The Present Israel-Palestine Conflict Thread

[Lief 🗽]

A country that is forcefully demilitarized is not a sovereign country. If you only support Palestinian statehood if said Palestinian state isn't allowed to have an army, then you don't actually support Palestinian statehood.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

[Indy Texas]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

I would say more power to them. But I'd say the more likely scenario would be Israel invading Palestine based on some trumped up accusation that some Jewish settlers who wound up on the wrong side of the border had some rocks thrown at them and that Israel had a duty to "protect the Jewish residents of Palestine" in the same manner that Russia had its duty to "protect the ethnic Russians of Ukraine."

I don't know why Israel would be so bothered by a militarized Palestine when they're already surrounded by several militarized countries that have attacked them in the past and didn't have any trouble repelling them. A Palestinian military that is an organ of the state is far less likely to do something as inflammatory as attack Israel than a non-state militia like Hamas is. And if Israel doesn't allow Palestine to have a full-fledged military, Hamas is going to fill that void just as it does now. And the Palestinian government will have no more ability to control the actions of those militias than they do now.

[traininthedistance]

Yeah, I'm relatively pro-Israel (by the standards of this site, at least; not really by USA standards) and Netanyahu's demand for a "demilitarized state" seems to me disingenuous and counterproductive for the reasons stated above.

That being said, I'd be fine with something like a UN-enforced buffer, say three miles on each side of the Green Line, where neither Israeli nor Palestinian armies can set foot.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

I would say more power to them. But I'd say the more likely scenario would be Israel invading Palestine based on some trumped up accusation that some Jewish settlers who wound up on the wrong side of the border had some rocks thrown at them and that Israel had a duty to "protect the Jewish residents of Palestine" in the same manner that Russia had its duty to "protect the ethnic Russians of Ukraine."

I don't know why Israel would be so bothered by a militarized Palestine when they're already surrounded by several militarized countries that have attacked them in the past and didn't have any trouble repelling them. A Palestinian military that is an organ of the state is far less likely to do something as inflammatory as attack Israel than a non-state militia like Hamas is. And if Israel doesn't allow Palestine to have a full-fledged military, Hamas is going to fill that void just as it does now. And the Palestinian government will have no more ability to control the actions of those militias than they do now.

I can't imagine that any settlers would be left behind. If that goes down, they'll have to be uprooted and it'll be Gush Katif times 100.

I think the bigger concern is yet another militarized state on Israel's far-smaller borders. Essentially resetting the status quo back to the high-risk days. I understand why the current status quo is untenable, but from the stories my mother told me I can also understand the fear.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

So because of that hypothetical, only one of the two proposed states should be allowed to have the ability to defend itself?

The point is moot anyway. It's all but certain that Israel will annex Judea and Samaria and either expel or exterminate the excess undesirables. Gaza will stay how it is for a while longer--Hamas is a fantastic propaganda tool for the Israelis.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

So because of that hypothetical, only one of the two proposed states should be allowed to have the ability to defend itself?

The point is moot anyway. It's all but certain that Israel will annex Judea and Samaria and either expel or exterminate the excess undesirables. Gaza will stay how it is for a while longer--Hamas is a fantastic propaganda tool for the Israelis.

The ongoing fever dream of impending Israeli genocide continues. It'll continue until people decide that it's time to do something about those pesky Israelis before they commit that genocide that never seems to come.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

So because of that hypothetical, only one of the two proposed states should be allowed to have the ability to defend itself?

The point is moot anyway. It's all but certain that Israel will annex Judea and Samaria and either expel or exterminate the excess undesirables. Gaza will stay how it is for a while longer--Hamas is a fantastic propaganda tool for the Israelis.

The ongoing fever dream of impending Israeli genocide continues. It'll continue until people decide that it's time to do something about those pesky Israelis before they commit that genocide that never seems to come.

