The US also publicly said things today they don't normally say about allies, but with their track record, what they say really doesn't mean much, but nonetheless...
Quote:
‘They’re starting to lose that support,’ Mr Biden said during a campaign fundraiser in Washington on Tuesday.
Quote:
“This is the most conservative government in Israel’s history,” he said before later adding that Mr Netanyahu must “strengthen” and “change” his coalition government to find a two-state solution to the decades-long conflict between Israel and Palestine.
Quote:
Mr Netanyahu “has to change this government. This government in Israel is making it very difficult,” Mr Biden said.
“We have an opportunity to begin to unite the region,” he said, according to Reuters. “They still want to do it. But we have to make sure that Bibi understands that he’s got to make some moves to strengthen ... you cannot say no Palestinian state ... that’s going to be the hard part.”
The US also publicly said things today they don't normally say about allies, but with their track record, what they say really doesn't mean much, but nonetheless...
Support within Israel for Netanyahu seems pretty abysmal too. He's likely done.
While Netanyahu is unpopular, and many realize and expect that heads will need to roll as an aftermath of 10/7, the current war in Gaza is still supported by most Israelis, as a necessary cause to root out Hamas.
“This is the most conservative government in Israel’s history,” he said before later adding that Mr Netanyahu must “strengthen” and “change” his coalition government to find a two-state solution to the decades-long conflict between Israel and Palestine.
Even if Israel pushed for a two-state solution, which they have a few times in the past, how do you get Palestinians to accept it? They have shown in the past they they want a one-state solution, and that one state not being Israel. Especially with Hamas in power as their stated goal is transparent, and it's the destruction of Israel and eradication of Jews. They want "from the river to the sea", in other words, all of it. This continued stance has basically just ensured that they may end up with none of it one day. Anyone who wants a two-state solution should hope that Hamas is defeated as swiftly as possible.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 12-12-2023 at 05:57 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
Even if Israel pushed for a two-state solution, which they have a few times in the past, how do you get Palestinians to accept it? They have shown in the past they they want a one-state solution, and that one state not being Israel. Especially with Hamas in power as their stated goal is transparent, and it's the destruction of Israel and eradication of Jews. They want "from the river to the sea", in other words, all of it. This continued stance has basically just ensured that they may end of with none of it one day. Anyone who wants a two-state solution should hope that Hamas is defeated as swiftly as possible.
Just because that’s what Hamas wants doesn’t mean it’s what all Palestinians want, and just because they’ve co-opted “from the river to the sea” to mean the eradication of Israel and the Jewish people, does not mean that anyone calling for it wants the same as they do. It’s a call for Palestinian freedom, first and foremost, something a two-state solution would offer. Why would we automatically assume Palestinians would struggle to accept the one thing to majority of them want?
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
Just because that’s what Hamas wants doesn’t mean it’s what all Palestinians want, and just because they’ve co-opted “from the river to the sea” to mean the eradication of Israel and the Jewish people, does not mean that anyone calling for it wants the same as they do. It’s a call for Palestinian freedom, first and foremost, something a two-state solution would offer. Why would we automatically assume Palestinians would struggle to accept the one thing to majority of them want?
In December 2021, Palestinians were polled and a large majority rejected the idea of a two-state solution.
The two-state solution is something that Israel and the West has wanted, but was never very popular in the Arab world. It's been offered at least 5 times in the past going back to the 1930s, so before Hamas even existed, and each time it was rejected. The proposed post-war partition map of Israel during the 1960s Arab invasion also did not include a Palestinian state, but rather Israel divided between Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. I don't believe these countries even really want one today, it's just a way for them to turn the script to make it look like Israel is against a smaller group. They used it to reverse the David and Goliath perspective. Instead of Israel being the David against the Arab Goliath, it's now the Palestinians who claim the underdog roll. It was a way for them to get more political sympathy and illustrates how they are being used as pawns by surrounding Arab countries.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 12-12-2023 at 01:35 PM.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
Just because that’s what Hamas wants doesn’t mean it’s what all Palestinians want, and just because they’ve co-opted “from the river to the sea” to mean the eradication of Israel and the Jewish people, does not mean that anyone calling for it wants the same as they do. It’s a call for Palestinian freedom, first and foremost, something a two-state solution would offer. Why would we automatically assume Palestinians would struggle to accept the one thing to majority of them want?
The problem for a two state solution for Palestine is it would a be a tiny state, basically Gaza and what they have left in the West bank, maybe Israel would close down a few settlements but there is no way they are going to roll back to 1967 borders, Israel would have no guarantees giving up land would bring peace and so they won't give up much
Just because that’s what Hamas wants doesn’t mean it’s what all Palestinians want, and just because they’ve co-opted “from the river to the sea” to mean the eradication of Israel and the Jewish people, does not mean that anyone calling for it wants the same as they do. It’s a call for Palestinian freedom, first and foremost, something a two-state solution would offer.
I generally respect your posts and viewpoint even though we’re on opposite ends, but I have to call this part out, and I hope you see where I’m coming from and re-think what you said.
