One group of people summarily rejects the idea of giving the Palestinians anything at all. Since they are "the enemy" and this is our land, we should not give them anything.
But none of these people propose what we should do instead. What's the long-term plan? Continue to rule over the Palestinians forever, without giving them the vote?
Another group of people summarily rejects the plan due to it not giving the Palestinians a fully independent state.
But none of these people propose what should and could realistically be done instead. How on earth can the Palestinians be given a fully independent state which will, in all likelihood, be used as a base for rocket attacks (and more) on Israel - with Israel politically restricted from responding due to the rockets being fired from civilian areas?
I'm not saying that I'm a fan of the Trump plan. My point is to demonstrate the weaknesses in the position of those who are so certain that it is utterly wrong, without acknowledging that their own position also has serious drawbacks. It's an essentially intractable problem with no good solution.
There is no "Deal of the Century". There is nothing to negotiate, other than the timetable for the "Pals" repatriation to their countries-of-origin and/or resettlement elsewhere in the world. Such a timetable should take no more than the five years required to do so for the 11-million displaced persons in the aftermath of World War Two (and, similarly, post-Somalia and the Balkans). That's it; everything else is an internal Israeli matter.
ReplyDeleteHow would one figure out where they're from and differentiate them from Palestinians who have been here for centuries?
DeleteAnd the repatriation of Jews is to proceed in parallel or will it be done right after? The Jewish Israelis who can trace their residency further back than the Palestinians number in the thousands. Maybe.
DeleteThe first categories seek the transfer of most, if not all the Palestinian population as the 'solution'. I see enough of a democratic deficit in IL for this to be realized within our lifetimes.
ReplyDeleteIn the second category, IL does and continues to attack direct or proximate 'civilian' targets and infrastructure when it so chooses, albeit with consideration of the risks, so not sure why you think the political restrictions are so great - they seem to be decreasing every year.
IL has the upper hand and the ability to obliterate whatever it wants. Whatever the Palestinians throw at IL will be limited. They have taken to launching incendiary devices attached to children's balloons. Dangerous yes, but they have little real appetite at this stage.
However, I will point out one thing. Palestine de facto already exists. Everytime people go to Kever Rachel they go to Palestine and the IDF coordinates with the PA forces to ensure minimal disruption. De facto economic, political and military relations already exist. The PA and IL work together behind the scenes every day. There is nothing stopping scaled attacks now and the reality will be not much different at a later stage. A major problem is the creeping annexation that has taken place for 40 years under both 'left' and 'right' governments.
In this latter scenario, any initiative needs to come from IL. It has no reason to do so however - annexation is the key here - and indefinite martial law for Palestinians.
Had the Orthodox community not swapped the pursuit of ehrlachkeit of Hillel ("דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד"), Rabbi Akiva ("ואהבת לרעך כמוך. רבי עקיבה אומר זהו כלל גדול בתורה"), Ben Azzai ("זה ספר תולדות אדם -- זה כלל גדול מזה"), R Simlai ("תורה תחלתה גמילות חסדים וסופה גמילות חסדים"), and was the Judaism of Litta, as articulated by R Chaim Volozhiner ("שזה כל האדם: לא לעצמו נברא רק להועיל לאחריני "), Rav Shimon Shkop ("שבראנו בצלמו ובדמות תבניתו, וחיי עולם נטע בתוכנו, שיהיה אדיר חפצנו, להיטיב עם זולתנו"), or Rav Dessler ("כח הנתינה הוא כח עליון ממדות יוצר הכל ברוך הוא ... וככה עשה את האדם").
ReplyDeleteRecall this is the religion where the obvious choice for the Torah reading on the day commemorating receiving the Torah was Rus, because it is so full of Chessed.
And instead we picked up this frumkeit thing. A focus on ritual mitzvos that belies what we historically believed Torah was all about.
If we did still live in a community that aspired to be ehrlicher Yidn, rather than frum, would we have so many people be content with a status quo where survival requires the constant practice of achzarius? Sure it's mutar or even mandatory in the face of survival. And sure "כל שנעשה רחמן על האכזרים, לסוף נעשה אכזר על רחמנים"... But how could anyone still connected to our authentic mesorah think that the status quo is a religiously sound and spiritually healthy place to remain?
(Of course this could well be the man with the hammer identifying every problem as a nail.)
Recall this is the religion where the obvious choice for the Torah reading on the day commemorating receiving the Torah was Rus, because it is so full of Chessed.
DeleteAre you stoned when you write this stuff?
The Vilna Goan said that the entire purpose of learning Torah is to improve your middos. Is that "authentic" enough for you?
DeleteWeaver: I don't understand what you are driving at. You are reinforcing what I said and asking if the Gra's position is authentic enough for me?
DeleteThe Torah is about ehrlachkeit. Always was, until we invented this "frumkeit" thing. Which was well after the Gra. See a seet of sources I collected on Sefaria מבקשי טוב ויושר - Other-Focused Orthodoxy. Interestingly, the quote you refer to from Even Sheleimah isn't there yet, but will be soon enough.
(And I assume Gavriel M is usually not that rude over a misspeech, he was just trying to illustrate my point.)
As for myself, my book is based on the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher by Rav Shimon Shkop. Which opens:
יתברך הבורא ויתעלה היוצר שבראנו בצלמו ובדמות תבניתו, וחיי עולם נטע בתוכנו, שיהיה אדיר חפצנו, להיטיב עם זולתנו, ליחיד ולרבים בהוה ובעתיד בדמות הבורא כביכול,
שכל מה שברא ויצר היה רצונו יתברך רק להיטיב עם הנבראים, כן רצונו ית׳ שנהלך בדרכיו כאמור “והלכת בדרכיו”, היינו שנהיה אנחנו בחירי יצוריו, מגמתנו תמיד להקדיש כוחותינו הגופניים והרוחניים לטובת הרבים, כפי ערכנו,...
