Moderator: Moderators
CloseHalf + Seven wrote:It's not just the Arab world that is preventing peace.
Gorbadoc wrote:Israel is in a position to compromise if they so choose. Palestine is not.
"The core of the situation has been starkly laid out by Ephraim Halevy, the former head of Mossad. He says that while Hamas militants – like much of the Israeli right-wing – dream of driving their opponents away, "they have recognized this ideological goal is not attainable and will not be in the foreseeable future." Instead, "they are ready and willing to see the establishment of a Palestinian state in the temporary borders of 1967." They are aware that this means they "will have to adopt a path that could lead them far from their original goals" – and towards a long-term peace based on compromise.....Halevy explains: "Israel, for reasons of its own, did not want to turn the ceasefire into the start of a diplomatic process with Hamas."
"Oh...who will stop the windmills in my head?
Who will remove the knives from my heart?
Who will kill my poor children...?
In order that they do not...grow up in the red
furnished apartments..."
("Ending" by Amal Dunqul; translated by Angry Arab News Service)
Wa Post: "Would Hamas recognize Israel if it were to withdraw to the '67 borders?"
Haniyeh: "If Israel withdraws to the '67 borders, then we will establish peace in stages... We will establish a situation of stability and calm which will bring safety for our people.
Wa Post: "Do you recognize Israel's right to exist?"
Haniyeh: "The answer is to let Israel say it will recognize a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders, release the prisoners and recognize the rights of the refugees to return to Israel. Hamas will have a position if this occurs."
Wa Post: "Will you recognize Israel?"
Haniyeh: "If Israel declares that it will give the Palestinian people a state and give them back all their rights, then we are ready to recognize them."
"Israel's unilateral movements of the past year will not lead to peace. These acts -- the temporary withdrawal of forces from Gaza, the walling off of the West Bank -- are not strides toward resolution but empty, symbolic acts that fail to address the underlying conflict. Israel's nearly complete control over the lives of Palestinians is never in doubt, as confirmed by the humanitarian and economic suffering of the Palestinians since the January elections."
"We want what Americans enjoy -- democratic rights, economic sovereignty and justice. We thought our pride in conducting the fairest elections in the Arab world might resonate with the United States and its citizens. Instead, our new government was met from the very beginning by acts of explicit, declared sabotage by the White House. Now this aggression continues against 3.9 million civilians living in the world's largest prison camps. America's complacency in the face of these war crimes is, as usual, embedded in the coded rhetorical green light: "Israel has a right to defend itself."
"There are no boundaries to the hypocrisy that a righteous fury produces. The discourse of the generals and the politicians is moving erratically between self-compliments of the humanity the army displays in its "surgical" operations on the one hand, and the need to destroy Gaza for once and for all, in a humane way of course, on the other.
This righteous fury is a constant phenomenon in the Israeli, and before that Zionist, dispossession of Palestine. Every act whether it was ethnic cleansing, occupation, massacre or destruction was always portrayed as morally just and as a pure act of self-defense reluctantly perpetrated by Israel in its war against the worst kind of human beings. In his excellent volume The Returns of Zionism: Myths, Politics and Scholarship in Israel, Gabi Piterberg explores the ideological origins and historical progression of this righteous fury. Today in Israel, from Left to Right, from Likud to Kadima, from the academia to the media, one can hear this righteous fury of a state that is more busy than any other state in the world in destroying and dispossessing an indigenous population.
It is crucial to explore the ideological origins of this attitude and derive the necessary political conclusions form its prevalence. This righteous fury shields the society and politicians in Israel from any external rebuke or criticism. But far worse, it is translated always into destructive policies against the Palestinians. With no internal mechanism of criticism and no external pressure, every Palestinian becomes a potential target of this fury. Given the firepower of the Jewish state it can inevitably only end in more massive killings, massacres and ethnic cleansing.
