Israeli-palestinian Conflict

[Lilllabettt]

Wow, that was really charitable. You're a Christian; just because you disagree with someone, doesn't mean you should put them down.

 

 

Who is it I disagree with?

Nobody listens to what Ms. Peters says in her book because she's sloppy. That's why its important to be careful in scholarship. Because it don't matter how right you are, if you're sloppy nobody will pay you any mind.

Reminds me of "Christ the King, Lord of History," another one for the hooey pile. 

[mortify ii]

Also as a Christian I'm disturbed by the unwavering support  religious conservatives give to Israel, especially those based on dubious end-times prophesying.

 

I too am disturbed by this and it's rather unfortunate. Israel is a secular state and persecutes Palestinians whether they be Muslim or Christian. The many Protestants are so wrapped about defending Israel goes to show just how powerful the propaganda disseminating the information is. 

[mortify ii]

Although controversial E. Michael Jones had some interesting points to make about this. Needless to say criticizing Israel generally gets one labeled with a term that almost discredits anything else you have to say. 

 

 

 

 

[mortify ii]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0kgG1_6Qn0[/youtube]

[Ice_nine]

Wow, words fail me. Where do you get your sources from? This is so biased, I don't even know what to say.

I'm the first to admit I'm just another idiot on the internet with an opinion, but I think you're also pretty biased.

 

Right now I'm reading The Iron Wall by Avi Shlaim. I'm sure there are biases within the text but I think it's a decent place to start educating myself. Another source that resonated with me in particular was a documentary narrated by a former Israeli soldier that exposed the crimes he witnessed and committed while serving. Unfortunately I do not remember the name of the film but I can look for it.

 

King Abdullah's letter to an American audience is something else I found compelling.

 

Those and a smattering of internet articles and videos are my sources. I'm not writing an academic paper, and if I was I know that it's not enough. There's propaganda everywhere and falsified information and years of complex history to wade through. I'm not pretending I know a lot but I'm trying to learn. In addition, beyond academic learning, real people are living under terror, and it breaks my heart. It messes me up emotionally.

 

Yes I am biased. I believe Christ is closest to the powerless, the poor etc, and I believe that generally speaking, the Palestinian people fall under that umbrella. So in a way I feel I ought to defend them in any small way I can because they are virtually defenseless.

 

It's just how I feel. Maybe it's wrong that I feel that way, but it is what it is.

 

Also keep in mind that I did spend a few of my formative years with a total pro-Israeli mindset. So it's not as if I'm totally benighted to opposing arguments. (Although the ones spoonfed to me were among the stupidest arguments).

 

well.

 

Thanks to the co-opting, Americans do not see Palestinians as the underdog. They associate them with a vast trans-national movement which has as one of its goals the destruction of the Jews.  If you buy into that narrative, Palestinians represent the Arab bullies. Israel is the underdog - a small speck of English-speaking blue-jean-wearing democracy adrift in a totalitarian, anti-Semitic sea. 

 

 And of course over time the consequences of this association have only gotten worse. After all, this is the same movement which sent Mohamed Atta to demolish the Twin Towers. Basically guaranteeing that Americans will get a wave of nausea whenever they think about making Israel negotiate with Palestine.

 

So that turned out nicely.  :| 

 

I had a brief love affair with end-times televangelicalism. It was an embarrassing stint during my high school years, but yes at one time I did buy into the narrative of Israel being the underdog. I remember John Hagee saying "Palestine never existed" because "it was never on a map if you look" or something to that effect, and I swallowed that because I was enmeshed in this apocalyptic/prosperity gospel bull. I blame that on being a dumb ass kid. What excuse do adult policy-makers have?

 

 

I too am disturbed by this and it's rather unfortunate. Israel is a secular state and persecutes Palestinians whether they be Muslim or Christian. The many Protestants are so wrapped about defending Israel goes to show just how powerful the propaganda disseminating the information is. 

 

I am especially disgusted with how the Holocaust is used as propaganda tool to give moral force to the existence of Israel, seeing as Zionist claims to the land far preceded the Holocaust. But it IS an emotionally effective argument. It got me back in the day.

[mortify ii]

I am especially disgusted with how the Holocaust is used as propaganda tool to give moral force to the existence of Israel, seeing as Zionist claims to the land far preceded the Holocaust. But it IS an emotionally effective argument. It got me back in the day.

