Message from Dr Norman G. Finkelstein

[Leonardo]

Do you think that the State of Israel has the right to exist, Leonardo..?

That Israelis/Jews need a homeland..?

Or do you favour giving it to Islam..?

That's what it boils down to.

I am clear that my loyalties lie with Israel......

.

I have never denied that Israel, now existing, has the right to continue that existence. In fact, I have declared this right of existence many times in previous threads. What I object to are some of the actions the govt of Israel has taken which are unnecessary to that continued existence - such as the illegal annexation of land for settlement, etc.

I also feel the Israeli govt has an obligation to recognise the controversial nature of the founding of the nation, and rather than assume a position of puffed-up self centredness on the issue of the 2-state solution, come to the negotiating table with the appropriate measure of humility regarding their unilateral actions.

[bee]

I have never denied that Israel, now existing, has the right to continue that existence. In fact, I have declared this right of existence many times in previous threads. What I object to are some of the actions the govt of Israel has taken which are unnecessary to that continued existence - such as the illegal annexation of land for settlement, etc.

I also feel the Israeli govt has an obligation to recognise the controversial nature of the founding of the nation, and rather than assume a position of puffed-up self centredness on the issue of the 2-state solution, come to the negotiating table with the appropriate measure of humility regarding their unilateral actions.

Fair enough.....thanks for reply..

My position is...that I think Israel is doing the best it can under very difficult circumstances...

We are just observing from afar...they are living with the difficult political decisions on a day to day basis.

I trust that they (Israel) are only being as tough as they need to be....

.

[Space Commander Travis]

I have never denied that Israel, now existing, has the right to continue that existence. In fact, I have declared this right of existence many times in previous threads. What I object to are some of the actions the govt of Israel has taken which are unnecessary to that continued existence - such as the illegal annexation of land for settlement, etc.

I also feel the Israeli govt has an obligation to recognise the controversial nature of the founding of the nation, and rather than assume a position of puffed-up self centredness on the issue of the 2-state solution, come to the negotiating table with the appropriate measure of humility regarding their unilateral actions.

They seem to live by different rules than apply to any other country (occupation that they actually openly refer to as occupation being turned a blind eye to, ferocious (some might argue disproportionate) military response to any provocation that surely if anyone else was to do, the UN would issue one of its famed and much-feared Condemnations, an open policy of apartheid to those of the Other race that happen to be living in territory they've annexed and so on), and it's not only turned a blind eye to by those nations that are usually loudest in condemning such behaviour, but it's openly supported with military and financial assistance. And Israel really isn't an impoverished Third World economy. It's these things that some people think doesn't really seem entirely fair. None of this means that people who say this want to see the Jewish race eradicated, people just think it's only fair that Israel should have to live by the same rules that everyone else does.

Edited July 19, 2014 by Admiral Rhubarb

[RoofGardener]

.........None of this means that people who say this want to see the Jewish race eradicated, people just think it's only fair that Israel should have to live by the same rules that everyone else does.

You know Admiral, I think you have just hit the nail on the head. Or at least, ONE nail.

When you say the above, who - exactly - are we comparing Israel to ?

I'm not sure that it is ethically or morally right to establish a "one size fits all" set of "international rules", without first considering the circumstances that each country faces.

Well.. OK.. perhaps SOME rules. I think the Geneva Conventions should probably have universal applicability.

What about the UN Declaration on Human Rights ? Personally I like it, but even THAT is rejected outright by 23% of the worlds population (as a block vote), and is routinely ignored by individual governments accounting for at least a further 25%. So concensus is hard to establish.

I'm going to open up a new thread, basically asking if anyone can think of any precedent - or similarity for - the situation re Israel vs the Arab/Muslim world, current or historical.

(edit ... here it is The Latverian Solution)

Edited July 19, 2014 by RoofGardener

[bee]

I'm not sure that it is ethically or morally right to establish a "one size fits all" set of "international rules", without first considering the circumstances that each country faces.

Bingo...!!

.

[Yamato]

In your previous post...you made a specific statement...I countered it with another specific statement...

now...as a debating tactic you ignore the original points made and bring in broad generalizations that

draw attention away from the fact that I countered your point successfully....

Your statements which I have not ignored indicate you're doing the exact same thing as what Dr. Finkelstein is talking about in the OP

[bee]

Your statements which I have not ignored indicate you're doing the exact same thing as what Dr. Finkelstein is talking about in the OP

whatever

.

[Leonardo]

You know Admiral, I think you have just hit the nail on the head. Or at least, ONE nail.

When you say the above, who - exactly - are we comparing Israel to ?

I'm not sure that it is ethically or morally right to establish a "one size fits all" set of "international rules", without first considering the circumstances that each country faces.

Why not?

Surely the "circumstances some countries find themselves in" are a direct result of ignoring humanistic ideals with universal applicability. Establishing those "ideals of universal applicability" and then establishing an authority under which countries are obligated to abide by them is surely the "ethically and morally" right thing to do?

And this would be what was envisaged of the UN, and the various Charters (such as the Charter of Human Rights) the UN promotes as having universal applicability. It is just that some nations - Israel and Palestine both included - feel free to ignore those ideals as and when it suits them. This is what is "ethically and morally " wrong - not the establishment of those ideals.

Edited July 19, 2014 by Leonardo

[RoofGardener]

The Palestinian Authority - along with the entire Islamic world - rejects the UN Human Rights charter outright. they formally refuse to ratify it.

[Leonardo]

The Palestinian Authority - along with the entire Islamic world - rejects the UN Human Rights charter outright. they formally refuse to ratify it.

Which does not mean the establishment of the Charter, and the universal ideals it espouses, was "ethically or morally " wrong. But this is what you argued. My argument is that the 'consideration' of each nation's respective "situation" you argued is putting the cart before the horse. Their "situation" is a result of ignoring ethically and/or morally correct ideals.

[RoofGardener]

Was it ethically/morally wrong to create the State of Israel in the first place ?

Because it was that declaration that launched seven Arab armies into the former Palestinian Mandate, with the stated objective of destroying Israel.

Was it ethically/morally wrong for Israel to resist those armies ?

Because everything else has flowed from that.

My objection is that we are asking Israel to abide by one set of rules, but then NOT applying those rules to the Palestinians, the PLO, HAMAS, et al.

[Guest]

Was it ethically/morally wrong to create the State of Israel in the first place ?

the obvious simple answer was yes it was wrong to impose the state of Israel on an already prexisting population and then to allow the new state of Israel to expel a significant proportion of that native population.

The Holocaust is not an adequate justification as two wrongs never equal a right. A form of moral blackmail was used to justify a pre-existing Zionist plan to seize control of the Palestinian region. To me this foundational state of illegitimacy is the root cause of everything that has happened subsequently.

Br Cornelius

Edited July 19, 2014 by Guest

[Leonardo]

Was it ethically/morally wrong to create the State of Israel in the first place ?

Possibly, but that is irrelevant now except in understanding the context of the conflict.

Because it was that declaration that launched seven Arab armies into the former Palestinian Mandate, with the stated objective of destroying Israel.

And it could be argued that was just a response to act of aggression of the Zionist authority under ben Gurion in declaring statehood without agreement by the other relevant parties. So, who is the "ultimate aggressor" here?

Was it ethically/morally wrong for Israel to resist those armies ?

No, it's never wrong to defend yourself, but the rest of the world, through the UN showed it's weakness in not immediately calling for a resumption of the dialogue and refusing to recognise the Israeli's declaration of statehood.

Because everything else has flowed from that.

Everything flowed from ben Gurion declaring statehood and that declaration being recognised by the international community - led by the US.

My objection is that we are asking Israel to abide by one set of rules, but then NOT applying those rules to the Palestinians, the PLO, HAMAS, et al.

No, everyone is being asked to abide by the same set of rules - but no-one is abiding by them. Hamas, etc by continuing it's military aggression and Israel by it's continued occupation of, and annexing of, foreign territories.

[Guest]

And until you understand (or admit) that for the Palestinians to achieve their desires means for the Israelis to be GONE from the land, you will never understand why this can never happen. You simply will not admit that Israel as a Jewish state and the Palestinina state cannot ever coexist. The PALESTINIANS will never allow it.