Israeli leaders have pretty much rejected all pretenses of supporting even a two-state solution at this point. I'm right, just wait for it.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

So because of that hypothetical, only one of the two proposed states should be allowed to have the ability to defend itself?

The point is moot anyway. It's all but certain that Israel will annex Judea and Samaria and either expel or exterminate the excess undesirables. Gaza will stay how it is for a while longer--Hamas is a fantastic propaganda tool for the Israelis.

The ongoing fever dream of impending Israeli genocide continues. It'll continue until people decide that it's time to do something about those pesky Israelis before they commit that genocide that never seems to come.

Israeli leaders have pretty much rejected all pretenses of supporting even a two-state solution at this point. I'm right, just wait for it.

It's basically shouting fire into a crowded theater, except it's really more shouting "That guy's going to start a fire! Get him!"

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

So because of that hypothetical, only one of the two proposed states should be allowed to have the ability to defend itself?

The point is moot anyway. It's all but certain that Israel will annex Judea and Samaria and either expel or exterminate the excess undesirables. Gaza will stay how it is for a while longer--Hamas is a fantastic propaganda tool for the Israelis.

The ongoing fever dream of impending Israeli genocide continues. It'll continue until people decide that it's time to do something about those pesky Israelis before they commit that genocide that never seems to come.

Israeli leaders have pretty much rejected all pretenses of supporting even a two-state solution at this point. I'm right, just wait for it.

It's basically shouting fire into a crowded theater, except it's really more shouting "That guy's going to start a fire! Get him!"

What's wrong with that? Someone in the Israeli government right now has to face the hangman.

[Middle-aged Europe]

To discuss who's right and who's wrong in the Middle East and whose sides' actions are justified and whose are not ist utterly pointless because they are all wrong.

It's like debating whether rape or murder is "less wrong". Obviously, rape is less wrong, but what value does such a conclusion possess in the first place?

[Velasco]

He just said that any Palestinian state would have to be demilitarized. He's always said that.

He said “I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan” and later  said that "at present we have a problem with the territory called Gaza,” noting that the West Bank is 20 times the size of Gaza, and vowed that he was not prepared “to create another 20 Gazas” in the West Bank.

He's just saying that there cannot be a situation in which the IDF withdraws the West Bank. As usual, Hamas is the alibi to continue the occupation in the territories under Abbas' 'authority' while settlements expand gradually. Status quo. No more and no less.

[Sbane]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

So because of that hypothetical, only one of the two proposed states should be allowed to have the ability to defend itself?

The point is moot anyway. It's all but certain that Israel will annex Judea and Samaria and either expel or exterminate the excess undesirables. Gaza will stay how it is for a while longer--Hamas is a fantastic propaganda tool for the Israelis.

The ongoing fever dream of impending Israeli genocide continues. It'll continue until people decide that it's time to do something about those pesky Israelis before they commit that genocide that never seems to come.

What need is there for a genocide if a continued status quo is enough to achieve your goals? The ghettoization process of the Palestinians will continue and so will the continued expansion of the settlements. Palestinians will be kept in their ghettos and will only be allowed to move around if the purpose of such move is to serve an Israeli. In other words, the status quo but on a grander scale.

And for those who think this situation is untenable, apartheid continued for a long, long time, didn't it? And what was the reason why western countries supported it for such a long time? That's right, terrorism. It's unfair to the Palestinians to be held to a higher standard than Israel, but they need their own Mandela.

[Sbane]

To discuss who's right and who's wrong in the Middle East and whose sides' actions are justified and whose are not ist utterly pointless because they are all wrong.

It's like debating whether rape or murder is "less wrong". Obviously, rape is less wrong, but what value does such a conclusion possess in the first place?

Well said. You don't get a situation like this without both sides being at fault to some degree. While one can understand the Palestinians frustrations(and the Israelis aren't shy about using force when they get inconvenienced), they should also be smart enough to understand that suicide bombs and missiles accomplish nothing. I don't understand how they haven't learned that lesson till now.

