here in the states.  

                      In that spirit, I appreciate your feedback and learned a great deal from our interaction.  As well as Volleyboy, Alex, and inner eyes, help in facilitating a happy resolution to this misuderstanding.

                      I'm sort of new to the I/P diaries, but now that so many Republicans and others are trying to use these as wedge issues in the upcoming elections, all of us dedicated to electing more and better Democrats need to learn how to discuss these issues in more positive and constructive ways, that also support our President's new and improved foriegn policy.

                      Thanks again.

                      The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

                      by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:55:07 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Excellent comment in the (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        HoundDog, Gatordiet, canadian gal

                        spirit of reconcilliation - Rec.'d

                        "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                        by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:25:38 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  I appreciate that...and certainly no hard feeling (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        HoundDog, volleyboy1

                        s.  And I hope you didn't think i was calling you anti-semitic.  

                        These conversations do tend to get touchy at times...

                        •  I knew you weren't doing that, Once again that (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          volleyboy1, Gatordiet

                          may be another sloppy expression of the idea that I thought you were criticizing me for being anti-Israel, for expressing opposition to the Likud back settlement expansion, and was trying to illustrate the false equivalence of a whole string of tactics.

                          No harm done to me, and I've enjoyed meeting you.

                          Yes, these are delecate and sensitive area.  I admire the courage of anyone who can swim successful in these waters.

                          As I've expressed elsewhere, I strongly support President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the entire Democratic Party, in these matters, especially after the long dark eight years of the Neocon focused Bush Administration.

                          So it is distressing for me to see a group of the Neocon soulmates announce intentions to undermine Obama and the Democratic Party in the upcoming elections.

                          We need to rally our progressive forces to make the advantages of what I see as a superior Democratic foreign policy, even if it is not perfect.

                          Thanks again.

                          The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

                          by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:55:05 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

              •  But I didn't not even use the term "pro-Israel" (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Eiron, Alec82

                Gatordiet.

                I consider myself to be "pro-Israel" fully support, and admire the Jewish, people, and even the government of Israel.

                I believe it is fully possible to by pro-Israel and oppossed to the policies of the right wing Likud government, and AIPAC support of right wing neocon foriegn policy, and pressures on our President Obama to pursue our US foreign policy and national security interests, without being.

                Trying to equate oppossition to the Likud government, to "anti-Semitism, anti-Isrealism, Israeli-delegitimzation, and even anti-Zionism, is not valid or contructive, IMO.  I politely ask to to reconsider you HR of my legitimate comment.

                Do you HR everone here who prefers J-Street over AIPAC?

                The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

                by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:45:34 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You didn't use the term...but you referred (0+ / 0-)

                  to "AIPAC talking points", in terms of what you see posters doing here.  It seems a very thinly veiled way of saying the posters here...basically all of whom would prefer J-Street to AIPAC, of being AIPAC stooges.

                  •  It seems quite a big jump to infer from the (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    volleyboy1

                    phrase "AIPAC talking points" that someone is an "AIPAC stooges."  

                    If had actually accused someone of being any kind of stooge, I would agree that calling me on it may be appropriate.  But, in this case the "very thinly vieled" implication is added by you to my words.

                    We and I have used the words GOP talking points here frequently.

                    And elements of AIPAC have now publically announced in writing a campaign to undermine Obama with a list of talking points, and blogging tactics.

                    Accussing anyone who supports President Obama, or Hillary Clintons mainstream Democratic and US foreign policy, of being "anti-Israel" is one of them, and even it it were not, would still be a logical error, ad hominom attack, diverting attention from the crucial point.

                    So, although I appreciate your civil point, and better understand your issue, I still think your HR of my comment was excessive.

                    However, it is also my hope to help rally a stronger defense of our President and Secretary of State, and all other Democrats in the November election, and help keep as many of our vital Jewish, and pro-Israel Democratic voters of all strips in our coalition.  So in that spirit, let me thank you for your constructive feedback.

                    I will endeavor to be more sensative about this kind of "implication" in the future.

                    The model I strive for is constructive engagement, as exemplified by Mahatma Gandhi, so I am always open to suggestions about how to learn to be more effective in advancing progressive, humanist, and Democratic Party goals.

                    Out of curiousity, I wonder what you think of President Obama's attempts to restart the peace talk?

                    The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

                    by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:43:27 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Gator I would pull the HR (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                HoundDog, Captain C

                Read HoundDog's posts - he is trying to be fair and I don't believe the AIPAC Army comment was meant as anything else other than a comment. We (myself included) have gotten way too thin-skinned here and with the amount of Anti-Semitism floating around it is understandable but I don't think HoundDog is one of them.

                Just giving you my opinion.

                "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:00:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I've removed the HR...and I wasn't trying to say (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  HoundDog, volleyboy1

                  that I thought Hounddog was anti-semitic.  I was just annoyed at (what I viewed) as him referring to posters here as being the "AIPAC army".

                  •  Thanks man - that (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    HoundDog, Gatordiet

                    makes sense. Things have gotten a little crazy here lately... Totally understandable.

                    "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                    by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:19:53 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I see your point Gatordiet, And I apologize if I (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Captain C, volleyboy1, canadian gal

                      accused anyone here of being part of the "AIPAC army."   There is no evidence for this being true, that I know of, and even if there were, it would not be constructive to phrase it that way.

                      I'm having trouble finding my original comment, but based on what you suggest here, I agree that this specific phrase was not helpful and would like to retract it and apologize to anyone who may have thought it was directed at them.

                      While I agree my language here seems sloppy at best, I am still concerned with what I am reading about some group of folks using these issues to target Democrats in the upcoming elections.  Yesterday, I read a long article by two people setting up a "Jews for Sarah Palin" blog, and a few articles in Israeli newspapers suggesting that Benjamin Netanyahu wait out President Obama, while others coordinate a political agenda to break our Democratic Congressional majority.

                      I'm hoping that some of your with greater knowledge and verbal agility will help lead the rest of us to a stronger defense of our President and Party on these foreign policy issues.

                      For most of the last years, most folks at DKOS have tried to avoid getting involved in the contentiousness of these issues, however, I think we all have to face the fact that these are emerging as more immediately consequential election issues, which is why I've been trying to learn how to engage in these discussion constructively.

                      I appreciate your patience and feedback while I work out some start-up chinks.

                      The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

                      by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:08:18 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  We've discussed the talking points (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              HoundDog

              Not AIPAC's specifically, but the guidelines on how to favorably discuss Israeli policy.  I think that those were suggested by the Israeli government? Heath did a diary on that last year.

              I think the political consensus is less the result of AIPAC or any other specific group and more the result of how linked Israel is to the defense industry.  So the in-house opposition isn't that surprising.

              Policy, Peace and Progress Before Party

              by Alec82 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:38:02 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  nope... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Terra Mystica, Alec82, volleyboy1

          its par for the course in most I/P diaries and comments no matter where your 'talking points' originate from : )

          "You can make a profound intellectual statement just by basing your efforts on silliness." -- Donald Roller Wilson

          by canadian gal on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 01:10:25 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  pfft. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mattman, capelza, Alec82

      I'll try that logic in the next 'Iran's got nukes' diary:

      There's no balance here!! Israel has nukuluhr wapons!! This har's one o them anti-Iranian hatin diarys!!!

      Listen to Noam Chomsky's Necessary Illusions. (mp3!)

      by borkitekt on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:23:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  you know (0+ / 0-)

        they do actually.  I studied excess fissionable material from post-cold war soviet bloc.  They have plenty enough plutonium for several warheads.

        All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

        by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:28:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Genocide (10+ / 0-)

    and of the only way to achieve its resolution, without endless war-turned-into-slow-but-steady-genocide.

    Given the Palestinian population growth, it always amazes me at how horribly inefficient Israel is when it comes to genocide.