 

Propaganda is to Democracy what force is to Tyranny. 

[Lilllabettt]

I had a brief love affair with end-times televangelicalism. It was an embarrassing stint during my high school years, but yes at one time I did buy into the narrative of Israel being the underdog. I remember John Hagee saying "Palestine never existed" because "it was never on a map if you look" or something to that effect, and I swallowed that because I was enmeshed in this apocalyptic/prosperity gospel bull. I blame that on being a dumb ass kid. What excuse do adult policy-makers have?

 

 

Well, their excuse is that it is a rather salient competing version of reality. 

 

Many people in America, the Arab and Islamic world, Israel and in Palestine "remember" things this way: when the dream of Palestine comes true, Palestinians will overwhelm the Jews, exterminate them from the land. and wipe Israel from the map. They will accomplish all this with the support of their Arab neighbors in the Middle East and the Islamic ummah spread across the globe, united with them in victory.

 

As a practical matter it makes zero difference whether this story originated in actual history or in the propaganda machines of the Arab world (you know my opinion.)  For many people this IS the story - this is how they remember it -- and their memory makes it real. Many Americans, Israelis, Arabs and Palestinians explain the conflict to themselves this way.  In their minds it's not Israel vs. Palestine, its Israel vs. the Arab world or Israel vs. the Islamic world.  This is not some esoteric theory of a lone crackpot. A LOT of people share this memory.That means that in a not insignificant way, Israel is in fact an underdog.

 

Now, not everybody remembers things that way. Many Palestinians are plenty cynical about "help" coming from their Arab neighbors. Many Arabs (especially in Egypt for example) are not interested in stretching "solidarity" with Palestine to the point of fighting a war to annihilate the Jews. Many Israelis view the overheated language coming out of Gaza every so often as the rhetoric of desperation -- not an accurate representation of the dreams of Palestine.  For these people, Israel does not face an existential threat from Palestine and the Arab world. For them Israel is not the underdog. They have a different reality. 

[superblue]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict

 

looks like some sense of peace was a possibility back in 2007, and it appears at least one major push to the problem at hand was when Hamas took power,  there may have been a real problem with the original party Fatah to begin with, but when a new challenger comes into play, things change drastically, and it doesn't help when the President of the USA suggests that Israel returns back to its' 1967 borders,  anyone wonder why it would be okay to tell Israel to do that, but why it wouldn't be okay for the USA to do so with any of our state borders ?

 

It is hard to take sides with Hamas, when it is Hamas time after time firing their rockets first. An perhaps it is directly ordered by the top to do so, perhaps Hamas is a sunshine government full of happy thoughts and it is only an evil terrorist org hiding behind innocent civilians to launch rockets. If it is terrorists and not a political party organizing the rocket attacks, surly Hamas is more than willing to aid in the capture and removal of such terrorists and to stabilize peace in the area, seems like any logical an peaceful government would want terrorist forces out of their town. There will eventually be a cease fire, but the fighting will never stop, there will never ever be peace in the middle east, nor will there be peace in North Korea, and other hell holes scattered around the world. Israel's best option is to take Hamas out of the picture sooner than later, and to then be prepared to deal with terrorist strikes after the war.

 

The problem with the middle east is it needs a one government system in place, and just have it be all under Saudi Arabia instead of divided up into other states, one government to blame and one way of ruling,  the current countries outside Saudi Arabia would be come states but in the end fall under Saudia Arabia and one flag.  Same Flag we fly under here in America, the south and the north don't really like each other all the much, Texas would rather secede from the union and I wouldn't blame em, and no one is ever fully happy with the politicians we have in our government so everyone is getting the stick every 4- 8 years.

 

If It was all just Saudi Arabia with some standard of governing that they set up, at least when things like this happen there would be a punishment under their law for such things taking place. so that would be Israel, Palestine,Jordan,Syria, Iraq,Yemen, Oman, the UAE,all under one flag of Saudia Arabia, then ya got

 

the Stan states, time to lump them under one flag too, If it has Stan at the end of it, tough cookies it is all lumped together now under the one glorious flag of Stanisstan or Stanadia ,  dunno why they love the word stan so much, but then you get to hold a new government for them accountable for all terrorist actions as well.  Instead of war, it would be justice between the states working together with a local police force to apprehend and imprison whom ever for building ieds, etc. Or sheesh look how big Russia is, perhaps pack everyone up outa the middle east and just ship em all there an tell em good luck. Send in the TSA to pat everyone down make sure they don't have any weapons since that is the TSAs' expertise , and then boom now we got an empty middle east to divide up the oil fields, turn the holy land into an area that no one is allowed into since no one can behave themselves, and then what ever.