Blessed shall be the Creator, and exalted shall be the Maker, Who created us in His 'Image' and in the likeness of His 'Structure', and planted eternal life within us [i.e. gave us the Torah], so that our greatest desire should be to do good to others, to individuals and to the masses, now and in the future, in imitation of the Creator (as it were).
For everything He created and formed was according to His Will (may it be blessed), [that is] only to be good to the creations. So too His Will is that we walk in His ways. As it says “and you shall walk in His Ways” (Devarim 28:9) – that we, the select of what He made – should constantly hold as our purpose to sanctify our physical and spiritual powers for the good of the many, according to our abilities.
(Chapter 1, the introduction with my translation, is available here. The book is available on Amazon and most sefarim stores that carry Feldheim distributed books.)
That said, while I feel I am on solid ground with the problems of frumkeit, my own feelings about the political implications are just that -- my own feelings. That first point can stand whether or not you agree with what I do with it.
DeleteThe mispspeech is illustrative of your muddleheaded, borderline random rambling. You want us (I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you live in America) to ignore both the written Torah and the the halacha, put our lives in jeopardy, and give away G-d's land based on what doesn't even rise to level of a chassidishe shalosh seudos drasha. The quotations you cite aren't even taken out of context, they are just flat out unrelated to your 'point', which is just some stupid Fiddler On the Roof, Daniel Boyarinesque fantasy of galus Judaism, undefiled by the reality of maintaining a nation state, consisting of rising to ever greater heights of niceness.*
Delete(The historical reality, should it interest you at all, has nothing to do with your B'nei Brith folktales. Ashkenazi Jews, from the very beginning, were concentrated in trades like moneylending, innkeeping, tax-farming and rent collection for the nobility, tailor-made for cultivating antagonistic relations with the indigenous population. If you've ever observed a slumlord dealing with low IQ tenants, then you know the typical peasant experience of Jews was and it wasn't 'erlichkeit'. This relationship became ever more toxic and gross on both sides until ... well we know what.)
Thanks for your anti Semitic hagiography. Clearly the middle aged Jews (many of the peasants of pre WW2 Eastern Europe were tradesmen. Hence shuls for glazers, copper workers, porters, etc.) were informed by modern day slumlords, and of course the Jews are *All* slumlords. It's tragic to listen to a Jews cite the unscientific bumblings of their haters as authoritative.
DeleteI blame the 53 year occupation.
In Eastern Europe, from about 1750, Jews experienced significant downward social mobility for a number of reasons. This is one of the reasons why a significant minority were drawn to radical political movements, which also didn't turn out that well.
DeleteMy description of the socio-economic niche of Ashkenazi Jewry is uncontroversial among scholars. There's some controversy about how much they sought out vs. were forced into this role, but that's it. I realise that it can be disturbing for American Jews brought up on a diet of self-aggrandising fiction to make contact with reality, but you'll just have to lump it. History is an ugly thing and it still isn't over.
Your description of the socio-economic niche of Ashkenazi Jewry is completely without citation, any context of the period to which you relate, and seemed to suggest that modern day slumlords (an economic niche currently occupied by a small number of Jews of all ethnicities, as well as Gentiles) were the reason Jews 700 years ago were money lenders. You seem to accept that from the 1750s onwards no such activity took place, without any reference to your stereotype of the economically unproductive, conniving Jew.
DeleteYou are not being terribly coherent. Go read a book. I recommend 'Aspects of Jewish Economic History' by Marcus Arkin.
DeleteFor the record, I don't think this niche was economically unproductive per se. nor that it inspired unusually connivingness, more a certain hardness and lack of empathy. You don't make a living letting people of their loan payments. I can't imagine why it is so hard for you, who ascribes all sorts of psychic effects to 50 years of occupation, to imagine that 700 years of a particular economic niche might have had some sort of impact too.
Also, look up what hagiography means.
Very nuanced. You don't hold with stereotypes of Jews as conniving, more as a "certain hardness and lack of empathy". It's hard to respond sensibly to the kind of sweeping generalisations of the sort a drunk holding forth in a bar would make. I have no idea exactly of exactly which Jews, when, you hold negative stereotypes against, and I'm not sure you do, but fascists were never that interested in the detail.
DeleteI know you wont like this, but sometimes the truth hurts. If you study Tanach it is very clear that punishment occurs due to sin.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately the State of Israel suffers badly from "an essentially intractable problem with no good solution".
We wish so much for all the hate to stop. If all these plans don't work, let's at least turn to G-d.
I am waiting for the day that a Prime Minster of Israel will call for a public day of fasting and repentance like they used to do in the good old days when the Temple stood. I am afraid I will have to wait a long time.
Let them go vote in Gaza. Otherwise, live in our Land, live by our rules. Civil rights, no voting.
ReplyDeletePeople who can't vote have no way to ensure their civil rights.
DeleteOne of the rules of "our land" is that everyone born in "our land" is a citizen of "our land" with a vote.
DeleteDumb and self-defeating rules are typically the ones that need to be changed.
DeleteI am guessing that you are likely a Republican leaning US passport holder. Do you think the right to vote for the The Great Orange One should be denied to US Jews as giving Jews the vote in a Gentile majority country is a dumb and self defeating rule that should be changed?
DeleteAre you really going to imply that US Jews are in a genocidal war with American non-Jewish majority for control over the country and to birthrate+kill them out of existence and replace America's Constitution with a document asserting sole authoritarian Jewish hegemony over the land of the USA? If not, your false analogy is worthless. But if so, you are insane to boot.