    •  True dat. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fizziks, volleyboy1, Gatordiet, FreeLancer

      Israel is guilty of lots of things but genocide isn't one of them.  Quite the contrary--Israel has been the principal objective promoter of Palestinian national identity over the last sixty-plus years.

      When your dream comes true, you're out one dream --The Nields

      by Rich in PA on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:54:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Indeed, while Israel is on a path that is both (8+ / 0-)

        horrible for the rights of Palestinians and self-destructive, the genocide charge just isn't rooted in fact.

        •  here is where I get it from, and you are right (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mattman, Red Sox

          I do not see it as outright genocide now, I was saying that current strategies lend themselves to a "no state" solution for the palestinians and the end result of that will be a slow genocide.

          here is the link I promised on the genocide thing.

          http://www.preventgenocide.org/...

          All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

          by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:30:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's certainly a possibility, and I am very much (6+ / 0-)

            of the opinion that Jerusalem needs to get out of the occupied territories lest it find itself in the situation where their only choices are losing their identity as a Jewish state, ceasing to be a democracy, a widespread pogrom, or outright genocide. But I think you're jumping the gun by introducing that in your diary.

            •  I respect your opinion on this (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mattman

              I am just calling it as I see it going, I am more supportive of a single-state shared state solution with a deterritorialized Jerusalem "holy city" as envisioned by theodor herzl.

              All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

              by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:57:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The problem here eye (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                livosh1, JNEREBEL, Captain C, Jersey Jon

                Is that none (ok well like 2%) of Israeli (and diaspora) Jews support a Single State solution. They have fought many wars to not let this happen.

                Do you or any other Single State proponent think the Jews are going to sit down and let that happen?

                I mean this will simply not happen. I don't say this to be mean or derisive or anything else, I am just being honest. Even diaspora Jews would go over to stop that from happening.

                The best realistic outcome is going to be the Two State solution. Israel is not South Africa - Israeli Jews are not South African Whites. You and many others need to understand that.

                Again, and I say this with all due respect - understanding the "Why's" are important.

                "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:19:59 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  if understanding the why's are important (0+ / 0-)

                  can you enlighten me to why,

                  Even diaspora Jews would go over to stop (a single state solution) from happening.

                  It is a touchy subject, but, really why?

                  I mean in a few bullets, nothing too long and complicated (unless you want to write a thesis in the comments section.

                  All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

                  by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:46:59 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'll chime in here . . . (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MBNYC, Captain C, volleyboy1

                    It is tremendously important to diaspora Jews that there be a Jewish state.  Before there was a Jewish state, Jews were pogromed and kicked out of most countries in which they lived.  Historically and morally it is altogether appropriate that Jews have such a state, and it is important, given the history that led to its formation, that democracies support that Jewish state.  

                    Without an Israel, Jews the world over rely on the hospitality of the their host nations, and that hospitality, while currently amiable, has not always been so.  These thoughts are trememdously important to most Jews.

                    We all know what a one state solution means -- an end to a Jewish state.  And that is just not acceptable to most Jews, diaspora or otherwise.  And this is especially true when there is such a simple solution that involves a sovereign state for both sides.  

                    Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                    by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:59:17 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Go with what Jersey Jon (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    livosh1

                    said - I would say as well to look at 4,000 years of Jewish History.

                    This is a tough one to do in a few bullets.

                    "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                    by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 01:16:12 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  It IS happening, per the maps. Israel operates (4+ / 0-)

                  freely in Area A.  Water, land, agriculture is being assimilated everywhere on the WB, irrevocably imho.  Palestinian building permits are not issued, even in the Jordan Valley (why do you think that is if not to permanently encircle a future, Israeli-controlled, Palestinian entity.).  Gaza is worse than an Apartheid-like bantustan, given total, restrictive, and unrelenting Israeli control of everything except internal government.

                  The last publicly available Likud party platform does not recognize a Palestinian state as an option.  Netanyahu's latest pronouncements specifically preclude Palestinian sovereignty as an end state.  Likud and its allies got, what, 55% of the Israeli vote last time.  

                  If there's no sovereignty, that's one state by definition.

                  The list goes on and on as to why one state is the current and foreseeable condition.  It seems you are arguing that Israelis and diaspora Jews will never accept something the vast majority have already accepted.

                  OTOH, there is no dynamic that I can see that suggests, given the current inexorable progress toward assimilating the WB, that a two state outcome is even possible, let alone probable (other than blind faith or inability to contemplate the alternative).

                  Perhaps you could point to some facts that show some reversibility of the assimilation of the WB that would suggest some useful/practical mechanism or willingness for realizing two separate sovereign states.

                  "Dega dega dega dega. Break up the concrete..." The Pretenders

                  by Terra Mystica on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:34:14 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  dual loyalty yet again from volleyboy1 (0+ / 0-)

                  please stop.

    •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Gatordiet

      I think the diarist over reaches when talking about genocide. Apartheid is not genocide. If I was able to peek into Israeli thinking I believe that a two-state solution is what they're looking for as well. They have no interest in absorbing the West Bank entirely and they have no interest in an endless war. Israel does want peace, it just wants peace on its own terms. Israel would be more than happy to shed itself of the weight of the occupation, what all this is is groundwork for slicing and dicing the West Bank so that they get what they want and ultimately ditch all responsibility for the Palestinian populations under their control.

    •  Genocide doesn't require physical destruction (10+ / 0-)

      Or even an attempt at physical destruction, for that matter.  I think you're better off focusing on the specific intent requirement, though.  

      Policy, Peace and Progress Before Party

      by Alec82 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:55:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  This shit again. (0+ / 0-)

      Image and video hosting by TinyPic
      By your own standards you are a genocide denier and should be shunned by the community.  You are a disingenuous hypocrite through and through.

      You have no function other then to hijack diaries with your shitty talking points as well as smear other members of this community.

      Please stop.  

  •  Not sure this is the best approach (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HoundDog, Terra Mystica, innereye

    This is the current palestinian lands drawn as a series of carribean islands and atolls in a kind of palestinian archipelago

    The Caribbean?  It's lovely, and you can have a viable archipelagic nation-state.  I wouldn't be surprised if Israel's image managers take your idea and run with it, to show that the Palestinians don't have it any worse than the Bahamians.

    When your dream comes true, you're out one dream --The Nields

    by Rich in PA on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:55:40 AM PDT

    •  Except one can take a boat between many of the (5+ / 0-)

      Caribbean islands without having to go through blockades, and checkpoints.  Many of these "West Bank" islands are being economically, and socially stangled into remote inaccessable gulags.

      I know you joking and it is even funny Rich, I'm not nagging you.  It's just this situation is so terrible tragic and sad, and we face so much propaganda sometimes, I feel like I have to remind myself of what the reality is.

      Your joke is extra poignant given that one of the controversies going on now, is that the UK has banned an Israeli travel brochure that list several Palestinian holy sights as being in Israel.

      Maybe next, they will offer Disneyland style "Pirate Boat" busses, that "sail" from one isolated region to the next.  

      Think of the jobs for the Palestinians who could do indigeneous dances, and serve cocktails.

      You might be on to a breakthrough here.

      The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

      by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:33:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  This, not surprisingly, bring sme to my solution (0+ / 0-)

        You've imagined, at the end of your comment, a dystopia in which Palestinian identity is reduced to touristic kitsch.  That's my dream for both Israelis and Palestinians within a one-state solution--to de-center the importance of sovereignty by putting them into the EU where most people don't give a fig about sovereignty because their rights are protected, and to reduce cultural identity to the kind of inoffensive superstructural stuff we do (or observe) for fun.  So Pirate Boats for everyone, Palestinians and Israelis alike.

        When your dream comes true, you're out one dream --The Nields

        by Rich in PA on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:30:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You've identified a critical point here. If more (0+ / 0-)

          folks could imagine a future where all could freely and safely travel anywhere in Israel-Palestine the way folks do in the European Union, the significance of these borders, would not bring out the now legitimate life and death fears for even basic survival.