The self-righteousness is a powerful act of self-denial and justification. It explains why the Israeli Jewish society would not be moved by words of wisdom, logical persuasion or diplomatic dialogue. And if one does not want to endorse violence as the means of opposing it, there is only one way forward: challenging head-on this righteousness as an evil ideology meant to cover human atrocities. Another name for this ideology is Zionism and an international rebuke for Zionism, not just for particular Israeli policies, is the only way of countering this self-righteousness." ("Israel's Righteous Fury and its Victims in Gaza", Ilan Pappe)
Kaz wrote:I was wrong, it appears it was Israel that broke the June ceasefire by raiding and killing Hamas members within Gaza [link]
Kaz wrote:"Globally recognized terrorist organization" is more imperialist semantic. The qualifiers necessary to make it objectively accurate would also define the Israeli state as a terrorist organization. Israel also spends more money on things that end up terrorizing civilians as well. Of the two, Hamas does less harm to less people than Israel does.
Kaz wrote:You have got to be joking about the warning before bombing. They have done it in the past when targeting Hamas leaders during cock banging contests, but right now I'm pretty sure the 3 (we're up to 3 now) schools and the plethora of random civilian buildings that were hit didn't receive much in the sense of advance warnings. And in any case, in a wide scale attack like now, where the fuck can civilians go? Gaza is tiny as hell and boxed in by concrete walls and a naval blockade, remember? They need water, sewage, electricity, not to mention food. All basic infrastructure that are not working right now thanks to the IDF's "surgical" strikes.
Kaz wrote:About 100 victims were women and children. It's a pretty vague figure because the IDF is still denying entry to journalists even when the Israeli Supreme Court ordered them to let them in Gaza 1 week ago, so we have to go by what a few foreign doctors are reporting. Speaking of doctors, at least 2 hospitals are shut down because their generators have run out of fuel. I wonder how many more will die because of that. Surely more than 15, the total amount of Israelis that have died to rockets since 2001.
Kaz wrote:The Palestinian land as delimited by the 1967 accord. Note that the entire region was almost all Palestinian except a few spots here and there until the British decided to "give" it to all Jews (imperialists love to give shit they don't own)
"Never in human history can an aggressor have made his purpose known in advance so clearly and so widely. Certain of victory, both the Arab leaders and their peoples threw off all restraint. Between the middle of May and fifth of June, world-wide newspapers, radio and, most incisively, television brought home to millions of people the threat of politicide bandied about with relish by the leaders of these modern states. Even more blatant was the exhilaration which the Arabic peoples displayed as the prospect of executing genocide on the people of Israel ... In those three weeks of mounting tension people throughout the world watched and waited in growing anxiety--or in some cases, in hopeful expectation--for the overwhelming forces of at least Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq to bear down from three sides to crush tiny Israel and slaughter her people."
Kaz wrote:That if the situation were reversed does not justify anything Israel is doing. Overpowering a mugger does not give you the right to shoot him even if that's what he would have done had you lost the struggle.
Don't you see the problem with Israel "allowing" aid in? It implies they also get to deny it. What the fuck gives them the right to deny humanitarian aid to Gaza? Nothing. Nothing at all. Nothing that is human. Yet they regularly do it as "retaliation". The WFP is only getting anywhere between 8% and 20% of its daily food shipments through and that was before the attacks. Food that Gaza citizens need. The rest rots away in Israeli warehouses.
Melli wrote:So you at least admit that Hamas is a "mugger" although "murderer" is a better term since their stated goals are related to murder while Israel's are related to national security and its continued existence. And why shouldn't you shoot someone who's mugged you lots and lots of times. Sure the neighborhood is bad and some other mugger will move in, but the hope is that you kill enough muggers (starting to sound like a racial epitaph now) they get the message.
Kaz wrote:Bah whatever. You've swallowed the victimhood bullshit hook, line and sinker.
Kaz wrote:Haha you're hilarious melli. Like it's ME who has preestablished views that are being threatened hahahahahaha. I'm whitey mccracker from north america. If anything I should be pro-Israel by default. But since I oppose disenfranchisement, racism and genocide it sort of makes it hard for me to be.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest