Israel / Palestine News Thread

[Leo Gura]

53 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

Depends on which Israel you talk about.

There is no depends.

The Israeli national policy for decades has been to allow settlements to expand and to stall out any possibily of a two state solution.

There is no two state solution and no one in the top levels of Israeli government will let that happen. The policy is stealth and defacto ethnic cleansing while denying it through crocodile teared PR propaganda campaigns.

Edited 21 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Lyubov]

The thing is though strategically and geographically speaking Israel is painted into a corner. There is no way they will ever let up in terms of the geography they control that technically isn’t recognized as a part of their country by the UN. A large part of their state building even hinges on having these territories and maintaining them for strategic purposes. There’s no way they will cede land. A two state solution borders on impossible in my point of view. How can you have a independent state geographically located inside and controlled by a stronger more powerful state? Really the best the West Bank can hope for is some sort of autonomous region integrated into the Israel state geographic integrity. It’s the only solution I see. In what world will territorial divisions solve this. 

[Lyubov]

We are living in a de facto one state reality. Israel is a Jewish state first and foremost. They can only keep the loud part quiet and ethnically cleanse the place. In Israel democracy comes second. It’s a joke. The democracy is for the Jews in the country not other ethnicities on the territory. 

[Nivsch]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

There is no depends.

The Israeli national policy for decades has been to allow settlements to expand and to stall out any possibily of a two state solution.

There is no two state solution and no one in the top levels of Israeli government will let that happen. The policy is stealth and defacto ethnic cleansing while denying it through crocodile teared PR propaganda campaigns.

This isn't the agenda of the parties in the Left and Center that are almost 50%. I follow them and hear their activists and voters for years. 

They are too little time in charge in the recent two decades (almost always Bibi). When they were in charge we have withrawal from Gaza.

A publicly signed deal is almost like a betrayl in the eyes of the Right wingers and a leader has to be exeptionally brave to advance it. Me myself wouldn't be brave enough to do this say I would be a prime minister.

You know what happened to the last prime minister who talked about peace in the most possible publicly and even romantic warm way.

Rather there are movements who talk about how to do the Israeli-Palestinian seperation in a quiet and gradual way.

Edited 20 hours ago by Nivsch

[zazen]

 

From Caitlin Johnstone:

“It's obviously false to say the US seeks peace in the middle east, but it's not really accurate to say it seeks war either. To me that's like saying water seeks wetness or fire seeks heat; war is just what the US empire is made of. It's the thing that it is.

Everything about the US-centralized power structure is pointed at continuous military expansionism and mass military violence. Once you've decided that it's your job to try to bring the entire population of your whole planet under the rule of a single power umbrella at any cost, you've accepted that you will be using violent force in perpetuity, because that's the only way to subdue populations who have no interest in such an arrangement. You might tell yourself that you want peace, and at times you might even actively try to avoid war, but everything about the way you've arranged your operation makes war inevitable.

This is the kind of environment that western empire managers spend their careers being groomed into accepting as normal. So they might actually believe they are telling the truth when they say their government wants peace, but this is the same as a fire saying it's doing everything it can to cool down the firewood. 

It is the fire's nature to burn, and it is the US empire's nature to make war. War is interwoven into every fiber of its existence. It's written into every part of its code. As soon as the mass-scale use of violence ends, the globe-spanning power structure that's loosely centralized around Washington will end. War is the glue that holds that power structure together.

Both the mainstream "progressivism" of Bernie Sanders and the right wing "populism" of Donald Trump try in their own ways to argue for a kinder, gentler empire which avoids unnecessary conflicts and abuses, but these arguments are deceptions in and of themselves, because the empire is made of conflict and abuse. 

The less war, militarism, economic strangulation and proxy interventionism there is, the less US empire there is. The empire can't roll back its violence any more than a shark can swim backwards. The only way to end the forward movement of a shark is to end its life.