I find it absolutely asinine that Jewish people are just supposed to look past anyone yelling “from the river to sea”, as some sort of call for Palestinian freedom, when the slogan in and of itself calls for the eradication of Israel and slaughter of Jewish people. Hamas themselves have blatantly said they want to kill all the Jews and have no interest in peace.
Why the hell should that statement not be taken at face value? And how is that statement being repeated out in the open not considered hateful?
Most of the people yelling that slogan at these rallies can’t even tell you which river or which sea, but have no problem yelling it. Their knowledge of this conflict is what they learned on TikTok earlier that day, and they’re just going around chanting destructive slogans.
This is similar to the disastrous congressional hearings with the Ivy League heads from Harvard and Penn. They couldn’t even acknowledge that anyone yelling genocide against Jews is hate speech, and it “depends on the context”. Imagine if that same question was asked about black people or the LGBT2Q+. I can bet my savings her answer would not have been the same.
Accepting this kind of stuff is what has bred anti-semitism.
While I have no issue with Palestinians or others championing their cause, I find it insane that we should just accept people yelling “from the river to the sea” as some sort of righteous chant, when this is the same rhetoric and ideology being spewed by terrorist organizations.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by Language; 12-12-2023 at 05:44 PM.
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to Language For This Useful Post:
I generally respect your posts and viewpoint even though we’re on opposite ends, but I have to call this part out, and I hope you see where I’m coming from and re-think what you said.
I find it absolutely asinine that Jewish people are just supposed to look past anyone yelling “from the river to sea”, as some sort of call for Palestinian freedom, when the slogan in and of itself calls for the eradication of Israel and slaughter of Jewish people. Hamas themselves have blatantly said they want to kill all the Jews and have no interest in peace.
From the poll I posted:
Quote:
The majority is still opposed to the two-state solution. But support for this solution has increased compared to the September 2021 findings and decreased compared to the October 2021 findings.
The two-state solution remains the one with the largest percentage of support compared to other solutions, including that of the one-state solution in which the two sides, Palestinians and Israeli Jews, enjoy equal rights; support for the one-state solution is higher than one quarter and less than one third.
So we know three things. They want a "free" Palestinian state (which assumes no annexation by other states, or continued non-state status). The majority does not support a two-state solution. An even larger majority does not support a one-state solution where Palestinians and Israeli Jews enjoy equal rights.
What does that leave on the table and what solution is acceptable to the majority? Unless public opinion has drastically changed since then, but I doubt it.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
I generally respect your posts and viewpoint even though we’re on opposite ends, but I have to call this part out, and I hope you see where I’m coming from and re-think what you said.
I find it absolutely asinine that Jewish people are just supposed to look past anyone yelling “from the river to sea”, as some sort of call for Palestinian freedom, when the slogan in and of itself calls for the eradication of Israel and slaughter of Jewish people. Hamas themselves have blatantly said they want to kill all the Jews and have no interest in peace.
Why the hell should that statement not be taken at face value? And how is that statement being repeated out in the open not considered hateful?
Most of the people yelling that slogan at these rallies can’t even tell you which river or which sea, but have no problem yelling it. Their knowledge of this conflict is what they learned on TikTok earlier that day, and they’re just going around chanting destructive slogans.
This is similar to the disastrous congressional hearings with the Ivy League heads from Harvard and Penn. They couldn’t even acknowledge that anyone yelling genocide against Jews is hate speech, and it “depends on the context”. Imagine if that same question was asked about black people or the LGBT2Q+. I can bet my savings her answer would not have been the same.
Accepting this kind of stuff is what has bred anti-semitism.
While I have no issue with Palestinians or others championing their cause, I find it insane that we should just accept people yelling “from the river to the sea” as some sort of righteous chant, when this is the same rhetoric and ideology being spewed by terrorist organizations.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There isn’t a lot here that makes sense, so I’m not sure what to respond to.
Before judging those who learned “destructive slogans” on TikTok, you could at least look into the origins and usage of the phrase over the last 60 years, which predates Hamas’ usage by 50+ years. They don’t determine the meaning of the phrase any more than pro-fascism truckers determine the meaning of the Canadian flag.
It is interesting you mention Black people, though, considering “Black lives matter” was also repeatedly misrepresented in an attempt to demonize and discredit anyone who used it.
This is from Dov Waxman, an “internationally recognized expert on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, Jewish–Arab relations in Israel, Israeli politics and foreign policy, Israel–United States relations, American Jewry’s relationship with Israel, Jewish politics, and contemporary Antisemitism” and a man who is Jewish himself:
Quote:
Dov Waxman, a professor and director of the Nazarian Center for Israel Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, does not perceive the slogan to be "inherently threatening" and believes that is not what many Palestinians and their supporters mean when repeating it.
"It's an expression of Palestinian nationalism and it's an expression of a demand for Palestinian freedom or self-determination," said Waxman. "I think Palestinian self-determination need not come at the expense of Jewish self-determination. Nor do I think Palestinian freedom has to be considered a threat to Jewish rights."
According to Waxman, many Jewish people hear the chant as a call for "the violent destruction of Israel," which is how Hamas and its supporters use the phrase.
Waxman said that "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" originated in the 1960s as an expression of Palestinian nationalism and has been co-opted by various groups over time, including Hamas when the group formed in 1987.
He noted that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud Party believe that "Jews had the rightful claim to this entire territory."
"They still would like to have Jewish sovereignty, essentially, from the river to the sea," Waxman said.
Quote:
Waxman said that "From the river to the sea…" has different meanings depending on the context in which it is used.
"If it's invoked by supporters of Hamas, for example, [the chant] has a very different meaning, and I would understand that as much more threatening than if it was advocated by, say, Rashida Tlaib," Waxman said.
Waxman says the vision of a single state in which Israeli and Palestinian people live with equal rights is "utopian," but "I don't think we should necessarily see [the slogan] as a call for ethnic cleansing or genocide, which is how many Jews do hear it."
According to Waxman, the backlash against the slogan is a result of an "effort to essentially insist that any form of anti-Zionism, any opposition to Israel's continued existence as a Jewish state, is inherently antisemitic, so even when that statement is now [said] by a college student who might favour just granting of equal rights [to] Palestinians in the West Bank, in Gaza, there are those who want to insist that that is inherently antisemitic."
I hope you do the same as you asked of me, see where experts like Waxman are coming from, and re-think what you said and the way you demonize anyone who utters that phrase.
EDIT: It’s also fairly telling that the people who thanked your post are a veritable who’s who for consuming and spreading pro-Israeli misinformation in this thread. At the end of the day, you’ll see what you want to see and hate who you want to hate, regardless of how unfounded the specific reasons may be, and regardless of how many Jewish experts provide more enlightened perspectives.
So we know three things. They want a "free" Palestinian state (which assumes no annexation by other states, or continued non-state status). The majority does not support a two-state solution. An even larger majority does not support a one-state solution where Palestinians and Israeli Jews enjoy equal rights.
What does that leave on the table and what solution is acceptable to the majority? Unless public opinion has drastically changed since then, but I doubt it.
Considering the three main solutions are all achieve the same goal, and those three account for about 67% of the preferred solutions, it stands to reason that any solution along those lines will be welcome to the majority.
Part of the problem, and these polls have highlighted this issue over the years, is that Palestinians do not actually believe in or trust Israel to implement this solution in any meaningful way, and a big part of that can be tied back to the settlements and settler terrorism they believe the IDF is complicit in.
Considering the three main solutions are all achieve the same goal, and those three account for about 67% of the preferred solutions, it stands to reason that any solution along those lines will be welcome to the majority.
I don't think that's how the math works with those kinds of polls. If 30% of people want red skittles and 30% want green skittles, it doesn't stand to reason that 60% would be happy with either. The questions were asked independently of each other. Unless I am misunderstanding what you mean.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The world starting to voice that enough is enough. The antisemitic Canadians, Kiwis and Aussies issue a statement.
Meanwhile at the UN a total of 153/193 antisemitic countries register their disgust at the slaughter of innocents.
Quote:
The prime ministers of Australia, New Zealand and Canada have called in a joint statement for a sustainable ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and an end to the “continuous suffering” of its citizens.
“We are alarmed at the diminishing safe space for civilians in Gaza,” a joint statement released on Wednesday said, as the Israeli bombardment of Hamas militants in the enclave continued.
“The price of defeating Hamas cannot be the continuous suffering of all Palestinian civilians.”
I don't think that's how the math works with those kinds of polls. If 30% of people want red skittles and 30% want green skittles, it doesn't stand to reason that 60% would be happy with either. The questions were asked independently of each other. Unless I am misunderstanding what you mean.
There was a question that specifically had people rank their preferences, and 67% of respondents chose a one or two state solution with equal rights for Palestinians and Israelis.
As in any negotiation where there is a massive power imbalance between the two parties there is no solution unless Israel approves of it, they are in charge, the idea of a one state solution with equal rights is therefore utterly dead in the water, a one state solution with Arab Israelis with little or no civil rights, certainly no voting rights is the only one state solution Israel might go for and even that I doubt
Again I don't see any solution, I think this goes on for a hundred years with Palestinians living grim unfulfilled desperate lives while being used as pawns, sacrificial offerings to left wing edge lord anti colonialism and shia sunni jockeying for power
Anyone proposing a one state solution always seems totally disingenuous. It's a movement that's become popular with right wing Israelis too. The Israeli perspective on it seems to be that it will allow them to take over the West Bank. The Palestinian perspective on it seems to be that they will just have numbers and be able to out vote the Israelis. Both of these perspectives ignore the fundamental core of democracy, in that all people are represented, not just the group with the biggest numbers and/or most power.
The people proposing this solution seem to only do so when they think future demographics are on their side. In reality, the future demographic situation is up in the air. Birth rates among Arabs are falling dramatically and who knows what would happen if borders were removed and it just became a free for all with free movement of people. In a one state solution, there are no more "settlers", just citizens of one country moving into other areas of that country.
The concept is further muddied as the region contains huge groups of people, on both sides, who hold deeply religious values that are decidedly undemocratic.
I can't possibly see how a one state solution wouldn't end up in more conflict. The closest functional solution to that would be some kind of binational economic federation. This would still require hard borders.
