Israel and Palestine Conflict Heats Up

[uuuhname]

It matters because the Arabs live in equality in Israel today, sometimes getting benefits surpassing even Jews. Yet if the roles were reversed, the Israeli's would have been wiped out by now and definitely there would be no civic or political equality. What the Arabs want is a racist ethno-state of their own, one where their status as the racial superiors is enshrined in law, as it was before 1948. What they lament is the loss of power and status they had and what adds insult to injury is being defeated militarily by a race they considered subhuman and totally subordinate and inferior. A lot of this could be solved if Arabic culture could accept Jews as equals to themselves. But as this rent dispute turned war shows, that is a bridge to far for the Palestinians.

It is stunning how you can write this and at no point does it cross your mind that you sound just like these people you're demonizing. good lord this is pure distilled islamophobia, gross levels of Islamophobia. like it's incredible you can sound just like members of the Israeli government who think Palestinian women should be killed "for giving birth to terrorists." this is disturbing.

- - - Updated - - -

Objectively untrue. You're lying.

https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/2...nd-persecution

no but that's Israel! ignore the west bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem all of those areas where the actual human rights abuses are happening.

[s_bushido]

This is just straight-up, unadulterated racism. You're essentially perpetrating a form of blood libel, here, just targeting Arabs rather than Jewish people.

After over a hundred pages of this garbage, I still can't comprehend how "the Arabs are bad, so we'll make endless excuses to allow the Israelis do the exact same thing we think they would be doing to them!" gets justified in people's minds.

[downnola]

Which Ethnostate are we talking about? A theoretical Palestine or Israel? And what? Is this going to get into some "Jews are really Khazars" kinda stuff with history debates and such?

I have no idea what you're trying to argue here. To be frank, I don't think you know either. I'll let you elaborate before I comment further.

[Theodarzna]

I have no idea what you're trying to argue here. To be frank, I don't think you know either. I'll let you elaborate before I comment further.

I am just curious first about your beliefs about the historicity of the existence or lack there of a Judea for example. That seems like a highly odd thing to deny ever existed given historical attestation at the time. So i am curious where you were going with that.

As for Palestine, I am curious if it would be an ethnostate? And if the laws of Palestine would resemble the laws of the region say before 1948? Or before 1914? Or before the 1860s? None of it is what we might call equality or not a racial hierarchy. So, what gives here?

- - - Updated - - -

After over a hundred pages of this garbage, I still can't comprehend how "the Arabs are bad, so we'll make endless excuses to allow the Israelis do the exact same thing we think they would be doing to them!" gets justified in people's minds.

I wonder why the Arabs get to be sanctified and we are never allowed to ask serious historical or even current questions about what the Arabs want and why? And more over why there seems to be different standards for Jews but not Arabs.

I know what would happen to the Jews had the Arabs won in 1948, and 1967, they let the world know in publicly accessible speeches and actual government policy. Hamas has a charter, you can read it, as does Fatah and Islamic Jihad. We can actually go back and read the records, we can read the laws that were in place and we can read the reports from Ottoman times and the British Mandate era. Arabs had no intention of living as equals with Jews, the only arrangement they would accept is Jewish subservience and submission or Jewish extermination. That was made clear then as it has been reiterated to this day. Heck the leaders of Egypt, Syria and Jordan are all very quotable on this, as is the old Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.

Thankfully for all parties the Israeli's keep winning and Arabs in Israel are fortunate to have such generous and forgiving neighbors who grant them citizenship, voting rights, let them buy property, lease government lands and even do so at a discount and Arabic religious clerics both Muslim and Christian get stipends from the State for their services. Gosh, given what the Arabs vowed to do to the Jews had they won ANY of these wars, it is truly amazing how merciful and forgiving the Israeli's actually are.

[tehdang]

It is odd how much Draco-Onis seems to want to imply Arabs living in Israel are like what? blood traitors or something?

I seriously await some clarification.

I mean the Israeli's could just say "Woe to the Vanquished" the way the Arabs planned to do; shortly before genocidal wave the Jews out as the UN slept because the UN only exists to protect the Arabs from military defeat; they never seem to raise a stink when it looks as if the Arabs might win and wipe the Jews out, that is just shrugs and 'oh wells'.