The wars will not end until the US empire itself ends. This doesn't mean ending the US as a country, it means ending the globe-spanning power structure comprised of allies, assets and subjects that's held together by endless violence. Every foreign policy official in Washington, London, Paris and Canberra has been groomed to view this as the worst possible outcome and to avoid it at all cost, and to spend their careers fiendishly dedicated to the project of ensuring that the fire keeps burning and the shark keeps moving forward. Only ordinary members of the public with normal healthy human values will ever be able to see this.

The problem isn't that western officials keep making bad individual decisions at each individual juncture in foreign conflicts of interest, the problem is that the existence of the western empire guarantees foreign conflicts of interest, and ensures that violent force will be used to control their outcomes.

Those who support the US empire will occasionally look back on history and acknowledge that in hindsight there were some bad individual decisions made with regard to Vietnam or Iraq or wherever, but they'll never admit there is an innately murderous structure in place that guarantees Vietnams and Iraqs will continue to happen in the future. But that is the reality, and you'll never hear it acknowledged in the state propaganda services known as the mainstream western press.

Our rulers are too far absorbed into the imperial machine to recognize this as true, so you will reliably hear them babbling about seeking peace and avoiding civilian suffering — even as they take steps ensuring that peace will not happen and civilians continue to suffer. These are the only moves they can see on the chessboard. The options that would lead to real peace are not even recognized as legal moves in the game. So they keep moving the pieces around in accordance with the rules of empire, and saying "Oh how sad" when families are incinerated and children are ripped to shreds, but saying that it was the only move available on the board.

Our world is on fire, and the US-centralized empire is the flame. We ordinary people must find some way to extinguish it, before it torches us all.”

Edited 21 hours ago by zazen

[Ramanujan]

@Nivsch A nice song

 

[Leo Gura]

38 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

This isn't the agenda of the parties in the left and center that are almost 50%. I follow them and hear their activists and voters for years. 

They have no power. All this war pulls everyone to the right.

There is not going to be a leftist pacificist leadership in Israel.

Quote

They are too little time in charge in the recent two decades (almost always Bibi). When they were in charge we have withrawal from Gaza.

Sharon also enabled the settlers.

And leaders who challange the settlers or sign peace deals will get assassinated by them.

Your state has been hijacked by radical nationalists.

Edited 20 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Nivsch]

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

They have no power. All this war pulls everyone to the right.

I agree that a trauma like oct7 will have a similar effect, a least in the short term for sure, as seeing in your own eyes a plane getting crushed inside a city you thought of as the symbol of the advancement and your safe life from childhood.

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There is not going to be a leftist pacificist leadership in Israel.

But a centrist leaders with ideologically mixed parties in his coalition who will quietly advance this seperation is very possible to my opinion.

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Sharon also enabled the settlers.

Actually he came also from Likud but throughout the years became more moderate and leaded the withdrawal from Gaza. Olmert who came after him was Center-Left and the negotiation with the Palestinians in his era were quite serious.

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

And leaders who challange the settlers or sight peace deals will get assassinated by Israeli terrorists

This is true. I am not sure it will be possible with todays private security they get, but yeah scary.

Edited 20 hours ago by Nivsch

[royce]

[Nivsch]

@royce Nice projection and nice generalization from him.

lets sort it out.

Netayahu fails the deal this is true.

Smotrich and Ben Gvir hold this government as a hostage because in our method they can collapse the government whenever it does not go according to their ideology.

At least 50% of Israelis according to surveys I putted here a week or two ago support a hostages deal as a top priority. I can add them again.

Israeli mainsteam TV channels and radio stations talks non stop about the hostages and their agenda is very similar to those 50%+ of the citizens.

Alon Mizrahi only exposes his own psychology and not the reality of the issue when he generalize in such gross demonized way.

This photo below explains how it works in my country.

Edited 14 hours ago by Nivsch

[Vercingetorix]

Watch this Documentary "Screams Before Silence" to understand Israelis' perspective on October 7th.