DeleteJews in America should absolutely be denied the right to vote or participate in the political process in any way. Why should the Sackler family get to bribe politicians to let them poison millions of working class Americans they feel no affinity or sympathy for? Why should Paul Singer get to gut American companies and lay off thousands just so he can have 56 billion instead of 55 billion dollars in his account? Why should Sarah Sontag get paid by the government to say 'The white race is the cancer of human history'? Why should George Soros be allowed to pay billions to promote blood libels against policeman that lead to thousands of excess deaths? Why should Jewish organisations have been allowed to spearhead liberal 'reforms' in the 1960s that caused the murder, rape, and violent crimes to more than double within the space of 10 years?[!] What have American Jews done for America except repay the hospitality of its founding population with unrelenting hostility? Liberal democracy is just irredeemably vile. Here, there, everywhere.
Delete@Gavriel M: Your anti Semitism (and really, the Soros / Rothschild tropes are now as boring as they are factually inaccurate - it's come to something when a Jew maligns a Holocaust survivor and my only reaction is boredom) only mentioned left wing Jews. What about Mr and Mrs Adleson?
Delete@KWR: It does seem to trouble you that the far right wing extremists in America use the same rhetoric and arguments about Jews that you do about Arabs. They are wrong. So are you. Jews are outkilling Arabs 20 to 1. There is no genocide of Jews; if anything you ought to be concerned about the reverse. Nobody is producing babies as part of a grand conspiracy, and nobody is stopping Jews having more babies if that's what they want.
It's fascinating to see how the Occupation has made conspiracy theorists - in the case of Gavriel, an antisemitic conspiracy theorist - out of the pair of you. It's the price we pay every day.
@The Hat
DeleteThe first two I mentioned are both Republican donors. Adelson is also pretty disgusting and used to be an open borders proponent, though he has toned that down somewhat. He also puts a lot of money into promoting better regulation of online gambling, albeit for obvious self-interested reasons, so that's another plus. Overall, I would rate him only moderately wicked and not particularly harmful. It's telling that you have heard of Adelson, but not the Sacklers or Singer, people responsible for destroying literally hundreds of thousands of lives.
And George Soros' promotion of anti-police blood libels is an undeniable fact. It's not the worst thing he's done, but I picked it because it's the one that even his most weaselly defenders can't deny.
"Anti police blood libels". What fragile snowflakes the facists are nowadays. I'm sorry for the hurt to your feelings, Gabriel M, occasioned by police racially motivated gun violence.
DeleteMultiple federal investigations have confirmed that the police officer who shot Michael Brown was acting in self-defence, that the 'hands up don't shoot' claim was a fabrication, that Michael Brown was high, that he was apprehended both after and in the process of committing a felony, and that he attempted to wrest the gun from the police officer's hand. The results of your blood libel were (and no-one disputes this)
Delete1) That an innocent police officer had his life turned upside down, lost his job, and received 10,000s of death threats for doing his job then defending himself.
2) Riots that led to tens of millions of dollars of property damage and the transformation of Ferguson to a slum.
3) The murder of eight police officers by people specifically citing the blood libel as motivation.
4) A spike in all forms of violent crime specifically in cities that BLack Lives Matters targetted resulting in more than a 1,000 excess murders to date.
Yet you dismiss those upset about this as snowflakes. Maybe you're the baddy.
You see, Gavriel, normally, you have to be a victim to claim victimhood status. I know you like to claim white victimhood status, and that's not easy when by and large white people are doing the oppressing. So we have vague claims of spikes in violent crime, and a police officer who - get this - had his life. Turned upside down, apparently, but had his life. Now yes, I agree, he didn't deserve to lose his job. In the circumstances, the use of force on Michael Brown was legal and proportionate. It's a real shame for the white dude.
DeleteBut Eric Garner didn't have his life turned upside down. He had it taken from him unlawfully . So did Akai Gurley, Dontre Hamilton, John Crawford, Renisha McBride, Charley Leundeu Keunang, Tony Robinson, Anthony Hill, Eric Harris, Walter Scott, Freddie Gray, William Chapman, Samuel Du Bose, Jeremy McDole, Corey Jones, Jamar Clark, Freddie Gray, Walter Scott, Aiyana Jones, Rekia Boyd, Timothy Russell, Malissa Williams, Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, Joseph Mann, Paul O' Neal, Terence Crutcher, Keith Lamont Scott and Deborah Danner.
But of course, they're black, so the only tragedy is that poor white policeman.
Impressive research skills. You want me to do a list of white people brutally murdered by blacks? Not hard.
DeleteOf course, in your headline case, Freddie Gray was killed by black police officers, which is not surprising. Blacks are underrepresented as a proportion of those wrongfully killed by police and overepresented as a proportion of those doing the killing. That's where affirmative action gets you.
Eric Garner was a bit of a gray area, but maybe we'll give it to you. Funny thing is, though, that the BLM money tap ran out just when it looked like it might cause riots in New York, where important people live. Getting your house burned down by a mob is for bad privileged people in Ferguson, not for good enlightened people who fund the DNC.
"There is no genocide of Jews;"
DeleteOnly because they are kept at bay by Israel's military superiority and sovereign dominance as well as spying agencies thoroughly infiltrating the land area you want cleared of all Jews and all Israeli spy and military presence.
They are constantly engaged in genocide efforts and plans. And you don't have to trust me on that (although it's an obvious point that everyone can see), just look at their political charters, their education systems, their various terrorist groups and memberships etc.
They are not succeeding at genocide only because they are unable to achieve it. You want to enable them by giving them more power, more land, more sovereignty, more money, more international recognition, and more freedom of operation from Israeli military deterrents.
"if anything you ought to be concerned about the reverse."
There is no Israeli attempt to genocide the Arabs. The Arab population is growing year after year. If they wanted to genocide them they could have long ago, and have not done so, so there is the proof you're about to ask me for.