The UN is a bit backwards on the Israel/Middle East issue.

[Theodarzna]

I seriously await some clarification.

The UN is a bit backwards on the Israel/Middle East issue.

I've always found it curious, the UN never calls for peace or a ceasefire when the Arab side is vowing rivers of blood, or when Egypt was claiming to be bombing Tel Aviv and news that in fact the Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian army had been routed and thoroughly annihilated in like 48 hours. When it appeared like a massive confederation of Arab state armies were about to annihilate the Israeli's and finish what a certain German leader had attempted, the UN was dead silent and disinterested in ceasefire's and peace. It is only ever when the Jews are clearly winning that calls for peace ring out.

[Xarkan]

I've always found it curious, the UN never calls for peace or a ceasefire when the Arab side is vowing rivers of blood, or when Egypt was claiming to be bombing Tel Aviv and news that in fact the Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian army had been routed and thoroughly annihilated in like 48 hours. When it appeared like a massive confederation of Arab state armies were about to annihilate the Israeli's and finish what a certain German leader had attempted, the UN was dead silent and disinterested in ceasefire's and peace. It is only ever when the Jews are clearly winning that calls for peace ring out.

It is more than half a century ago, perhaps deal with the world now instead..

[ati87]

I've strongly disagreed with Easo in this thread, so when I agree with him on this point, you should take notice.

Arab citizens can own stuff in Israel. The issues come about with regards to stuff like these historical claims of ownership that Israel is unlawfully pushing into East Jerusalem ("unlawfully" because East Jerusalem isn't Israel, and Israeli courts don't have jurisdiction). They respect Jewish claims of pre-1948 ownership, often despite really shitty and probably faked documentation as with the recent Sheikh Jarrah horseshit (the courts refused to allow original Ottoman-era documentation from archives in Istanbul showing that the "ownership" was actually just a rental agreement, in these particular claims). They do not respect any Arab claims to any such properties in Israel proper.

And when it was a few hundred displaced Jewish residents mostly in East Jerusalem, versus three-quarters-of-a-million displaced Arab Palestinians all through what's now Israel, and those displaced Jewish people were compensated with their choice of vacated properties and that alone should have voided any such claims moving forward, it becomes super clear how this is really all about ethnic cleansing, not property titles.

Yet you can not truly talk about ownership if there is always a realistic risk of losing that said ownership.

[Easo]

I've always found it curious, the UN never calls for peace or a ceasefire

To give you an explanation. You know all those resolutions UN made about Israel, making it a "record holder" and some people love to mention those?
It is actually very simple - all Muslim states, many of which have oil, add countries dependant on that oil so they obviously won't vote against. Then add Soviet block and countries dependant on handouts from them (including oil again, lol), since the Israel chose West after both USA and USSR supported it's creation (Soviets also had a massive brain drain when Jews emigrated en masse). That is how you get a majority vote.

Do note - 60ties, 70ties were a different time, with different standards/worldviews. The overall UN "blocks" have changed a bit today.

They don’t in the eyes of the Israeli courts.

I too love emotions!
So you want to tell me that if an Arab citizen in Israel oficially and legally bought an appartment or a car, it could be taken away by some Jew and he would lose? Sure, whatever you believe.

[Draco-Onis]

I've always found it curious, the UN never calls for peace or a ceasefire when the Arab side is vowing rivers of blood, or when Egypt was claiming to be bombing Tel Aviv and news that in fact the Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian army had been routed and thoroughly annihilated in like 48 hours. When it appeared like a massive confederation of Arab state armies were about to annihilate the Israeli's and finish what a certain German leader had attempted, the UN was dead silent and disinterested in ceasefire's and peace. It is only ever when the Jews are clearly winning that calls for peace ring out.

Maybe because the UN just got established in 1945 and barely had a peacekeeping force until 1948, I mean I can go into more details into how that was not really feasible but keep living in imaginary land.

[Theodarzna]

It is more than half a century ago, perhaps deal with the world now instead..