          The non-violent movement among the Palestinians is slowly growing.

          But, Palestian leaders who announced an intention to let those Israeli settlers  who are "legitimately, living in the West Bank, and Jerusalem settlement to apply for Palestinian citizenship, or resident visas, and travel freely across the border to get to work, would gain credibility.

          However, a big problem is that Palestian courts will probably not recognize many of these settlements as "legitimately" owned.  

          So to the extent that folks now fear violence from the other side if they end up on the "wrong" side of the final border, these "negotiations" become almost impossible.

          The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

          by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:37:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  this sounds almost exactly (0+ / 0-)

            what people said about northern and southern ireland in 95.

            http://news.bbc.co.uk/...

            Neo. . . I believe. . .

            All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

            by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:48:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Do you say this as an encouraging parrelal, or a (0+ / 0-)

              cynacal dismissal?  It seems to me that we've greatly improved the situation in Ireland, and I've read several analysis suggesting that both the US and Israel, and many other government could learn a great deal by how the UK government totally changed their hardline traditional response to the IRA for the better.

              In fact, isn't this why George Mitchell was chosen as the special envoy?  Was he not involved in the Irish peace in a very positive way?

              By paying a lot more attention to collateral damage to innocent civilians, and focusing on public safety rather than hard line "anti-terrorist warfare" techniques, the UK was able to convert many away from violent resistence to peaceful cooperation.

              Do I misunderstand your point?

              The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

              by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:51:12 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Bahamas (4+ / 0-)

      I'm from the Bahamas - leave us out of it!

  •  Empty desert developed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jersey Jon

    There is a difference between the current conditions and those of years ago.  The maps since 1946 are misleading.  Most of Israel used to be worse desert than the area north of Roswell, NM.  It was just miles and miles of empty desert land that was not occupied or developed by anyone.  Israelis bought much of the land.  Israel became a sovereign nation and had the right to develop this empty land.  The early settlers developed and irrigated this land and made the desert bloom.  It was not the current situation of unjustified tearing down of Palestinians' houses.

  •  Opportunity lost. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fizziks, MBNYC, Jersey Jon

    Go back to the 1947 UN partition map and see what might have been if the Arabs had agreed to the partition instead of opting for a war of annihilation against the Jews. The ensuing land loss was the direct result of armed agression against Israel.

    We Americans should understand that with our land acquisition from Spain and Mexico.

    •  This is a silly argument. (15+ / 0-)

      It's just not logical for a people to agree to give away more than 50% of its land with nothing in return because an international body of which it is not a member decides they should.

      Actually, more than silly, it's a grotesque argument, because it blames the victims--the Palestinians--for the continued loss of their lands and provides cover for Zionism's colonialist expansion. If only they had agreed to the partition, Israel wouldn't have had to take more land.

      Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

      by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:14:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But similar things did happen elsewhere in the... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fizziks, innereye

        world, i.e. Turkey and Greece, India and Pakistan, etc...

        Granted, those places aren't exactly doing great...

      •  I'm not sure I agree (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fizziks, zemblan

        There's a history here.  There was a proposed solution in the 40's that, had the Arab world accepted it, would have greatly benefited the Palestinians.  There have been a number of other rejections by people in the West Bank, not the least of which was the buildup to the '67 war.  

        And how was the land in question "its"?  Who's the "it"?

        There are a lot of assumptions embedded in your comment that my not be either fair or accurate.

        Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

        by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:30:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  asdf (11+ / 0-)

          "There was a proposed solution in the 40's that, had the Arab world accepted it, would have greatly benefited the Palestinians."

          Er, no. Retrospectively, you can say that they'd have probably been wiser to accept it. But at the time, what Flyswatterbanjo says is precisely accurate: there is no reason whatsoever "for a people to agree to give away more than 50% of its land with nothing in return because an international body of which it is not a member decides they should", and few people anywhere on earth would.

          "And how was the land in question "its"?  Who's the "it"?"

          The people who lived, worked and owned land there, obviously.

          •  Well, clearly, it would have been wiser (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            fizziks

            Retrospectively, you can say that they'd have probably been wiser to accept it. But at the time, what Flyswatterbanjo says is precisely accurate: there is no reason whatsoever "for a people to agree to give away more than 50% of its land with nothing in return because an international body of which it is not a member decides they should", and few people anywhere on earth would.

            Yes, it would have been wiser if they had accepted it, as the maps illustrate.  As to why they should have accepted it at the time, one answer is that it would have avoided decades of war.  Another answer is that Arabs allied themselves with the most genocidal war machine in the history of the world, and lost.  Another reason is that it was a fair compromise to to deal with a global problem that was, at least in part, of their creation.  

            As to your answer to my second question, which is related to the first, you say,

            The people who lived, worked and owned land there, obviously.

            Where are the maps showing what, by your definition, was "Jewish Land" all over the world before WWII, especially in Syria, Iraq, Morocco?  Why is there no outcry for restoration of those rights?

            Also, what happens to "Jewish" land or "Palestinian" land if the people who live on, own and work the land sell it?

            Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

            by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:27:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Um, no. (4+ / 0-)

              one answer is that it would have avoided decades of war.

              That also goes under the heading "Wiser Retrospectively."

              You could probably put it under the heading "Human Behavior Not Found on Planet Earth."

              And again, because it blames the Palestinians for irrationally not wanting to give up their land: "Grotesque."

              Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

              by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:48:58 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  A question (0+ / 0-)

                You could probably put it under the heading "Human Behavior Not Found on Planet Earth."

                To what does this refer?

                Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:54:32 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  1. People do not have magical (5+ / 0-)

                  powers to see that decades of war lay ahead if they do not acquiesce to outrageous demands, and

                  1. People do not fail to fight for their land when the taking of it is unjust.

                  Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                  by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:05:34 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I understand your first answer, thank you (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Gatordiet

                    As to your second, bear in mind that "Jewish Land" was unjustly taken all over the world, and there was no possibility of fighting.  

                    Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

                    by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:12:07 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  But it seems that people (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    fizziks, Captain C, canadian gal

                    think there are magical solutions - like the One State Solution that the overwhelming majority (like 98% or so) Israeli and Diaspora Jews will never accept.

                    "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                    by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:57:26 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  And interestingly enough... (4+ / 0-)

                      ...proponents of the One State Solution never seem to have any sort of credible plan to peacefully convice said overwhelming majority of Jews to go along with their plan, other than telling us we are Bad People and Racists.  One wonders if they actually understand what it would take to get such a One State Solution without selling Jews on the idea.

                      •  Well it is because they (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Captain C

                        mistakenly think that Jews and Israelis Jews are just like South African Whites.

                        It is a complete fantasy to think the One State solution will happen short of a major loss of human life.

                        Seeing as there are no more than a handful of Jews that would peacefully go along with this plan - there are serious issues whether this takes 10 years or 1000 years. But hey, let people have their delusions I guess.

                        "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                        by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:24:47 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  We already have one state in west of the Jordan (0+ / 0-)

                        And I don't really see why they can't all live with equal rights since that is guaranteed under Israel's Basic Law.

                        Buffy: "Your logic does not resemble our earth logic" Xander: "Mine is much more advanced". BtVS, The Wish.

                        by Fire bad tree pretty on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:07:47 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Sigh - I appreciate your (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Captain C

                          outlook but there should not be One State - there should be Two. Israel is wrong to be in the Occupied Territories they should give it to the Palestinians mostly along 1967 lines and it should be a National homeland for them.

                          Jews need their own national homeland. It is only fair the Palestinians should one have one as well.

                          "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                          by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:27:46 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  But since (4+ / 0-)

                            you can't support Palestinian efforts to non-violently bring about two states and because Israel remains unmovable on the issue, we are left with the status quo--one apartheid state.

                            We are out to defeat injustice and not white persons who may be unjust. -MLK Jr.