[Amppax]

From Time Immemorial was very publicly dismantled. Norman Finkelstein did the initial research on it (his book Image and Reality in the Israeli Palestinian Conflict quite meticulously documents the falsified quotations and demographic calculations), but it also received negative reviews from Israeli historians such as Yehoshua Porath. Porath also noted, "In Israel, at least, the book was almost universally dismissed as sheer rubbish except maybe as a propaganda weapon." The book's popular appeal was centred mainly in the US, in non-academic circles - which goes back to the question Ice nine raised, that of unstinting support for territorial nationalism in certain quarters. In Europe it was disparaged by reviewers pretty much as soon as it came out - the Times Literary Supplement took it apart. It is worth noting that Peters' book was never peer-reviewed by an academic journal, and even people who actually agree with her politically - Daniel Pipes, for example - cautioned the readership that she was not a historian, used sloppy methods, and was overly partisan.

 

(A note on my own qualifications: I am doing my doctoral research with Palestinian and Israeli Jewish children of different communities, looking at how they approach and digest histories that are considered taboo in their community. My MA was in Jewish Studies and I looked at contemporary religious Jewish engagements with Palestinian experiences of displacement, so I am pretty well-read in this field on an academic level as well as having lived and worked in the region.)

 

I am uncomfortable with descriptors like 'pro-Israel' and 'pro-Palestine'. It's not a football match. I have many Israeli friends who are working for justice for Palestinians, often at some personal cost. People can't and shouldn't be split neatly into two equal opposing camps on the basis of ethnicity or nationality. Looking at your friend's website, I think he has this football match mentality. No matter what your political views are, I would be very suspicious of the idea that we as Catholics should owe de facto allegiance to a particular government by virtue of our faith. This is shackling our consciences. Governments can do awful things (and they do!). I also dislike the way he seems to conflate Israel with Jews. What about my Israeli Jewish friends who testify with Breaking the Silence (and organisation of ex-conscript soldiers speaking against abuses they either witnessed or perpetrated)? They would not view him as being particularly helpful to them or their country by backing it in everything it does - but they are Jewish too, and Breaking the Silence was founded by a religious Jew who felt he had a spiritual duty to start speaking up about the things he had participated in as a soldier. So when Christian Zionists talk about 'fidelity to the Jewish people', who and what do they mean? The ex-soldiers who stand up and say, "This is wrong, we shouldn't have done this" or the government that sent them to do it? The Israeli state is not the automatic arbiter of everything Jewish; it's not that simple.

 

Whenever I see this kind of religious nationalism, I remind myself of Jesus' teachings on the children, the prisoners who await visitors, the naked, the hungry, 'the least of these'. Especially the children, perhaps because I work with children. I will not practically venerate a flag and be unwaveringly loyal to any state. Jesus taught that the kingdom of heaven belongs to the little ones. He gave no other directions on real estate. If you attend to the needs of the most vulnerable, then we can't go far wrong. I know this because I have worked with both Palestinian and Israeli kids, many of them with profound disabilities - and their needs are almost exactly the same! What is in the interest of one is in the interest of the other. Looking at them I am reminded of what Mother Teresa said: "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other." Religiously-sanctioned ethnic nationalism will not help us to remember. Theologically and ethically I don't see how it can work. As St Paul tells us, we have no abiding city, we look for the one that is to come.

 

Thanks for clarifying. Again, I'm not very familiar with this. Like I said, I'm pretty opposed to his interpretation, but it's much better thought out then most Zionist Christian presentations I've run into. Just throwing it out there as something of interest on this topic. He even told us in class that this presentation is largely a simplification of the issues. 

 

Again, I'm involved/interested/knowledgeable about the theological aspects. I definitely have a problem with religious nationalism, it seems antithetical to a catholic (in the sense of universal) perspective. You're point about the children is interesting, lots to ponder. Thanks. 

Edited July 21, 2014 by Amppax

[kujonicus]

Wow, words fail me. Where do you get your sources from? This is so biased, I don't even know what to say.

 

It seems to me that she didn't espouse one POV over the other.