Gosh its crazy how selective we are about when and how we can discuss the past, We CAN discuss the past if it presents the Arab position in the best most angelic light one can conjure out, but we cannot discuss it in any way to adds some nuance to the story. Or have any actual record of how we got to a point where an Arab family finds it to be morally reprehensible that they have to pay rent to someone of another race. And apparently "Anti-Racist" people are firmly supporting these Arab families outright bigoted sense of supremacy and injured ego at having to pay rent to someone of a different, and in their mind inferior, race.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe because the UN just got established in 1945 and barely had a peacekeeping force until 1948, I mean I can go into more details into how that was not really feasible but keep living in imaginary land.

So in 1967, when the Egyptians were broadcasting to the world that they were bombing Tel Aviv and a combined Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian army was amassing and vowing to completely annihilate the country, no calls for peace and intervention, only when it became obvious the Arabs had been utterly routed and the bombing of Tel Aviv was pure fiction did the UN go "Oh We better step in!" strange.

- - - Updated - - -

To give you an explanation. You know all those resolutions UN made about Israel, making it a "record holder" and some people love to mention those?
It is actually very simple - all Muslim states, many of which have oil, add countries dependant on that oil so they obviously won't vote against. Then add Soviet block and countries dependant on handouts from them (including oil again, lol), since the Israel chose West after both USA and USSR supported it's creation (Soviets also had a massive brain drain when Jews emigrated en masse). That is how you get a majority vote.

Do note - 60ties, 70ties were a different time, with different standards/worldviews. The overall UN "blocks" have changed a bit today.

The UN is functionally worthless in that respect. They vote as a bloc to demand a stop when it looks like they are about to loose totally and be forced to actually surrender and discuss terms. I seem to recall how the Jordanian King was hysterical on the phone in 1967. My money is the UN would have simply ignored it if the Arabs got their way and we got Holocaust 2 as their leaders had all vowed to do and public opinion polls show is a very popular position. What a "Useful" organization the UN is.

I too love emotions!
So you want to tell me that if an Arab citizen in Israel oficially and legally bought an appartment or a car, it could be taken away by some Jew and he would lose? Sure, whatever you believe.

Hey, according to NGO's they fund raise from the Saudi royal family and the Qatari governments news agency the Israeli's drink the blood of Arab babies and subject Arabs to cruel human rights violations like asking them to pay rent to Jewish landlords if they signed a lease agreement. What the actual laws say be damned!

[Theodarzna]

So you aren’t aware of what started this? https://apnews.com/article/jerusalem...3a9e77243ab3b8

Evictions tend to happen if you refuse to ever pay rent, and no, racial resentment towards your landlord and finding it beneath your dignity to pay someone a rent check because you view them as inferior isn't a good reason to refuse to pay rent.

[downnola]

I am just curious first about your beliefs about the historicity of the existence or lack there of a Judea for example. That seems like a highly odd thing to deny ever existed given historical attestation at the time. So i am curious where you were going with that.

I was very clearly mocking the claims that the land was given to ancient Israelites by god, and that there is no archaeological evidence that the book of Exodus happened as told. It's odd that you would assume I'm contesting the historical existence of Judea, or the genetic history of Jewish people, especially when I didn't do so in my post.

As for Palestine, I am curious if it would be an ethnostate? And if the laws of Palestine would resemble the laws of the region say before 1948? Or before 1914? Or before the 1860s? None of it is what we might call equality or not a racial hierarchy. So, what gives here?

It's kinda hard to theorize how bigoted a nation might be when it's current being settled into non-existence.

[Theodarzna]

I was very clearly mocking the claims that the land was given to ancient Israelites by god, and that there is no archaeological evidence that the book of Exodus happened as told. It's odd that you would assume I'm contesting the historical existence of Judea, or the genetic history of Jewish people, especially when I didn't do so in my post.