                            by soysauce on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 06:46:46 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Setting aside... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            volleyboy1

                            ...the unproductive and misleading generalizations here, now would be a great time for you to present a plan of how to persuade the vast majority of Jews to go along with a One State Solution.  Unless, of course, our views don't really matter, and we don't really count.  I'm pretty sure you don't hold that position.

                          •  After telling me to (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL, Captain C

                            If you disagree with the fucking tactic, then just shut up and keep quiet about it.

                            I would not be so sure what she believes.  

                            You're right of course I agree with what you were laying out down below pretty much point by point. You know the days where Jews just get told to "Shut up and deal" are OVER and will never again happen. The sooner people realize this the sooner we can get down to the business of making peace.  

                            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                            by volleyboy1 on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 08:55:37 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  KISS - keep it simple stupid (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            callmecassandra, Peacenick, soysauce

                            The simplest solution right now is full equality under the law in Israel/Palestine. That does not mean we can't have a 2-state solution at some point in the future. But the simplest way to improve the lives of many RIGHT NOW is guaranteeing them their equal rights under law. Now that's an idea any progressive or liberal can support.

                            Buffy: "Your logic does not resemble our earth logic" Xander: "Mine is much more advanced". BtVS, The Wish.

                            by Fire bad tree pretty on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:00:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I agree... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...Israel should withdraw to lines established at Taba or by the Geneva Initiative, and let the Palestinians have their state.  Of course, if there were similar post-withdrawal problems as there were in Gaza, that might lead to further unpleasantness (to understate vastly).  So you may want to think about having, you know, an actual peace agreement first.  Or, as I just said to Soy, if you have a plan for persuading the vast majority of Jews to go along with a One State Solution (other than telling us Jews we're Bad People and Racists, and/or that our views and needs don't really matter), now would be a really good time to spill it.

                          •  WTF? (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            callmecassandra, Flyswatterbanjo

                            I'm talking about what can be done today. The easiest thing that can be done right now is equal rights. That does not preclude a one or two state solution. I don't have a plan to persuade Jews or Palestinians to do anything. All I'm saying is that equality is possible now, whatever the future political configurations are.

                            And where the hell did you get

                            if you have a plan for persuading the vast majority of Jews to go along with a One State Solution (other than telling us Jews we're Bad People and Racists, and/or that our views and needs don't really matter), now would be a really good time to spill it.

                            from my post? Where have I ever called Jews Bad People, Racists or that their views don't really matter? Just get away from me with this shit. First off, I don't capitalize like that. Second, if you are going to fault me for something, fault me for what I say, not this crazy crap you've pulled out of your head and somehow inserted into my mouth. Well that shit won't fit here. Third, I believe in the universality of human rights and since Jews are human they don't get an exemption from the whole universal rights thing. Fourth, why are you getting this frothed up when I talk about equal rights for Palestinians?

                            You are some piece of work. Just stay the fack away from me.

                            Buffy: "Your logic does not resemble our earth logic" Xander: "Mine is much more advanced". BtVS, The Wish.

                            by Fire bad tree pretty on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 07:21:48 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Setting aside... (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            fizziks, mattwb, volleyboy1

                            ...the butt-hurtedness and irrelevancies here, perhaps you could get of your self-serving high horse (I mean, really, who's not in favor of human rights, at least in principle?) and explain what you actually mean by this.  Otherwise, you risk sounding like a Glibertarian expounding on the virtues of Free Markets.

                            While I'm sure (well, I hope; being the internet it's remotely possible you could be a 13-year old with too much brains and time on his/her hands or some plant from somewhere, just like any of us) you don't actually think all Jews are Bad People and Racists, it's my strong impression (and no, I'm not going to look up and do a scientific survey of all of your I/P posts) that you haven't posted much at all on your understanding of the Jewish perspective in all this and what it means for an eventual equitable peace.  If I'm wrong, now would be a great time to link to such a post.  Plus, you do have to admit that a lot of the anti-Israel rhetoric here comes down to the fact that Jews Zionists are Racists and Bad People, and shouldn't have self-determination.  Not that it's said in so many terms, and in fact it's often couched in the opposite, but that's what it effectively means in the real world.

                            As far as faulting you (and no, I don't assume you hold every view that the Pro-P/Anti-I crowd here does, and yes those camps are distinct, but very overlapping), you do realize that your "Equal Rights" (quoted here because I want you to be sure that I'm quoting you, not for scare-quote purposes) demand (entirely reasonable, and even very desirable on its face) echoes a lot of the One State Solution rhetoric, which basically boils down to "Jews, just give up your state.  Nothing bad will happen this time.  Really."  So, to use your terms, I'm "faulting" you for not being willing to explain what, in real-world terms, you mean by "Equal Rights" here, and for not explaining in real-world, logistical terms what you want and how to get there.  Also, given that in the above post, you didn't show any indication of understanding the Jewish position, or that it matters other than lip service, perhaps you could have given such an indication.  Not that you actually don't (or don't care to) understand, or think it matters, but I have no way of knowing what you think other than what you type. If I could read minds, I'd be a retired billionaire by now (and probably trying to bribe everyone possible into a sustainable, peaceful co-existence).

                            It's nice that you believe in the universality of human rights.  I'm sure almost everyone here does.  It's nice that you apply it to us Jews also; some of the heated rhetoric around here gives the impression that not everyone here does believe in equal rights for Jews, at least in practice (since this apparently needs to be made specific and clear, I'm not accusing you personally of spouting such rhetoric, though again, I have no desire to quote mine your posting history to find a nice out-of- or in-context remard to the contrary).  I'm sure that in most cases, it's just a case of people not thinking through the implications of what they're saying.  However, when you start throwing that term around the way you have, it does give the impression that you're thinking you're better than your interlocutors, who by implication are not for equal rights.  This, of course, is counterproductive, just as it would be counterproductive of me (and the rest of us on the Pro-I side, such as it is) to assume that everyone on the Pro-P side has a secret agenda to, if not push Israel's Jews into the sea; to at least deprive them (and us, when you include the Diaspora) of the right of self-determination, even if the solutions put forward would in practical terms lead to just that.

                            Oh, and I'm "frothed up" (nice projection there) because very often "Equal Rights for Palestinians" actually translates to "Jews get the shit end, again."  I'm not saying that this is what you mean by it, but if you can't show basic understanding, if not sensitivity, to this, and the Jewish half of this equation in general, then you really don't have anything to offer in terms of actually making things better.  I'm pretty sure that, with the exception of a few posters, most of whom have been banned, pretty much everyone on the Pro-I is very much in favor of equal rights for all (this is why we're mostly very strong advocates of a prosperous Palestinian state, along 1967 lines with some minor, mutually-agreed up adjustments), and to insinuate otherwise is counterproductive at best.  

                            And if you don't want to interact with me, than don't comment on threads that I'm involved in.  Otherwise, suck it up and deal.  Seriously, just walk away.  Of course, such an approach is inimical to your stated goals of equal rights (and presumably justice), but why keep at it when it's hard, and when people you're dealing with might not trust your side (regardless of your individual views).  It's much easier to just go back to the echo chamber.  So, is it more important to make progress, or feed your butt-hurtedness?

                            Oh, and I really don't care what you do or don't capitalize.  It's not about you anyway.  It's about two groups of people locked in a death grip who need to find a way to live together without killing each other.

                            But again, if you want to tell us just how your Instant Equal Rights For All (With No Apparent Need To Look At The Past or Present From All Sides) plan will actually work in terms of logistics, now would be a good time to get past feeling insulted and actually tell us.  Seriously, what does this entail in the real world, as opposed to some Platonic Ideal?

                            Oh, and as a fig leaf, I'll let you know, directly and here, where I stand.  I'm in favor of a plan along the lines of   The Geneva Initiative, implemented yesterday if possible.  I'm also in favor of deducting a dollar from U.S. aid for every dollar Israel spends on the settlements (I think Volley even got that idea from me; I know I got it from somewhere else originally), and for Obama to lean on both sides, as heavily as possible, to get them to, however grudgingly, come to an equitable agreement and thus a just peace.