 

One of my college roommates once described the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as one side throwing rocks, prompting the other side to launch missiles that knock down buildings, creating more rocks to be thrown.

 

The wisdom of this analogy increases every single day. 

There's nothing biased about facts, and the facts are that this is a WILDLY asymmetrical war, in that the Israelis are able to basically deflect every single rocket launched by the Palestinians with their superb missile defense system. Meanwhile, Israel is straight up pummeling Gaza, destroying homes, businesses and, yes, a fair amount of civilians. The Palestinians aren't blameless in this. Hamas is just the latest iteration of several historical hardline Palestinian liberation groups that can't seem to exist and define itself without a violent opposition to Israel. The Palestinians abide these groups because they use grassroots tactics to manipulate people to either join them or at least accept their existence. Hamas is famous now for taking over hospitals and doing a great job providing services to the communities they serve. They've accumulated a lot of public capital because of it. And Israel's continued opposition, and opening up lands for new settlements, creates the climate where the Palestinians are susceptible to Hamas' ideology. 

 

Now, your assessment of the morality of this situation is, of course, your opinion. But it strikes me as odd to get all worked up into a lather decrying the one-sided (ie.- pro-Palestinian) nature of the coverage of this conflict. It sort of reminds me of someone getting whiny that we don't talk more about the Nazi soldiers who were killed or injured by angry Jews in the concentration camps!

[Lilllabettt]

 

 But it strikes me as odd to get all worked up into a lather decrying the one-sided (ie.- pro-Palestinian) nature of the coverage of this conflict. It sort of reminds me of someone getting whiny that we don't talk more about the Nazi soldiers who were killed or injured by angry Jews in the concentration camps!

 

 

 

1. The media coverage has not been one-sidedly pro-Palestine. If you find it is so you may in fact be drinking some specially prepared kool-aid.

2. Drawing equivalencies between Israeli soldiers and Nazis is the sort of inflammatory language we saw from people who rode the intifadas as if they were a hobby horse. Kindly consider flying a kite or soaking your head.

[kujonicus]

1. The media coverage has not been one-sidedly pro-Palestine. If you find it is so you may in fact be drinking some specially prepared kool-aid.

2. Drawing equivalencies between Israeli soldiers and Nazis is the sort of inflammatory language we saw from people who rode the intifadas as if they were a hobby horse. Kindly consider flying a kite or soaking your head.

 

1. Your reading comprehension skills need some work, as I most certainly did not say that the coverage has been one-sided, but rather suggested that I found it odd that anyone would think so, and be bothered by it.

 

2. Again, you either didn't understand, or didn't read that last paragraph, as I said that being bothered by lack of coverage (or sympathy) for Israel's position is being narrowminded in their assessment of the conflict. 

 

Now excuse me while I go dry my hair and take my nephew out to fly a kite.

[Lilllabettt]

1. Your reading comprehension skills need some work, as I most certainly did not say that the coverage has been one-sided, but rather suggested that I found it odd that anyone would think so, and be bothered by it.

 

2. Again, you either didn't understand, or didn't read that last paragraph, as I said that being bothered by lack of coverage (or sympathy) for Israel's position is being narrowminded in their assessment of the conflict. 

 

Now excuse me while I go dry my hair and take my nephew out to fly a kite.

 

1. Pardon me, but I'll have to take your word for it. Because your way of putting it is rather unclear. For example, when you say:  

"it strikes me as odd to get all worked up into a lather decrying the one-sided (ie.- pro-Palestinian) nature of the coverage of this conflict"

 

 

That "the" in there does not seem to admit any question about the coverage being one-sided. But I will take you at your word.

 

2. I understand perfectly. You think media is obligated to balance the Israeli and Palestinian perspectives as much as they are obligated to balance the Nazi and Jew perspective (i.e., not at all). I'm saying that sort of talking is inflammatory and deserves a sedative. And honestly. Irony! Because isn't it narrow minded to think the Israelis, like the Nazis, do not have reasonable concerns vis-a-vis their enemies?

 

Unless you meant to say the Nazis have some reasonable concerns vis a vis the Jews? (Here's me hoping not). 

[KnightofChrist]

This morning I downloaded the app that sounds an alarm every time rockets are fired into Israel. While writing this post it has sounded off 6 times and appears to be for 6 different locations (not sure I don't read hebrew and the name of the cities are in hebrew). Since downloading it it has gone off at least 50 times, at least. I know that for every alarm people are likely rushing into bomb shelters, Israel counter attacks, and since Hama uses human shields and they use civilian buildings to shoot their rockets I know it likely means Palestinians are being bombed and killed.  