That is your projection of the only possible outcome - I do not accept it in any way AND THEN. It is you projecting Biblical doom prophecies outwards and I personally think they are a peculiar form of madness.

And history doesn't even support your position since there are many examples of progress towards a liveable accommodation between warring groups. South Africa and N.Ireland are the two most obvious ones.

Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

[+and-then]

That is your projection of the only possible outcome - I do not accept it in any way AND THEN. It is you projecting Biblical doom prophecies outwards and I personally think they are a peculiar form of madness.

And history doesn't even support your position since there are many examples of progress towards a liveable accommodation between warring groups. South Africa and N.Ireland are the two most obvious ones.

Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

Perhaps you can quote some of the IRA or Brits actively planning and demanding the TOTAL ANNIHILATION of the "others"? You are being naive at best.

[Guest]

Perhaps you can quote some of the IRA or Brits actively planning and demanding the TOTAL ANNIHILATION of the "others"? You are being naive at best.

You should read your history a little better and put the fiction down (Bible). Rhetoric is rhetoric.

Here's a question for you, since you are taking everyone's pronouncements literally - how do you like been referred to as the Goyim and all that implies ?

A word used by some Jews to refer to Gentiles (non-Jews). The word can have derogatory connotations, such as the word "black" when used to refer to a persons of African descent. It can be neutral or negative depending on the context and the intent of the speaker.

The Christian right are been played for useful fools in all this - more fool you.

Br Cornelius

Edited July 19, 2014 by Guest

[bee]

.

and yet in a survey...Israel was the 19th LEAST religious country in the world....

it's interesting to see the countries that came out as more religious than Israel...

http://www.kirainet.com/english/the-least-religious-countries/

[Guest]

Bee you have hit it on the head - this is nothing to do with religion.

Great of you to finally spot it

Zionism is a secular movement and Israel is a secular state. There are more Christian Zionists than Jewish Zionists. Anti-Semitism seems an unusual phrase to bandy around in the light of this.

The great lie is that this whole conflict is something more than it actually is - one nation waging war on an occupied nation and breaking just about every law in the international book.

Br Cornelius

Edited July 19, 2014 by Guest

[bee]

.

@Br Cornelius

eh..? what..? I don't see that as a great revelation....it just means that Israel and it's inhabitants are more like us

than people realise...like a Western Country...with Western values...

edit to say....IMO...all the more reason to support it..rather than support a group like Hamas...

.

Edited July 19, 2014 by bee

[Guest]

.

@Br Cornelius

eh..? what..? I don't see that as a great revelation....it just means that Israel and it's inhabitants are more like us

than people realise...like a Western Country...with Western values...

.

So ******* what ... so their like us so it allows them to murder people.

Get a ******* life.

I didn't defend the S.Africans because they were like us and I certainly aint going to defend the Israelis.

Thats the most vacuous thing I have heard in a long day.

Br Cornelius

Edited July 19, 2014 by Guest

[bee]

So ******* what ... so their like us so it allows them to murder people.

Get a ******* life.

Br Cornelius

charming.....

behave yourself

.

[bee]

.

edit to say....IMO...all the more reason to support it..rather than support a group like Hamas...

.

just in case you didn't see my edit....

.

[Guest]

just in case you didn't see my edit....

.

I support the Palestinians. Do you support the IDF in killing those four boys ?

Playing the moral high ground game again. Its a loser.

Br Cornelius

[bee]

I support the Palestinians. Do you support the IDF in killing those four boys ?

Playing the moral high ground game again. Its a loser.

Br Cornelius

and the Palestinians support Hamas...ie elected them

you would do well to take your own advise and stop playing the moral high ground card all the time

.

[TSS]

This thread highlights well why the subject topic constantly hits the buffers..

The video in the OP criticises what it see's as crocodile tears about the holocaust when justifying the actions of the hierachy in Isreal, yet uses the long list of Palestinian hardships to criticise that action. I'm not surprised that irony is skipped over since it highlights the problem with both sides have in accepting responsibility for the mess over there. As with the Good Friday agreement, no peace is worth the paper it is written on until all factions want peace.