                          •  Wow. Your reality is really different from mine (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            soysauce

                            To my knowledge, I've never interacted with you before. You are the one who responded to me with so much conclusion-jumping that there must have been sharks involved. If you really want to know what I think go to my comments and dairy history and read. But if you wanna keep jumping to conclusions and bringing me craptastic stuff like 'equal rights for Palestinians means Jews get shit on' (which makes me wonder about your logical capacity and language skills) I'm quite happy to go back to not knowing you exist.

                            Buffy: "Your logic does not resemble our earth logic" Xander: "Mine is much more advanced". BtVS, The Wish.

                            by Fire bad tree pretty on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 07:53:42 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  If you're going to... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...(deliberately or otherwise) miss and distort what I've written, yes, there's no further point in interacting.

            •  asdf (12+ / 0-)

              "Another answer is that Arabs allied themselves with the most genocidal war machine in the history of the world, and lost.  Another reason is that it was a fair compromise to to deal with a global problem that was, at least in part, of their creation."

              That's offensive bullshit. The Palestinians played no role in, and bore no responsibility for, the Holocaust, so you can fuck off with that right now.

              It wasn't a "fair" compromise at all - it's only "fair" if you don't give a shit about the rights of the majority of Palestine's population, which didn't want to give away most of their land to state designed explicitly to exclude them.

              "Where are the maps showing what, by your definition, was "Jewish Land" all over the world before WWII, especially in Syria, Iraq, Morocco?  Why is there no outcry for restoration of those rights?"

              OK, if all you're going to do is keep asking "why don't people focus on x issue" then I see no use in continuing this conversation. We've been through why that's a stupid argument before, not that it should have been necessary, and I see no need to do it again.

      •  What land? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jersey Jon

        There never was a country called Palestine. That part of the Middle East was part of the decaying Ottoman Empire and officially named South Syria. The Arabs living there were subjects of the Ottoman Sultan and later Britain that was given a mandate over the territory as a winner's prize after WWI.

        If an international body that inculcates the law and morality of civilizations (East and West) cannot make a ruling that settles disputes, who can? To dispute this is to completely destroy the rationale of the United Nations and its charter.

    •  What would have happened would have been Israel (0+ / 0-)

      with a 45% Arab population.  Exactly the condition that people, today, are saying would lead to violence.

      Do you think that a half-Arab population of Israel would have been sustainable, as partitioned?

      "Dega dega dega dega. Break up the concrete..." The Pretenders

      by Terra Mystica on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 01:25:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  genocide is a loaded term but... (0+ / 0-)

      war of annihilation against the Jews.

      Not a loaded term.

  •  Dude. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Red Sox, zemblan, volleyboy1

    Learn how to format images. Your maps are breaking my browser.

    It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

    by MBNYC on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:04:01 AM PDT

    •  geez sorry, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mattman, borkitekt, heathlander

      not sure what you mean by formatting, I had to leave some bigger to allow the detail of the map to be readable.  

      All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

      by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:36:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Don't apologise (7+ / 0-)

        he doesn't actually care about the formatting, he just doesn't want this topic to be discussed at all on this site.

        I think the first map you used isn't accurate - or, at the very least, isn't clear - but the others are very helpful. Thanks for posting.

        •  Shorter you: (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fizziks, Red Sox

          "Nothing matters to me except flinging my propaganda, and rules are for little people".

          Funny. I've always found the English to be so polite.

          It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

          by MBNYC on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:14:55 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nothing left but xenophobia. Again. (2+ / 0-)

            Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

            by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:06:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Whereas (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              volleyboy1

              your name-calling is what, morally superior?

              It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

              by MBNYC on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:23:35 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  ; ) (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                heathlander, Terra Mystica

                What name did I call you again? I believe I was addressing your argument, not you.

                Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 12:30:16 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Here's how I see it. (0+ / 0-)

                  Heathlander is, to the best of my knowledge, a British subject. That's fine. But when I'm overseas, I don't get involved in the governance of other countries, because it's none of my business. I certainly don't stand myself in Trafalgar Square and tell the English that they're ignorant fools for, oh, say, their policy in Ulster.

                  That wouldn't be polite.

                  Hence, my underlying issue with him. Aside from the fact, of course, that I generally dislike ideologues.

                  It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

                  by MBNYC on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 03:15:37 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Are you sure you want to argue this? (4+ / 0-)

                    Because it follows logically from your point that you (all of us and the personal you) should not 'get involved in the governance' of other countries - like Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, China etc. So are we going to expect that you won't criticise these countries as well?

                    Buffy: "Your logic does not resemble our earth logic" Xander: "Mine is much more advanced". BtVS, The Wish.

                    by Fire bad tree pretty on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:28:06 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  It actually doesn't follow. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      fizziks

                      At all.

                      If I were to sign on to, say, Baidu.cn, and proceed to trash the Chinese for their treatment of Tibet, I wouldn't expect much friendliness either.

                      And besides, if anyone had the temerity to post daily diatribes about the Saudis, let alone a daily cavalcade of these, we all know what would happen. They'd be denounced as 'anti-Arab racists' or whatever the terme d'art is.

                      It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

                      by MBNYC on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:28:45 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  asdf (4+ / 0-)

                        Point 1: You are saying a British subject cannot criticise the governance of another country because it's none of his business. By extension, none of us can criticise another country of which we are not a citizen. Now if this critique of yours only applies to heathlander (and not all non-citizens) then your position has way more problems than I have time to point out to you. The politeness or lack thereof is irrelevant since I am an American citizen and yet you seem to have no problem being impolite to me.

                        Point 2: I'd really like you to find a link where someone has criticised the policies of an Arab regime and been accused of being 'anti-Arab racists'. More likely (as I have shown you before) many of us here do not support the policies of anti-Arab regimes. The fact that you have been proven wrong on this and still try to sell this line is something I find perplexing. And the fact that the links you once provided me to prove the horrific nature of some Arab regimes (as if that's something I don't know!) were themselves filled with anti-Arab racism and essentialism shows me that you find it difficult to recognise when racism is directed at Arabs.

                        Buffy: "Your logic does not resemble our earth logic" Xander: "Mine is much more advanced". BtVS, The Wish.

                        by Fire bad tree pretty on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:50:54 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I agree (2+ / 0-)

                          with most of your sentiments, but I disagree with this:

                          shows me that you find it difficult to recognise when racism is directed at Arabs.

                          He finds nothing wrong with anti-Arab racism because in his view Arab cultures have contributed little to world civilization. He simply doesn't care, and no amount of pointing out how his discourse or his assumptions are racist will change the mind of a Eurocentric bigot. In the circles I travel with, boasting of one's Eurocentrism is a very odd thing to do, but, there all all types of people here on this blog, and apparently MBNYC has no trouble embracing Eurocentric discourses that most educated liberals would shun. It also seems true that for him, Arabs are the ethnic or civilizational exception--in other words, targeting them with essentialist racist discourse is perfectly acceptable because their societies are not progressive. It is straight out of the Geert Wilders playbook. That's the kind of racist "progressivism" we're talking about here.

                          •  I've been around and round with MBNYC (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sortalikenathan

                            on this issue ad nauseum and it seems that you may be right.

                            So much for my hopes to build bridges here.

                            Buffy: "Your logic does not resemble our earth logic" Xander: "Mine is much more advanced". BtVS, The Wish.