[Simfan34]

The flip side of that question is, when a militarized Palestinian state with a Hamas-led government fires the first rocket that kills an Israeli civilian, and Israel considers it an act of war from a neighboring state and sends in the troops, what will people say?

So because of that hypothetical, only one of the two proposed states should be allowed to have the ability to defend itself?

The point is moot anyway. It's all but certain that Israel will annex Judea and Samaria and either expel or exterminate the excess undesirables. Gaza will stay how it is for a while longer--Hamas is a fantastic propaganda tool for the Israelis.

The ongoing fever dream of impending Israeli genocide continues. It'll continue until people decide that it's time to do something about those pesky Israelis before they commit that genocide that never seems to come.

Israeli leaders have pretty much rejected all pretenses of supporting even a two-state solution at this point. I'm right, just wait for it.

It's basically shouting fire into a crowded theater, except it's really more shouting "That guy's going to start a fire! Get him!"

What's wrong with that? Someone in the Israeli government right now has to face the hangman.

Throw the Jew down the well.

[Famous Mortimer]

Japan is not a sovereign nation?

[Sol]

Japan is not a sovereign nation?

Japan is not really demilitarized.

[ingemann]

Japan is not a sovereign nation?

JSDF may not be called an army, but I doubt we could find 10 or even 5 militaries in the world which could beat it. So it's an army in all but name.

[Silent Hunter]

I don't know why Israel would be so bothered by a militarized Palestine when they're already surrounded by several militarized countries that have attacked them in the past and didn't have any trouble repelling them. A Palestinian military that is an organ of the state is far less likely to do something as inflammatory as attack Israel than a non-state militia like Hamas is. And if Israel doesn't allow Palestine to have a full-fledged military, Hamas is going to fill that void just as it does now. And the Palestinian government will have no more ability to control the actions of those militias than they do now.

They had plenty of trouble in 1973. If you look at their neighbours, they have peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, Lebanon doesn't rate as a military and Syria is in the midst of a civil war.

[ingemann]

I don't know why Israel would be so bothered by a militarized Palestine when they're already surrounded by several militarized countries that have attacked them in the past and didn't have any trouble repelling them. A Palestinian military that is an organ of the state is far less likely to do something as inflammatory as attack Israel than a non-state militia like Hamas is. And if Israel doesn't allow Palestine to have a full-fledged military, Hamas is going to fill that void just as it does now. And the Palestinian government will have no more ability to control the actions of those militias than they do now.

They had plenty of trouble in 1973. If you look at their neighbours, they have peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, Lebanon doesn't rate as a military and Syria is in the midst of a civil war.

Yes and the Syrian border have always been the one peaceful border Israel had.

[dead0man]

Can't tell if sarcasm or....

[Silent Hunter]

I don't know why Israel would be so bothered by a militarized Palestine when they're already surrounded by several militarized countries that have attacked them in the past and didn't have any trouble repelling them. A Palestinian military that is an organ of the state is far less likely to do something as inflammatory as attack Israel than a non-state militia like Hamas is. And if Israel doesn't allow Palestine to have a full-fledged military, Hamas is going to fill that void just as it does now. And the Palestinian government will have no more ability to control the actions of those militias than they do now.

They had plenty of trouble in 1973. If you look at their neighbours, they have peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, Lebanon doesn't rate as a military and Syria is in the midst of a civil war.

Yes and the Syrian border have always been the one peaceful border Israel had.

Not in the 1980s it wasn't.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If anything a proper and regularised Palestinian military would be in Israel's interests for several very obvious reasons.

[Silent Hunter]

If anything a proper and regularised Palestinian military would be in Israel's interests for several very obvious reasons.

Let's face it, we're not getting a long-term solution to this problem with the current Israeli leader; remember his brother was killed by Palestinians at Entebbe.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

He is very keen to be as much of a Big Damn Hero as his late brother, yes.