Nobody is producing babies as part of a grand conspiracy, and nobody is stopping Jews having more babies if that's what they want.
"It's fascinating to see how the Occupation has made conspiracy theorists"
It's not a conspiracy theory to acknowledge the decades of terrorist attacks and bombings on Israeli civilians, the teachings of various PLO and other political movements, the teachings of their education system, the political charters, the tunnels in gaza, the rockets, etc.
It is conspiracy theory on your part to suggest that they are not engaged in a genocidal war with a genocidal end goal and constantly fueling these genocidal efforts.
It is a shame to see how the Oslo process has so deluded you into thinking that acknowledging reality is a "conspiracy theory" and that the Arabs have no ill intentions toward Israeli Jews.
Yes Gavriel. I do want you to list every single white person killed unlawfully - get this - By. The. State.
DeleteBlack people are 9 times more likely to be killed by law enforcement, and the logic of your position is that they are more than 9 times as likely to be culpable than a white person. There is zero - zero - evidence of that. It is an irrational fear of black people.
If a significant proportion of law enforcement officers share your irrationally held prejudices, it might provide a more elegant explanation for the disparity.
Off you toddle.
I forgot to respond to the grand conspiracy part.
Delete"Nobody is producing babies as part of a grand conspiracy,"
Arafat yemach shemo once stated “The womb of the Arab woman is my strongest weapon.”
If you think the men and women teaching their children to become martyrs aren't also having as many kids as possible to contribute to the PLO's demographic strategy, you're naive.
"and nobody is stopping Jews having more babies if that's what they want."
No but the terrorist murders typically target religious Jews and settlers who have the highest birthrates. Could be mere coincidence though. I only meant my comment from the other direction, the half that I addressed above.
Sorry, yes, that's entirely right. Sex is a conspiracy. And settlers are obviously targeted not for ease of access but for their birthrate. Also chareidim... But that's not right is it. You are being absurd.
DeleteThe Peace Plan proposal is doomed to failure, but I think there are some important political messages:
ReplyDelete1) By refusing to engage in the process, the Palestinians were unable to advocate for their own position. Hence the plan is heavily skewed to a position that represents Israel's position.
2) The more important point, and the positive aspect of this plan: For the first time Palestinians are being told that the "outcome" is not guaranteed for them. Until this point the Palestinians have seen no need to compromise on a maximalist position. The view was that the 1948 armistice lines were a defacto boarder and that any final settlement would reflext that. If the outcome is already set in stone, then there is no incentive to rapidly reach a final end of conflict. (The Palestinians see a political advantage in portraying themselves as victims.)
This proposal puts on paper the fact that the longer they delay in making an end of conflict agreement with Israel, the less they will get.
What about continuing to rule over the Palestinians until they recognise the Jewish right to self determination and stop paying terrorists families money.
ReplyDeleteIn theory time limited but in practise forever. Although maybe the Trump plan allows for that
What about giving the Palestinians their equal inalienable equal rights to self determination no ifs no buts?
DeleteHat, that was attempted already multiple times. They rejected and went to war instead because any self-determination for that newly invented group that does not eliminate Jewish self determination is not within their definition of self determination.
DeleteThe last PM to support Palestinian nationhood no ifs no buts was Ariel Sharon, and he died before he could finish the border fence and drag our extremists over onto our side of it.
DeleteThis is a very complicated and sensitive topic, one in which I own that neither I nor any man has any immediate solution to the problem. Nevertheless, here is my comment.
ReplyDelete**Is Israel “holy?”**
Yehudah Halevi and Nachmanides certainly felt that the land was holy. However, Maimonides felt that nothing is inherently holy per se. Neither land nor objects are holy, for soil cannot suddenly become holy. This is unnatural.
Actually, the term “holy” means separated. Land and objects are only designated “holy” when we use them properly, for example, Shabbat is only holy when Jews keep it. Maimonides wrote that Israel is only holy if Jews live there. Also, Israel is important to Jews. Thus, holiness is the result of proper action but Israel is not inherently holy.
Be this as it may, G-d never drew particular borders nor did we ever hold all of the ideal lands of Israel. Besides one could say that G-d’s promise is His alone and that we should not make efforts to expand the settlements (which are legally ours).
**Trading land for peace**
Should the State of Israel exchange land for peace? I Kings 9:11 says, “Hiram king of Tyre had supplied Solomon with cedar and cypress trees, as much as he desired, and King Solomon gave to Hiram twenty cities in the land of the Galilee.”
The Bible does not disclose the purpose of Solomon’s gift. It might have been payment for the supplies. In ancient times, when a king provided another with a gift, they usually expected tribute in return. Yet in II Chronicles 8:2 Hiram ceded territory to Solomon, each king trades some land to the other. One thing is clear. Solomon cemented a relationship to secure funds, resources, and peace by trading land. Remarkably, the Bible never condemns Solomon for trading twenty Israelite cities to Tyre.
Is saying that land can be traded for peace advocating a two-state solution? Or, does the unwillingness of Palestinian cooperation negates the possibility for peace?
"Is saying that land can be traded for peace advocating a two-state solution? Or, does the unwillingness of Palestinian cooperation negates the possibility for peace?"
DeleteDefinitely the latter. In a famous responsum of Rav Ovadiah Yosef (that has been abused numerous times) he posits that, if keeping the West Bank would lead to war, then the "sanctity of human life outweighs the sanctity of Eretz Yisrael".
But, in practice, the situation that Rav Ovadiah describes does not apply: in fact, ceding land to the Palestinians in fact endangers Jewish lives even further--as we have seen with the Oslo Accords and the Disengagement. It was possible to roll back the concessions of the Oslo Accords in the aftermath of the Second Intifada, by keeping a tight IDF presence in the major Palestinian population centers in the West Bank. Such a rollback is practically impossible in Gaza.