                            by Fire bad tree pretty on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 02:58:50 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  There's only (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Fire bad tree pretty

                            so much effort that can reasonably be expended on someone with such reductive views. But as I said, it is an interesting example of where so-called "progressivism" merges with a variant of intolerance (dare I say fascism?) that is most visibly expressed in Europe today with the anti-Muslim and anti-Arab sentiment that is widespread there. The idea that Arabs and Muslims and their values, civilizations, cultures, are explicitly at odds with the values of "progressive Europe" is now a mainstream idea in Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium, and elsewhere. It is most often on display from so called secular progressives when an issue comes up like the minaret banning in Switzerland; they couch their xenophobia and anti-Arab sentiment in arguments about protecting "our way of life" or the so-called homophobia and cultural incompatibility of Islam and Arabs with "Western" values. Nevermind that most Muslims in Europe vote for the liberal political blocs. For me, living in Germany has been one of the oddest experiences of my life. Because on the one hand there is this official discourse of being vigilant about fascism, and in particular anti-semitism. But on the other hand, I can't tell you how often I've heard anti-immigrant sentiment directed against Arabs, Turks, Muslims, from the very people who two seconds ago proclaimed a commitment to progressive principles and fighting racism. The lesson in all of this is that Arabs and Muslims are the exception; they are the targets of the new anti-semitism, and frankly, I'm no longer willing to accept that people don't know better.

                        •  Fine. (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          fizziks, canadian gal

                          Let me walk this back a little bit.

                          First, my argument was clear: if people from outside the U.S. decide to get engaged in our political process, de minimis, they should try not to be condescending twits. Your 'extension' is absurd, and you do not get to decide what is or is not relevant to me. Like I said: when I'm overseas, I behave differently than heathlander does here in virtual America, on a site dedicated to electing more and better Democrats. I'm actually somewhat surprised that you would hold that to be a controversial argument, but then again, this isn't about principle, it's about far more narrow team loyalties.

                          Second, if I follow this thread a little south to nathan's freshest spew, that's exactly what I was talking about. 'Eurocentrism', 'Geert Wilders', 'racism', 'Eurocentric bigot', and all that. Because nathan's not ethnocentric to a fault, I presume.

                          Third, as per the usual, this is the process here: MBNYC says something related to I/P. You show up, or daud, or nathan, or whomever, launch into ferocious attacks on my motives, character, whatever, and the discussion becomes, presto, about me, as it has become here. Now, it would flatter me if I thought I was the only target of that calculated ire, but I'm not. It's red sox, livosh, volley, whomever, and the intent is always the same: shut down and deter any pro-Israel voices that disturb the narrative.

                          And given that you saw fit to rec that aforementioned spew, I don't see, frankly, any residual value in engaging with you. Have a pleasant day.

                          It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

                          by MBNYC on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 07:32:10 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  What's (0+ / 0-)

                            most puzzling to me is how you could be surprised that an Arab might associate you with the politics of Geert Wilders considering the offensive, bigoted tripe you link to. Someone needs a clue, and it's not me.

                          •  QED. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            fizziks

                            Smears, invective, and victimhood, all rolled up into a nice pungent package.

                            And coincidentally, since I see that Germany is not tolerant enough for your refined sensibilities, you should take note of the fact that that country has taken in hundreds of thousands of refugees from Muslim countries, and that the head of the Green Party there and an MEP is an ethnic Turk, Cem Özdemir. Berlin is the largest Turkish city outside of Turkey proper. The German government pays for Islamic religious instruction in public schools. There's a mosque being built right now in Cologne for 4,000 worshippers.

                            And, my mother's people even have great cake, right, buddy?

                            It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

                            by MBNYC on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 11:18:50 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ha! (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            soysauce

                            I love this comment. Really, you've outdone yourself once again! I mean, when one observes the racism directed against Muslims (Turks and Arabs) in Germany, something you could not possibly have experienced, and something that I am actually experiencing, you resort to a full-throated defense of the German state!

                            You really do make my points for me, so I thank you for that.

                            I do enjoy the German pastries and desserts, and there is much to commend about Germany today. I'm sorry if you took my comments as some kind of all-encompassing condemnation of all things German. It was not. But to get so defensive when one points to the anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant sentiment here in Germany demonstrates a kind of willful denial of reality that again, most liberals would be hesitant to reveal. Just today I was walking in beautiful Tiergarten in central Berlin and saw graffiti saying, "Islam raus". If you bother talking to Turks and Arabs here, or even German leftists, they will  confirm what I say. And oh, that mosque in Cologne? It hasn't exactly been met with open arms:

                            http://www.spiegel.de/...

                            There is some evidence that he is right. A SPIEGEL survey last December found that, were a minaret referendum held in Germany, 44 percent would vote in favor of a ban while 45 percent would not.

                          •  Listen, cupcake. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            livosh1

                            I've had a very long day, so I'll just say this: your experience of the Federal Republic reflects what you brought there, not what is. That's not defensiveness, it's a desire to perhaps bring some perspective to your portrayals of a place I know rather well, that you paint perhaps a bit too monochromatically.

                            It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

                            by MBNYC on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 09:27:52 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ah yes (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            soysauce

                            I'm just imagining it when I'm accused of shoplifting. All of my experiences must be in my head.

                            :)

                            Have a wonderful day.

                  •  I don't get it. (3+ / 0-)

                    I certainly don't stand myself in Trafalgar Square and tell the English that they're ignorant fools for, oh, say, their policy in Ulster.

                    This is the internet. Any of us could be anywhere. Do you think Heathlander is standing in the middle of Times Square typing on his ibook about how America sucks? And if so, so what?

                    Are you Israeli? You seem to comment about their government a lot. Are you Iranian, too?

                    Geology is the study of pressure and time. That's all it takes really, pressure, and time.

                    by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 08:00:50 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  It's really very simple (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Peacenick

                      if the US stops interfering in other countries - specifically, if it stops enabling the massacre and torture of Palestinian civilians - then people in other countries will be far less inclined to comment on US politics.

                      Just as the British government can't complain about others commenting on their policies while it continues to murder people in Afghanistan and Iraq, to cooperate with torture flights, to dispossess the residents of Diego Garcia, to arm some of the most brutal regimes in the world, and so forth.

                      Not complicated.

      •  There's a section (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fizziks

        of the FAQ that deals with images. I usually size my pics to 600 px or put in a tag 'width=100%'.

        Of course, it's useful to learn stuff before you post diaries.

        It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

        by MBNYC on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:08:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  it's like trying to surgically separating highly (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HoundDog, Terra Mystica

    entwined Siamese-twins, with a shared nerves system and circulatory system.
    hmmm... maybe we dont need obsolete politicians to work on a peace accord, maybe we need some neuro-surgeons instead...

  •  Have you shown the Israeli Gaza withdrawal? (5+ / 0-)

    Israel withdrew from Gaza, is that on the maps?

    •  I didn't really look at that (0+ / 0-)

      the gaza situation is a whole nother topic

      All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

      by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:40:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  How is the Gaza Strip (4+ / 0-)

        a whole other topic?  Are Gazans not Palestinians?  Isn't Gaza supposed to be a part of the two state solution that this whole thing is about?  Do you think it was fair not to include the withdrawal in a diary of this sort, which carries the trappings of objectivity?

        Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

        by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:43:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  some would say that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Eiron

          the withdrawl from gaza was because the israelis realized they couldn't control it from within and had to withdrawl so that they could impose the blockade.  This diary is only to show the current maps of the west bank situation.

          All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

          by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:59:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And "some say" President Obama (0+ / 0-)

            is from Kenya.... "Some Say" is not an accurate statement anywhere but Fox News. What is real is relative. I have heard everything from the reason you stated before to Sharon wanted to dump Gaza so he could prove things wouldn't work to Israel was really trying for peace.

            Who knows, none of us were in the Israeli cabinet at the time and we don't have the notes of the meeting to withdraw from Gaza. Otherwise it is all speculation.

            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:26:38 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  There was no "withdrawal" (13+ / 0-)

          from Gaza - the settlers were removed, and the troops were redeployed around the borders (although not totally - Israel retains a permanent military presence along the Gaza-Israel border, which puts a huge chunk of Gaza's agricultural land out of use for Gazans). But it retained control of Gaza's airspace, border crossings and population registry - that is, of everything and everyone going in and out of Gaza. Hence, no one apart from the Israeli government recognised the 'disengagement' as a "withdrawal" - on the contrary, the relevant human rights organisations and UN bodies and officials have all declared that Gaza remains under Israeli occupation.