Edited 15 hours ago by Vercingetorix

[royce]

1 hour ago, Nivsch said:

At least 50% of Israelis according to surveys I putted here a week or two ago support a hostages deal as a top priority. I can add them again.

Israeli mainsteam TV channels and radio stations talks non stop about the hostages and their agenda is very similar to those 50%+ of the citizens.

What is the connection between what you're saying and what Mr. Alon Mizrhari tweet ?" 

 

check this :

Edited 14 hours ago by royce

[royce]

18 minutes ago, Vercingetorix said:

Watch this Documentary "Screams Before Silence" to understand Israelis' perspective on October 7th.

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/debunking-screams-silence-sheryl-sandbergs-7-oct-mass-rape-film

[Raze]

 

[Karmadhi]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

There is no depends.

The Israeli national policy for decades has been to allow settlements to expand and to stall out any possibily of a two state solution.

There is no two state solution and no one in the top levels of Israeli government will let that happen. The policy is stealth and defacto ethnic cleansing while denying it through crocodile teared PR propaganda campaigns.

I have seen a lot of Israeli remarks about that where they say that they gave Palestinians multiple chances to create their own state including the Oslo accords and they turned them all down. Also when they withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Gaza was turned into Hamastan. Basically saying Israel was willing to have peace but Palestinians always refused it.

Now, what would you say to them as a response? 

Edited 13 hours ago by Karmadhi

[Ero]

On 25/09/2024 at 0:20 AM, Leo Gura said:

Israel could hatch a scheme to provoke Iran into war and then scream self-defense.

But I think the US would pressure Israel against that. Unless maybe Trump is in power, then all bets are off.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/09/26/world/israel-lebanon-hezbollah-hamas?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb
 

[royce]

44 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

Basically saying Israel was willing to have peace but Palestinians always refused it

You've been repeating this nonsense for a year — aren't you tired of it?

I have much more respect for the right perspective in Israel than this bullshit .

They're saying, "Fuck the Palestinians ; they’re savages. This is our land—God gave it to us. We’re stronger than the Palestinians and backed by the Americans, so we’ll do whatever we want. We’re going to take more land to build a greater Israel."

This point of view makes more sense than what you're trying to say!

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

I have seen a lot of Israeli remarks about that where they say that they gave Palestinians multiple chances to create their own state including the Oslo accords and they turned them all down. Also when they withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Gaza was turned into Hamastan. Basically saying Israel was willing to have peace but Palestinians always refused it.

Now, what would you say to them as a response? 

I don't know the details of those peace proposals. They were probably not favorable to the Palestinians.

Israel is forcing Palestinians to settle for breadcrumbs, which of course is hard for them to do. But also the most radical Palestinians sabotage the process because they keep believing that all the land belongs to them and that they shouldn't compromise with thieves.

It's an impossible situation.

Yes, giving the Palestians a state means they would have a military, and that military will be hostile to Irseael. But that's how rival states are. That's just a bullet Israelis gotta bite unless they wanna occupy Palestine forever. The solution there is simply investing into better border defenses.

Edited 11 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Karmadhi]

40 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I don't know the details of those peace proposals. They were probably not favorable to the Palestinians.

Israel is forcing Palestinians to settle for breadcrumbs, which of course is hard for them to do. But also the most radical Palestinians sabotage the process because they keep believing that all the land belongs to them and that they shouldn't compromise with thieves.

It's an impossible situation.

Yes, giving the Palestians a state means they would have a military, and that military will be hostile to Irseael. But that's how rival states are. That's just a bullet Israelis gotta bite unless they wanna occupy Palestine forever. The solution there is simply investing into better border defenses.

Thank you for your response.

Really appreciate you being so active in these threads and replying to us personally.

Very few do that.

We learn as much from this forum and interacting with you personally as we do from your videos  

Edited 11 hours ago by Karmadhi

[Raze]

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Raze