Such "land for peace" deals should only be considered if they would actually attain peace. I don't believe the Palestinians, or enough of them at least, are really in favor of peace with Israel, in any borders.
Yehudah is on point. Chiram was Shlomo's ally. If Israel had dispute of some kind with a nation that was trustworthy and was not in principle based on the goal of destroying Israel, then yes, as Turk says, it may be permissible to cede Land-For-Peace. In the situation we find ourselves in now, when the PA is simply the revarnishing of the PLO and is still a supporter (or a tacit acceptor) of terrorism, and that they simply use every land acquisition as a new staging ground for violence, Land For Peace is not a realistic thing.
DeletePA forces keep Jews safe daily, and are rewarded by sweetheart deals between Netanyahu and the terrorists of Hamas.
DeletePA forces keep Jews safe that enter into Area A in the West Bank--but the security cooperation between the IDF and the PA keeps the West Bank from falling into the hands of Hamas. There are over 400 terror attempts from the West Bank that are foiled every year by the security cooperation. Most of those attempts come from Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
DeleteA lot of pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel folk I encounter on different forums seem to believe that Israel has been led by Jewish-supremacist bigots for its entire history, and that's why the conflict has not been resolved.
ReplyDeleteIf there was an easy solution, we'd have found it in the past 100 years.
No easy solution doesn't equate to no responsibility to try and progress matters. The logic of your position is that nothing should changes, but every day new facts on the ground address changing - the settlements, and the demographics.
DeleteYou are falling into the trap of "something must be done; this is something, so do it!". To date, the Palestinians have resisted all changes that might bring peace closer. There's no point in rehashing the same proposals over and over.
DeleteMichael Oren gave an interview where he says that the problem with previous negotiations were that the burden was on Israel to make concessions, and there would be peace. The results were Palestinian lip service to be committed to "peace" and "recognizing Israel", but still carrying on incitement that Israel is squatting, and occupier, colonialist, expansionist, etc. On the other hand, terrorists are all "martyrs", "freedom fighters", "political prisoners", etc.
DeleteThe Trump plan is to first see if the Palestinians can provide peace, and only then Israel will concede land.
https://themedialine.org/news/opinion/the-trump-peace-plan-an-interview-with-ambassador-minister-michael-oren/
Could you tell me the last time Israel seriously made an effort? You need to try more than once every 12 years. I'm not denying Palestinians have a responsibility too. And if we can't agree, I think the Sharon vision of San imposed solution has considerable merit.
DeleteIn my opinion the presentation of the plan is in and of itself the solution.
ReplyDeleteThe one common factor in every proposed peace plan so far is that each one offers the Palestinians more than the previous one did, in the hope that after they said "No" last time they would finally be offered enough to say "Yes".
The problem is that they've gotten used to the idea that the more they hold out the more they get.
By merely presenting a plan that offers them less - by showing them this assumption is faulty - it increases the chances that they'll say yes to the next peace plan.
Trump will be gone in a year or two. The Palestinians will still be here.
Delete"How on earth can the Palestinians be given a fully independent state which will, in all likelihood, be used as a base for rocket attacks (and more) on Israel - with Israel politically restricted from responding due to the rockets being fired from civilian areas?"
ReplyDelete1 What is the current status quo, and what are the trends for the future on the rate of extortive rocket fire for the future? Has it escaped you notice that the occupation isn't working? No, we aren't occupying Gaza and yes, there isn't yet rocket fire from the West Bank - because the Netanyahu is too chicken to mount a proper (3 month) ground operation and clear out the terrorists.
2)A you confident that Israel still hold a military edge able to extract a 20:1 kill ratio in 2040?
3) On what basis can you deny Palestinians their right of self determination for 53 years for precrimes that haven't yet committed? There is no certainty in this world with or without occupation and demanding absolute certainty may be a disproportionate demand (and a counterproductive one). Don't the Palestinians also deserve security (empirically
Palestinian civilians face far more annual deaths from Israeli civilian terrorists and official security forces them Israeli civilians do, but you buy the line uncritically that it was absolutely necessary to police dense riots with live ammunition).
4) If a sovereign state attacks Israel then on what basis will it be more politically difficult to respond then the current situation, where rockets are also being fired from built up areas?
5) Let's say you are right. But how does ever increasing levels of settlement increase security? It's a figleaf for a land grab.
6) are you not bothered by the trends in public discourse and morality (price tag attacks, representation of extremist thugs in the Knesset, regular racist outbursts from Likud and Netanyahu) caused by 53 years of occupation of the lands of another people?
1. Which occupation do you mean? the Arab occupation of Gaza or of the west bank? there are no jews currently in Gaza so there can't be a Jewish occupation there. Most of the Arabs currently in Israel are descended from migrant workers who came from Egypt and Syria when the Jews returned and needed labourers. You think they should own the country? Nah.
DeleteSo what do you mean by 'the occupation isn't working?
2. Yup
3. See answer to 1
4. Think that's fairly obvious
5. Er it's our land. UN mandate and all that. Just because the Arabs claim something doesn't mean it belongs to them. They also want Spain back. And much of Eastern Europe.
6. I think if you are calling the Likud racists etc. then you have rose colored spectacles on about what others are saying.
1. West Bank
Delete2. It costs Palestinians about 40,000 USD to fire 20 X grad type rockets. Assume 40 percent are headed for a built up area. That's 16 Tamir interceptors at around 20,000 USD each, so 320,000USD. Do the maths.
The US may be a fading superpower and the Chinese and Europeans are antithetical. A democratic US President like Bernie is likely to embargo arms sales to Israel. Who knows what the future holds.