I am unsure why you'd bring up the very distant mythic stuff when the plainly obvious facts of say Hebrew being a dialect of Canaanite and of the Canaanite language family with El Elyon and Elohim and Yahweh and all that stuff being Gods shared by other Canaanites and by all accounts Hebrew as a language would have been mutually intelligible to any other Canaanite speaker in the area. Plus Judea and Samaria and even coins of a historic Israel and the language link is pretty well established archeologically. Plus Jews have lived in that region of Canaan before and after the Bar Kokhba revolt, it isn't as if Jews were vacated from the area after Bar Kokhba and then reappeared in the 1880s.

So I am curious what your point is? I mean, the Al Aqsa Mosque exists because of an interpretation of a dream Muhammad had were he road a Pegasus to heaven. I don't think really anyone here is basing anything off of these really ancient and half remembered 'Mythic History' that likely isn't what it alleges to be.

[Endus]

Evictions tend to happen if you refuse to ever pay rent, and no, racial resentment towards your landlord and finding it beneath your dignity to pay someone a rent check because you view them as inferior isn't a good reason to refuse to pay rent.

This is as dishonest a framing as suggesting that the Jews in Nazi Germany had clearly stolen all that art and wealth and it was just the good Nazi courts taking that back for good Germans.

Israelis did not own these properties. The evidence presented was not even evidence of ownership, but of Jewish tenants. The courts refused to enter the actual property deeds from Ottoman archives from being entered into the record, because those deeds proved the Jewish tenants were only renting the properties in the 19th Century in the first place.

This is just theft and ethnic cleansing. That Israeli courts support it is as meaningless as that Nazi courts supported the seizure of Jewish properties within the Reich, or black American properties in the USA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheikh...operty_dispute

[Easo]

So you aren’t aware of what started this? https://apnews.com/article/jerusalem...3a9e77243ab3b8

FFS, can you all stop mixing up Israel with Palestinian territories/East Jerusalem? Can't you read? The original poster I quoted clearly insinuated that Arab citizen cannot own anything in Israel. Your article is talking about East Jerusalem, a disputed territory, territory which de iure does not belong to Israel.

[downnola]

I am unsure why you'd bring up the very distant mythic stuff when the plainly obvious facts of say Hebrew being a dialect of Canaanite and of the Canaanite language family with El Elyon and Elohim and Yahweh and all that stuff being Gods shared by other Canaanites and by all accounts Hebrew as a language would have been mutually intelligible to any other Canaanite speaker in the area. Plus Judea and Samaria and even coins of a historic Israel and the language link is pretty well established archeologically. Plus Jews have lived in that region of Canaan before and after the Bar Kokhba revolt, it isn't as if Jews were vacated from the area after Bar Kokhba and then reappeared in the 1880s.

So I am curious what your point is? I mean, the Al Aqsa Mosque exists because of an interpretation of a dream Muhammad had were he road a Pegasus to heaven. I don't think really anyone here is basing anything off of these really ancient and half remembered 'Mythic History' that likely isn't what it alleges to be.

I bring it up because it's a very common belief in Christian and Zionist circles and part of the justification for settlement in that region. That you're trying to deny this fact is absurd.

It's interesting just how far in the past people are willing to go to justify some claims on the land but not for others. It's wild to me that a Jewish man from Brooklyn supposedly has a claim to property in the West Bank or East Jerusalem but the Muslim Arab who has lived there his entire life and can trace his lineage going back centuries doesn't.

To be honest, I don't see any reason why both claims to the region shouldn't be recognized and honored considering both groups have populated the area going back thousands of years.

[Draco-Onis]

So in 1967, when the Egyptians were broadcasting to the world that they were bombing Tel Aviv and a combined Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian army was amassing and vowing to completely annihilate the country, no calls for peace and intervention, only when it became obvious the Arabs had been utterly routed and the bombing of Tel Aviv was pure fiction did the UN go "Oh We better step in!" strange.

Do you not read a history book or at least google this stuff? You are literally saying the UN of 1967 is the same as in 2021. If you even put a second of thought into this you would realize how laughable that is but go on keep putting your foot in your mouth.

[Theodarzna]

I bring it up because it's a very common belief in Christian and Zionist circles and part of the justification for settlement in that region. That you're trying to deny this fact is absurd.