          •  Plus the IDF re-enters Gaza anytime they like. (5+ / 0-)

            The humanitarian crisis going on now in Gaza should be on the national news every night.  

            At least the UN has been escalating the attention provided to the area.

            The economic blockage imposed by Israel should be ended immediately.  Most especially, for food, and medical supplies.

            The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

            by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:52:56 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Are you being serious Jersey Jon, or is this a (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          capelza, heathlander, budr

          snark?  You seem to be placing demands on this diarist that are not placed on any other writer here?

          This diarist has already gone well beyond the normal averages of time and data content put into a diary.

          Why don't we criticize him for not including a preface of maps of all previous colonialist occupations around the world to provide historical context.

          Are maybe we should criticize inner eye for not including maps of mineral deposits, population densities, average real estate value.

          One important and timely issue, is many Palestianians have complained about is that in the presumptive "land swaps" envisaged by the Likud government, they have unilateral announced they will exchange non-specified remote desert land, for prime Jerusalem settlment real estate on an equivalent area basis.

          How would this be fair?

          I don't agree with all inner eyes says, but the attempt to add map data to a discussion more frequently carried out on assumptions, should be appreciated by all of us who are search for peaceful solutions to this crisis, don't you think?

          The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

          by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:50:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Israel still occupies Gaza, by (9+ / 0-)

      any reasonable interpretation  of the law, because it controls borders and all access.

      Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

      by Tom J on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:42:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  One of the issues with the diary (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    richiedoc, fizziks, Red Sox, zemblan

    shows up in the very beginning with the 4 maps purporting to illustrate Palestinian loss of land.  What is meant in the first two of those maps with the phrase "Jewish land"?  And what is meant by "Palistinian land"?  

    I think the diarist's bias is shown right there in the beginning?

    Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

    by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:15:27 AM PDT

  •  The conflict consists of two sides (5+ / 0-)

    and if you want to really "understand" the conflict you need to read Israeli and Jewish publications and websites...not just anti-Israeli ones.  If you want to continue reposting this diary you might want to start reading the Jerusalem Post and the Middle East and Terrorism blogsight.

  •  thanks for the maps. nt (5+ / 0-)

    Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. -MLK

    by Tom J on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:36:54 AM PDT

  •  Why Use Map Showing Borders in 1940's (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fizziks, sandbox, canadian gal

    That is convenient for proving your point.  But I am not sure that is any more relevant or intellectually honest than going back to 1900, 1800 or the time of Moses.

    •  there is a pervasive myth (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Deward Hastings, Terra Mystica

      that palestine was pretty much unpopulated.

      All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

      by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:47:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And how do the maps refute that myth? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fizziks, canadian gal

        Other than by declaring certain lands within the Palestinian mandate "Palestinian" and other land "Jewish" (whatever that means)?

        Hill? What hill? No one said there was going to be a hill . . . . Was there a sign?

        by Jersey Jon on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:02:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And Who or What Authorized (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fizziks, canadian gal

          all these boundaries?  In the old days the boundaries were mainly determined as outcomes of wars, I imagine, because the United Nations is a modern something or other.  I'm  not necessarily advocating that as an accepted norm, I'm just saying...In fact, and this is just speculation, the British mandates were justified for various reasons but usually at the heart of them in the Middle East were imperialistic impulses. Now however, they are being served up as "go-bys" as if they are any more legitimate and "right" today as they were when they were implemented.

        •  The maps do require more discussion. I hope (7+ / 0-)

          inner eye will collect all the additional insight and "upgrade" any future republication of them.

          The exact border of any final resolution is going to be the most challenging sticking point.

          Most folks have accepted that a two-state solution, is the way forward, but land swaps for settlement, continquity, transport corridors, etc. is going to be darn well impossible.

          Apprently, a growing number of Europeans, seem to be agreeing with the notion that a unilateral declaration of Palestian independence with international recognition of the 67 borders, may be the only way to give the Palestianians sufficient bargaining power, and the Likud government sufficient motivation and urgency to provide enough convergent force to move forward.

          The 40 year old Likud strategy of delay to create settlement "facts on the ground" is still perceived to be their best outcome.

          Unless, the international community engineers different motivational structures, a negotiated outcomes seems doubtful.  And, although, I fully support Obama and Clintons latest attempts to encourage the parties to get back to the table, it seems doubtful that Congress, and American election pressures will allow this administration to escalate the pressure to the threshold necessary to break the status quo.

          So, sadly, unless others in the international community will have to take the lead, and the Palestinians do something to change the rules of the game, we will probably be stuck in this current mode for decades to come.

          But at least, the some in the Palestian leadership are starting to learn that an agressive non-violent strategy is the only way they can make real progress.

          The PA plan to declare unilateral independence next August, looks encouraging, and if it is quickly recognized by the international community, and perhaps even the US, it could be a big breakthrough.

          Perhaps, even enough that the PA could win elections in Gaza over Hamas.  Their fractured leadership is one of the current biggest obstacles on their side.

          President Obama could probably get away with appearring to cautiously and reluctantly go along with this if it was initiated by the Palestinians and international community.  

          But, the political blowback to him appearing initiate this would probably be impossible to sustain.

          But, once Likud, could see that their Best Alternative to a Negotiated Outcome was no longer better than delay, we might finally see some urgency and greater sincerity about negotiating the land swaps to keep the most critical settlements within Isreal.

          The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

          by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:24:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Good comment HoundDog (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            HoundDog, fizziks, Captain C, canadian gal

            Whether I agree or not with everything you said - and I want to read it again as it is a long comment, it is clear you are starting to understand this more than the "average bear" (Yogi Bear ref.).

            It is good that you recognize both sides and the unpleasant realities facing them. I wish I recommend more - but I only have one rec. to give.

            "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

            by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:53:36 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thanks for the goodwill, patience, and tolerance (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              volleyboy1

              volleyboy1.  I don't know if even I agree with everything I've said.  It's a new set of ideas I've been reading about that seems to have the potential to introduce some creative new elements to a system seemingly stuck in a dead end paralysis.

              Since you've been so kind as to rec the comment, and even compare me favourable to Yogi, let me share with you some possible counter-arguments to these ideas I've read about from the Likud point of view, that may have some validity.

              Firstly, the Minister of Interior, whose name I can't remember doesn't like them at all, and has issued several warning to the Palestinians of grave consequences if they attempt a unilateral declaration of independence, including threatoning to withhold all intermediary financial payments, as well, as canceling any previous treaty agreements.

              While this much seems like predictable posturing the more profound concern is that any such talk by President Obama, the European Union, the Quartet, or probably even us here, will encourage the Palestinians to think they are better off not conceeding to pressures now to rejoin talks or make concessions, as they can sit back and get a better deal waiting for the impatence of the international community.

              I have to think about this more, however, I am encouraged to see new thinking based on the presumption and committment of the Palestinians to non-violence.

              Sadly, up until now, the Palestinian leadership has fallen seriously short of what is needed for peace, almost to the point that it is difficult not to use the words incompetent.

              Plus, with Hamas in charge of Gaza, and still committed to violent outcomes, or at least not consistently articulating any committment to work withing a peaceful framework, some question if it is even possible to expect any reliable committments, or leadership on the Palestinian side.

              Despite these valid concerns, the possibility that a new generation of less corrupt, and more competent Palestinian leadership could gain sufficiently credibility both internally, and externally, if they pulled this off, that they might be able to win internal election against Hamas in Gaza would be a big plus for everyone -- including all peace hopeful Israeli's including Likud.

              The current plan, seems to be to use the next year, trying to build more credible PA security forces and institutions, and then unilaterally declare independence in August.