4) Netanyahu is too chickenshit to attack the terrorists in Gaza City now. However,he often strikes all over Syria and in West Iraq. Seems to me that national borders mean nothing.
5) So do the people born in the West bank all get a vote
6) 'the Arabs are voting in droves'
5. Lets see the Turks born in Germany or the Muslims born in France get the vote. Voting is for people who share, at some basic level, your vision of the country, not a vehicle to hand over your safety to someone who's only interest is to kill you. And then of course there's the old saying "if voting could change anything they wouldn't let you do it"....
DeleteSkeptic: I have some shocking news for you. The Turks born in Germany and the Moroccans born in France do get to vote. So do the Arabs born in Israel.
DeleteThe intellectual emptiness and moral bankruptcy of centrist Zionism is really something to behold. First we get told we have to give away land because otherwise there is NO OTHER OPTION than to "Continue to rule over the Palestinians forever, without giving them the vote?" (as if that's some big deal, anyway). Then they pivot around and say we can't give them an actual state because it "will, in all likelihood, be used as a base for rocket attacks (and more) on Israel". But why will it in all likelihood be used for these attacks? Could it be that Palestinians are our enemy? No that can't be, because then we'd actually have to treat them as an enemy and that's wrong because, something, something Rabbi Akiva. Lame.
ReplyDeleteYeah, it's clear that Palestinians are our enemies. No way that they could be given the vote and full rights as citizens including free movement throughout the country. They would be terrorizing the country. I mean except for the 1.5 million Palestinians who already have those rights.
DeleteIs it your position that every single Arab is an enemy and a legitimate target for military attack? Do explain.
Delete@David Ohsie
DeleteDon't you think that, just to mix things up once in a while, you should occasionally say something other than a moronic liberal cliche?
I didn't say Arabs were our enemy, I said Palestinians (a national, not an ethnic identity) are our enemy and actually I didn't say that, I said that the obvious logic of the centrist/moderate Zionist position is that they are our enemy. My personal position is that we simply need to liquidate all Palestinian nationalist organisations and then the rest of the Palestinian population would represent no problem. I'd still favour sending most of them somewhere else, but I'm sure the cheap labour lobby would want to keep them around. However, that's an internal issue and precisely none of your business.
If every single Palestinian - man, woman, child, baby, elderly, disabled, sick, etc - is our enemy, isn't the logical corollary that we are their enemy - and that every single Jewish man, woman child, baby, elderly, disabled, sick etc. is fair game in a bitter winner takes all stone aged existential battle?
DeleteThere is no "deal" because there is no chance of both side agreeing to it. It should really be called the "Proposal of the Century". Or perhaps more accurately, the "Proposal of the Week"
ReplyDeleteWeek is correct, I would guess. It seems to me that most of the world assumes that Trump is a blip and that in a few years it will be back to business as usual.
DeleteSo as time passes, my guess is, this deal will just fade away.
Not worth getting worked up about I think. But I might be wrong...
I fully agree. The current obsession the details and minutiae of the ritual mitzvos is because they don't know how to do anything else. They are literally incapable of relating to Hashem in any other way. Accessing any other aspect of the human psyche to serve is Hashem completely foreign to them. Pretty sad, really.
ReplyDeleteWhy ruling over the Palestinians forever, without giving them the vote, is not realistic??
ReplyDeleteIndeed, it is that was done in Eastern Jerusalem, and it works fine.
Palestinians in EJ who accept Israeli citizenship can vote. And what do you mean that "it works fine"? For who?
DeleteWorks fine for who? For the Palestinian neighborhoods neglected by the 'Ayarah? The dozens of Israelis stabbed in the Old City? Occupation isn't working.
DeleteHa. Go ask the east jerusalemites how well its working. Ignorance is bliss, eh?
DeleteIt may be "realistic" but it is morally reprehensible.
Delete"Another group of people summarily rejects the plan due to it not giving the Palestinians a fully independent state." I think is straw-manning for the most part. The criticism from the "left" is that you can't make a peace deal without involving the other side. The proposed "deal" is so much posturing.
ReplyDeletePalestinian leadership: We want all or nothing!
ReplyDeleteIsrael: OK.
Rationalists see the Miracle from modern day Cyrus Trump
ReplyDeletehttps://carolineglick.com/the-oslo-blood-libel-is-over/
My heart started thumping like a rabbit tail.
You mean the Palestinians lose if they don’t agree to peace? Does President Trump support this? I asked in stunned disbelief.
Yes, of course, he supports this. It’s his plan, after all, Friedman said, smiling and a bit surprised at my reaction.
Boom.
Unannounced, tears began flowing out of my eyes.
Are those tears of happiness or sadness, Friedman asked, concerned.
For several moments, I couldn’t speak. Finally, I said, I feel like I need to take off my shoes. I’m witnessing a miracle.
Confirmation bias like most of the millenarianism from religious Zionists. The next president might be Bernie.
Deleteof course there is a solution,and you know it everyone knows it even the extreme leftist's knows it and it is the ONLY solution," THEY ALL MUST GO".
ReplyDeleteisrael the only country that 20% of it's population are murderous enemies of the state who cannot wait for it's demise and look forward for the day they can slit the throat of every man woman and child,
this is a untenable situation and will only lead to an eventual bloody civil war
I want to war game this scenario through. What forces are you going to deploy on day one, and where? Have you mobilised your reserves? How prepared are the US and the EU for this move? What are the troops' rules of engagement? Has any transport for the deportees been arranged? What kind of military resistance whoare With you expecting from PA forces and terrorists?