 

All of it causes me to wonder where the peace process would be today if it were not for terrorist groups like Hamas being part of the Palestinian government. I'm not sure about Israel but it seems that it could be possible they actually want peace. But it is very hard for me to see that Hama wants peace with the Zionists/Jews/Israelis. How can there be peace if Hamas refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist? Why did they begin to shoot rockets into Israel unless they wanted war? They've been shooting rockets for years, and since the beginning of this year. Why didn't anyone seem care until Israel fought back with their own missile attacks? Why do so many not seem to notice until Israel fights back? Why does Hamas use human shields and use civilian buildings and vehicles in warfare if they really cared about preventing Israel from killing their people?

[Ice_nine]

1. The media coverage has not been one-sidedly pro-Palestine. If you find it is so you may in fact be drinking some specially prepared kool-aid.

 

 

From the news I've been watching it seems, perhaps not one-sided, but I think that it might be starting to slant that way? Perhaps it's just the sources I'm using (I don't watch a lot of cable news).

 

 

As a practical matter it makes zero difference whether this story originated in actual history or in the propaganda machines of the Arab world (you know my opinion.)  For many people this IS the story - this is how they remember it -- and their memory makes it real. Many Americans, Israelis, Arabs and Palestinians explain the conflict to themselves this way.  In their minds it's not Israel vs. Palestine, its Israel vs. the Arab world or Israel vs. the Islamic world.  This is not some esoteric theory of a lone crackpot. A LOT of people share this memory.That means that in a not insignificant way, Israel is in fact an underdog.

 

So people oversimplify a complex situation in order to form a coherent collective memory narrative. I get that. It's something most of us probably do to make sense of the world. But it can become (and has become) really dangerous to do so.

 

 

This morning I downloaded the app that sounds an alarm every time rockets are fired into Israel. While writing this post it has sounded off 6 times and appears to be for 6 different locations (not sure I don't read hebrew and the name of the cities are in hebrew). Since downloading it it has gone off at least 50 times, at least. I know that for every alarm people are likely rushing into bomb shelters, Israel counter attacks, and since Hama uses human shields and they use civilian buildings to shoot their rockets I know it likely means Palestinians are being bombed and killed.  

 

All of it causes me to wonder where the peace process would be today if it were not for terrorist groups like Hamas being part of the Palestinian government. I'm not sure about Israel but it seems that it could be possible they actually want peace. But it is very hard for me to see that Hama wants peace with the Zionists/Jews/Israelis. How can there be peace if Hamas refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist? Why did they begin to shoot rockets into Israel unless they wanted war? They've been shooting rockets for years, and since the beginning of this year. Why didn't anyone seem care until Israel fought back with their own missile attacks? Why do so many not seem to notice until Israel fights back? Why does Hamas use human shields and use civilian buildings and vehicles in warfare if they really cared about preventing Israel from killing their people?

 

Where's the app that tells you every time a rocket is fired into Palestine? Also, how many of these rockets aren't intercepted before they can cause any damage? Is there an app for that?

 

I can understand why there are people who believe Israel shouldn't exist. The initial claims to the land were dubious and their subsequent occupation was illegal, in my opinion. Kind of like how it was wrong for Europeans to claim land in the Americas where indigenous people already lived some 400 something years ago. I'm essentially living on stolen land, but four centuries soothe my conscience a bit and make it nearly impossible for anyone to take back what was/is rightfully theirs.

 

And you wonder why Hamas uses civilian buildings? Do you know how small Gaza is? Where are they going to put a military installation?

The difference over in Palestine is that this mass emigration of Jews there happened a mere 60-70 years ago. That's what? Three generations? The illegal takeover, the confiscation of land that families have lived on for centuries, that's  all still very fresh. You cannot empathize with them wanting Israel to be gone? I don't think it's possible to eliminate Israel non-violently (perhaps in a perfect imaginary world the could all be repatriated from whence their forebears came), but knowing your grandparents land and lives have been stolen by the grandparents of the Israelis who now live there, that has to sting. And it may be oversimplifying but to just say "oh how terrible is Hamas!" consider how ticked off you would be if you were in their situation. How violence might start to seem appealing.