              I think they should use the Forth of July, build statues of Gandhi and George Washington in Ramallah, and East Jerusalem as a way of gaining US support.

              The sticky part of the plan would be that pending some unexpected breakthrough in the border talks, declaring the 1967 Green line as the provisional or ultimate borders would require the Quartet, UN, Nato, and possibly even US and Russian troops to secure the borders.  At first this would just be in "non-disputed" areas, but eventually, to be taken seriously, the US would have to join the international forces in insisting that the IDF pull back to whatever transitional borders are agreed upon.  

              This is where our domestic political blowback would be collasal.  Which is probably why August 2011 was chosen rather than July 4, 2010.  

              But, if the Palestinians could develop even a minimally competence public relations campaign they would invite everyone to their Forth of July Indepence Day celebrations where the Boston Pops would play the traditional Esplanade concert, and U2 would play "It a Beautiful Day"  to the back drop of fireworks.  Maybe even get Barbara Streisand to sing Memories or something inspirational.

              :-)

              The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

              by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:18:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Not sure I agree with you (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                HoundDog

                here but I have to say - you are thoughtful. It's nice to see someone who actually reads both sides in these threads.

                "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:30:51 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  The declaration of the 1967 Green line as the (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                volleyboy1

                default border is only a transitional negotiating position to motivate Likud, and other pro-settlement Isrealis to see more urgent advantages to seriously negotiating land swaps as compromises.

                About 120,000 of the settlement in the West Bank will probably have to be given up.  But, many hope that perhaps as many as 300,000 of the illegal settlements built in the areas of what used to be the West Bank, but has now been "refined" as Jerusalem might be swapped for other areas, to give Palestinians more contiquity, and transit corridors between Gaza and the West Bank.

                Also, many in the Arab communities, insist that the Golan Heights be returned to Syria as part of the total solution.

                None of these compromises is acceptable or even imaginable by significant percentages of the existing government coalitions.

                What possible incentives do they have to voluntarily give these up?  Virtually, every day, one can read those insisting that no compromise is possible on settlements or the division of Jerusalem.  And the expectation, and explicit plan is that Benjamin Netanyahu wait out Obama, and the Democrats who are being targeted in the November elections.  

                The hope is that if they can neuter our President and the Democratic majorities in November, they will be "safe" for another decade.

                But, more "progressive" thinkers do not believe this status quo can be maintained for another decade.

                At current birth rates, in 20 to 30 years, Palestinians will represent a majority of the population in the combined Israel - Occupied Terrotory regions.

                Even the leader of the Labor Party, asks how can Israel stay both Democratic and Jewish under these conditions?  

                The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

                by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:31:31 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Right the situation is untenable (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  HoundDog

                  and I think you are right regarding the coalition. They are looking at the Alon plan or "Greater Israel" from the Med. to the Jordan as their plan. That is where American Jews come in. We have to convince President Obama we are supportive of him and then the coalition can't wait out the U.S. Gov't.

                  At least no matter what you are showing strong understanding of what is happening here.

                  "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

                  by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 04:39:02 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Thanks volleyboy1, I appreciate your feedback. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    volleyboy1, canadian gal

                    I've learned a lot from your diaries and comments.  

                    What is the best,  most respectful way to refer to the group of folks, mostly in Israel, who favor the aggressive "Greater Israel" expansion plans (from the Mediteranian to Jordan, and Northward as well?

                    Every "label" I've heard used seem problematic.

                    I realize that not everyone in Likud believes this, but this seems like a better label than "Zionist" which seems more loaded.  As several generations of good people seem to have grown up thinking this was truly synonamous with "pro-Israel."

                    To the extent that people from this group start to intervene to defeat Democrats in November, don't we need a respectful way of talking about it and responding?

                    BTW, I support their right of free speech, and even their right to "engage" in our elections, as we can't complain about this if we wish to discuss the relative merits of Kadima, Labor, or alternatives to Likud, in their elections.

                    But, I wish I knew how to do this without risking the many possible confusing misunderstandings the choice of the wrong words could engender.

                    The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

                    by HoundDog on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 05:18:59 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

  •  Innereye - the maps are (11+ / 0-)

    interesting but they don't explain the Palestinian/Arab - Israeli conflict in anyway, shape, or form. They show the results of a series of conflicts regarding what happens.

    This does not explain anything, it fills in a picture for one side of a narrative. Honestly, it does show the progression of an occupation that is destroying Israel internally as well as oppressing the Palestinians but to understand the conflict it takes more than looking at maps.

    "No Groin.... No Krav Maga" - The Simpsons

    by volleyboy1 on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 09:47:59 AM PDT

    •  I think that maps are mostly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Basho

      impartial.  Being just layouts of reality.  They challenge the pictures in our minds against what is the physical layout of the territory.  THis then shows us where things stand as they really are today.

      All liberal values can be summed into a single issue: The dismantling of the American Middle Class. Publicly Funded U.S. Politics NOW!!!

      by innereye on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 10:02:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  For maps (12+ / 0-)

    the UN OCHA is an excellent source - it has a whole Map Center. See, for instance, this map illustrating the fragmentation of the West Bank in 2007:

    Photobucket

    The UN OCHA concludes that Israel is constructing in the West Bank

    "an entrenched multi-layered system of obstacles and restrictions, fragmenting the West Bank territory and affecting the freedom of movement of the entire Palestinian population and its economy. This system is transforming the geographical reality of the West Bank and Jerusalem towards a more permanent territorial fragmentation".

  •  I see Naked Aggression (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Peacenick, innereye

    I see no response from the US, either.

  •  This animated map (7+ / 0-)

    is the most useful representation in my opinion:

    We are out to defeat injustice and not white persons who may be unjust. -MLK Jr.

    by soysauce on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 11:37:45 AM PDT

  •  Meanwhile, from the Democratic party.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    volleyboy1, canadian gal

    ...that actually represents both mainstream and moral Democratic thinkers....

    Our great speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has this to say on Israeli independence.

    Today, we join the people of Israel in celebrating 62 years of independence.  Israel’s founding stands out as one of the greatest achievements of the 20th century – and it will continue to shine as a beacon of hope long into the future.

    Israel’s story is one of resilience in the face of terror, bravery in the face of danger, and courage in the face of threats to its very existence.  A nation forged by pioneers, it has demonstrated an unbending resolve to succeed and thrive.  A country sustained by immigrants, it has pursued a path of innovation, promoted creativity, and embraced diversity and new ideas.  A people bound by the hope to be a free nation in the land of their ancestors, Israel has fulfilled the promise of one of Zionism’s founders, Theodore Herzl: 'If you will it, it is not a dream.'

    Just minutes after Israel declared independence, President Harry Truman made the United States the first nation to recognize the Jewish state.  In that same tradition, America’s support for a future of peace and security for Israel remains unwavering.

    In Congress, we will keep standing united to advance causes critical to Israel’s future: aid to ensure Israel's strength; an enduring peace between Israel and her neighbors; and measures to halt Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons which are a threat to Israel and indeed, the entire world.

    For more than six decades, our nations have been bound together by common values of democracy and freedom.  For the decades to come, we will continue to share a special, unbreakable bond with Israel’s government and its people.  On behalf of all Members of Congress, I wish all Israelis a happy Independence Day.

    If missiles were falling where my two daughters sleep, I would do everything in order to stop that. -- President Barack Obama

    by JPhurst on Mon Apr 19, 2010 at 07:26:20 PM PDT

  •  As the old IBM advertising campaign slogan went, (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    capelza, Peacenick, soysauce

    … "Not just data—reality." A picture map is worth 1000 words. Thanks, innereye.

    The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war.

    by lotlizard on Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 03:02:17 AM PDT

  •  Maps to mask the Truth: (0+ / 0-)

    "Israel  is not a temporary inconvenience to be demonised, destroyed or wished away, but the independent, legitimate and permanent nation state of the Jewish people"

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site