It's interesting just how far in the past people are willing to go to justify some claims on the land but not for others. It's wild to me that a Jewish man from Brooklyn supposedly has a claim to property in the West Bank or East Jerusalem but the Muslim Arab who has lived there his entire life and can trace his lineage going back centuries doesn't.

To be honest, I don't see any reason why both claims to the region shouldn't be recognized and honored considering both groups have populated the area going back thousands of years.

Whatever the reason is, really does it matter? I mean If Jews decide to buy land in that region because a book told them to, or some historical tie, or to join other Jews in the area of historical significance or whatever reason is that a problem? I mean before the 1880's Jews were outright legally forbidden from owning anything, from riding horses, and had to dress a certain way and accept that Arab children could pelt them with rocks and they just had to take it on the chin or accept that occasionally an Arab could barge into a Jewish persons house or business and just take their stuff. Why Jews decided to buy land there seems completely unimportant unless this is "Well these people should be forbidden from buying things here!" and the only reason they were forbidden from doing so was a different set of laws that came specifically from a religious text. The Arabs would only accept a social arrangement of Jewish submission, and subservience, and their entire position is one of restoring that social order. I find Liberal Americas fanatic support of that kind of funny; given you know White Southerners have a similar grievance about Black people but nobody takes their injured ego as some grave moral injustice.

That Muslim Arab man did not accept the Ottoman reforms that allowed Jews to own property and made pretty clear that they did not tolerate equality with Jews. Likewise no Arab living there can earnestly trace their ancestry back centuries; come off it. Many of the Arabs there now are about as recent as the first wave of Jews who came there when land was liberalized and people who weren't Muslim could legally own property. Arabs for their part couldn't go back thousands of years because Arabic isn't that old, likewise Arabic is a lot further afield from say the Canaanite languages of which Hebrew is a branch of Canaanite languages. So this claim "Both have been there for thousands of years" is also not backed up archeologically. We can in fact point to when Arabic speakers showed up in the region, the Ummiyad conquests specifically brought Arabic rule to that strip of land, but there is also little evidence the present day Arabs are in fact those Arabs descendants. Given the history post Ottoman Land Reform, many of them are likely Kurds, Egyptians, Turks, and elsewhere.

[Elegiac]

Whatever the reason is, really does it matter? I mean If Jews decide to buy land in that region because a book told them to, or some historical tie, or to join other Jews in the area of historical significance or whatever reason is that a problem?

Colonialism and apartheid are generally bad whatever the justification.

I mean before the 1880's Jews were outright legally forbidden from owning anything

Sucks to be a Jewish person before 1880, but it's 2021 and Israeli Jews are not the disadvantaged party here.

I find Liberal Americas fanatic support of that kind of funny; given you know White Southerners have a similar grievance about Black people but nobody takes their injured ego as some grave moral injustice.

Primarily because Black people aren't actively involved in the occupation and colonization of the rest of the country while instituting a system of apartheid. But you knew that, so why make such a shitty and dishonest comparison?

Likewise no Arab living there can earnestly trace their ancestry back centuries; come off it.

This crap argument again, huh?

Many of the Arabs there now are about as recent as the first wave of Jews who came there when land was liberalized

No they weren't.

Arabs for their part couldn't go back thousands of years because Arabic isn't that old likewise Arabic is a lot further afield from say the Canaanite languages of which Hebrew is a branch of Canaanite languages. So this claim "Both have been there for thousands of years" is also not backed up archeologically.

Because as we all know, people living in an area have never adopted new languages as a result of cultural influences in their area. /s

We can in fact point to when Arabic speakers showed up in the region, the Ummiyad conquests specifically brought Arabic rule to that strip of land, but there is also little evidence the present day Arabs are in fact those Arabs descendants.

Aside from all the genetic evidence and, you know, actual history. Lol.

Given the history post Ottoman Land Reform, many of them are likely Kurds, Egyptians, Turks, and elsewhere.

What history? You claiming that "Palestinians speak Arabic and Arabic is newer than Hebrew therefore Jews were there first" isn't history, it's a bad argument.