DeleteMy thoughts: I think you would need a divisional sized force for each of Chevron, Ramallah, Jenin and Shechem. If you used D9 bulldozers I would expect to raze each of them in 2 weeks. It would take two weeks to mobilise and forces concentrate reserve forces. I would anticipate a number of them would refuse to carry out a patently illegal order. The Israeli High Court would intervene. The EU and US and the entire UN would put a full sanctions regime on Israel. No country would accept the deportees, and Jordan would shoot at forces attempting to enforce deportation. Hezbollah and Hamas would reduce Haifa and the cities of the South to complete economic inactivity. We would run out of Iron Dome interceptors in the second week of the war. The divisions raised will be needed for defensive purposes in the North and East. The Russians and Turks may intervene millitarily with long range missile attacks on Israeli air defence assets. The Iranians are certain to attempt to attack Dimona and other strategic assets. The Palestinians on the West Bank will not go peacefully in the trucks, and it will end up a blood bath.
As well as being strategically ruinous, of course deporting millions from their ancestral lands is inhumane and disgusting, but that's not the point. The point is that there Israel is a little client state of the US with limited power.
Of course, of you think that 20 percent of the population - elderly and young, sick and healthy, disabled and able bodied, men women and children - are a legitimate military target for the other 80 percent - I cannot see any objection to the 20 percent having such a murderous policy towards the 80.
Hat - I appreciate how you express your disagreement in thoughtful terms, with a willingness to explore possibilities. Its so much more useful than categorical denials and contradictions.
DeleteSome of your points can be quibbled with. Eg, I don't think the US would sanction Israel, I don't think refusal to carry out orders will have any more impact than it did in Sharon's Gaza expulsion, and I don't think Hezbolla is strong enough to stop Haifa. But you are correct that the Arabs certainly wouldn't leave quietly, and there would be numerous political problems of one sort or another.
I also would not call deportation "inhumane and disgusting", but agree that its distasteful and not the right way to go. (I say this with great respect for the courageous and righteous R.M.Kahana HYD.) Of course, this just means the same problems we have will continue, which no one denies. However, with the insanity of the 90s behind us, we are incrementally getting back to where we were before the suicidal psychotics in power then armed our enemies and literally tried to give away the country. They went way overboard. We can live with the current status quo, more or less, and it would be better than deportation.
The only honest thing you've said is that we are client state of the U.S., which is of course true and determines our scope of action.
DeleteMorally, however, we know exactly what standard we have to uphold to treat the Palestinians. The holy Palestinian Authority that you love so much has signed a letter endorsing China's counter-terrorism efforts in Uighur territories. We see, therefore, that the Palestinians see nothing wrong with rounding Muslims up in concentration camps, forcing them to eat pork and stealing their organs. Therefore, as long as we don't go further than that (and there's really no need to) we're good.
DH: Firstly, pogroms and liquidations are things that as a Jew I find rather more than "distasteful."
Deletecurrent intelligence estimated are that Hezbollah possess over 100,000 rockets. Over the course of 4 weeks, that's around 150 rockets every day, 7 days a week, 24 hours a day. Even if 20% of those rockets are intercepted before launch (a reasonable estimate given the IDF's repeated history of failure to suppress launches over every single conflict) , and of those launched 60% don't land on target (a number which is likely to reduce due to the "precisioning project" and the ubiquity of low cost avionics and actuators sourced from drones) that's 40 rockets, every hour of every day.
It takes 30 minutes to reload a 20 round Iron Dome Tamir interceptor magazine. SOP is to fire two Tamirs at each target, but in extremis that would likely drop to 1, with a 90% PK (probability of kill), so 4 hits per hour every hour every day for 4 weeks. That's enough to shut down a city.
Bear in mind that the radar would need to be shut down for servicing every few days or so creating gaps in coverage. The crews cannot service the interceptors every day for 4 weeks, 24 hours a day, without a break.
Donald would indeed not sanction Israel, but I have to tell you there's a decent chance that the next POTUS will be not be Trump.
The status quo is being expanded every day with the settlements. You can't complain simultaneously about the insecurity, and then place civillians in remote insecure locations every day. You can live with the status quo because of course it is so radically imbalanced in your favour. Because of the lack of a good fence, hundreds of Palestinians are killed - many without good reason - by the Israeli state -= every single year - while protesting for their human rights.
Gavriel M: I was taught as a four year old that *Two* *Wrongs* *Don't* *Make* *A* *Right*. It wasn't complicated as a four year old in the playground, and it isn't really that complicated now. I mean, yes it would be complicated if somehow there was a trade-off between protecting Palestinian human rights and Uighur human rights, but there isn't.
Also - not that this matters - did the PA actually sign a letter endorsing Chinese "counter terrorism efforts", or is this more Breitbart fake news? I don't read the Daily Stormer much, so I might have missed this story.
If the decision is ultimately made, against my wishes, to resettle the Arabs, the resettlement could still not be called either a pogrom or a liquidation. That's just typical left wing hyperbole. No one on the right called the Gaza expulsion a "pogrom." (And by the way, that's a perfect example of how people can and are removed from areas against their will.)
DeleteRe the rockets and military capabilities etc -you may well be right. I myself don't know. And I know that military assessments are very often wrong, starting from the assessment in 1947 that Israel would be wiped out by the Arabs its first day of existence. Either way, I think what you're doing is the best way to present an argument: by engaging the other side with argument, not bromides.
Re Trump - its useless to debate politics, I know, but just for fun, and because this post is already stale anyway, so no one else is reading this, I will waste my time telling you that the chances of a D winning the election are less than nil. Its just not happening. Trump is too popular, and they've not nobody. Their best hope is that they can somehow stop the identity politics that took over their party and alienated them from main street America, so that they can have a prayer (if they believed in prayer) in 2024. But I don't think they can. They are so invested in such ID politics that they cant nominate one without offending the others. And the blacks, their base, aren't coming out again like they did for Obama. I think they're in the political wilderness, at least re the White House, for at least a generation.
@The Hat
DeleteYou can download the whole text of the letter yourself from the internet. Google 1609635 OHCHR. But, first, here's some quotes from the Palestinian Authority of whom you never tire extolling the virtues:
We commend China’s remarkable achievements in the field of human rights by adhering to the people-centered development philosophy and protecting and promoting human rights through development. We also appreciate China’s contributions to the international human rights cause.
We appreciate China’s commitment to openness and transparency.
We note with appreciation that human rights are respected and protected in China in the process of counter-terrorism and deradicalization.
And remember, the Palestinian Authority that you think is so great and amazing didn't have to sign this letter. No-one actually gives a hoot what they think. They signed it because they just genuinely think incarcerating a million Muslims in camps is a justified response to terrorism. Who are we to say they're wrong?
Gavriel, anything about the thing you ought to have been taught as a 4 year old? I know quoting gotcha irrelevant right wing talking points is easier.
DeleteIf you Google the phrase you provided nothing turns up. But. That. Is. Not. The. Point.
I am not going to be distracted.
Mohamed was not justified in killing the Jews of Qurayza because of the (cited justification) of the killing of the Midianite women.
Two. Wrongs. Don't. Make. One. Right. Say it, Gabriel. Two. Wrongs. Don't. Make. One. Right. The tannaim knew about that when they elided the Biblical law of an eye for an eye. Once more as you need the practice. Two. Wrongs. Don't. Make. One. Right.
DF, would it be ok if you and your entire city should be dispossessed and expelled at gun point with some bloodshed? What is hateful to you do not do unto others. I'm being objective, you just retreat to right wing sectarian tropes about people they disagree with because you know right and wrong.
@The Hat
DeleteLearn to use Google. The UN provide it as a downloadable Word Doc. They're cute like that.
Two wrongs don't make right is a useful heuristic for four year olds because it stops them getting out of hand. It has some limited applicability even after that. However, other heuristics also come into play too. One of them is not to hold yourself to "moral" standards that only exist to benefit your enemies who then proceed to ignore them. That one you should learn by 13 or so.
The alternative to a consistent single rule of law for all is utter amorality where there is no "moral" standards whatsoever. All you can say about terrorism is that you don't like it. Not that it's immoral, or wrong to have shot the young Shalhevet Pass. After all, isn't the convention not to shoot babies in the face as they snooze in the sun a "moral" standard that only exists to benefit enemies.
DeleteThere's nothing immoral about evicting the Palestinians. They themselves don't believe that there is anything immoral about it and have formally expressed as much in writing. The only people who actually have a problem with it are degenerate post-Christian societies, but these countries are sick and dying and their morality is in every respect contemptible.
DeleteNow you are equivocating. Are you too degenerate to accept the existence of a universally binding morality - or not? Morality Gavriel. Yes or No?
DeleteIf Yes, your pathetic little distraction (pathetic and little because really, one has to struggle very hard to get into the mode of thought where because the PA signed a piece of paper signed a pro Chinese piece of apologia for the persecution of the Uighurs with 20 other countries on a report on the second agenda item of some obscure UN committee bureaucracy therefore every single Palestinian absolutely consents to IDF liquidating entire Palestinian cities even though they explicitly don't consent to being liquidated even remotely makes sense) gotcha Breitbart talking point is utterly, totally, completely, entirely irrelevant. Irrelevant, Gavriel.
Is there such a thing as morality, Gavriel. Yes? Or No?
It's not up to a Palestinian diplomat to define morality Gavriel, is it? Wrongs are wrong even if the Palestinians sign a meaningless piece of paper fig leafing for another wrong, aren't they Gavriel?
And over the last thousand years or so, displacing, robbing, raping and attacking civillians have very definitely been regarded as wrong, has it not Gavriel?
Calling those civilians enemies on grounds of their ethnicity doesn't change the fact that they are civilians - men, women and children - does it Gavriel? It doesn't change the fact that their babies snoozing in the sun are just as innocent and deserving of grace as our babies, does it Gavriel?
Shooting babies in the face, Gavriel. Yes. Or no?
For the record, I'm against shooting babies in the face.
DeleteAre Arab babies enemies?
DeleteWhich of these massacres do you approve of or disapprove of?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_and_massacres_during_the_1948_Palestine_war
Exceptions aside, most people are aware that no plan is perfect, and the problems you describe do not appear capable of peaceful resolution. But political solutions are like politicians - you don't go for perfect, you go for the best possible option, taking into account things like cost, practicality, and myriad other things. Surely RNS does not think he's the only one aware of the problems.
ReplyDeleteExactly this. Nobody is suggesting utopia is achievable. But there is an aleph-one infinity of possibilities between "utopia" and "somewhat better than the current situation."
DeleteBy way of analogy, Alzheimers is an intractable disease and all the obvious and indeed novel treatments to date have not been successful at curing patients. We nevertheless persist in treating patients with dignity, with drugs which have mild beneficial effects.
There's no excuse for lackadaisical indifference.
The people attempting to develop treatments for Alzheimer's Disease do not continue to try the same failed drugs in clinical trials over and over again. In their persistent efforts, they discard the failures and try new compounds. It is novel compounds that enter clinical trials after the previous attempts failed.
DeleteOslo is a failed paradigm. It must be discarded like all the failed alzheimer drugs that never made it to FDA approval. Just a bad, poorly thought out, reckless and irrational experiment.
There is no cure for Alzheimers therefore we must leave Alzheimer patients to suppurate, while steadily dispossessing them of successive rooms in their own house.
DeleteSo your analogy failed and only proved your own position wrong, and now you are morphing it into some weird imagined and unrelated tangent. Got it.
DeleteWhy are you blogging when you should be making babies? Are you part of the conspiracy?
DeleteI think the Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu is good for Israel. He knows whats he's doing.
ReplyDelete