Apartheid? in the West Bank and Gaza

[Guest Derek L]

South Africa is a mess, by many objective standards worse now than before. Certainly, that does not justify the system it had before. But the system it has today is also inexcusable and needs major reform, just as badly as the one preceding it, if not even more so. Not sure of the relevance that has to Israel, because the two situations are not comparable.

I don’t think anyone did justify it……………..But in all actuality, when Apartheid was created in the late 1940s, it was similar in many respects to what was done in the South by the likes of Bull Connor and the Jim Crow laws and even shared many of the aspects of how Canada, Australia and New Zealand dealt with their respective Indigenous Peoples early on…………I think with the later three examples though, the key difference being that a clear majority implemented such laws, well in South Africa, it was minority rule against a population that was inundated with radical Communists supported by a Superpower……………

Now, as for Israel, there is no question that Arabs in the West Bank are not treated the same as Israeli citizens. The reasons and necessities for why this is so are obvious. The entire arrangement is temporary, and Israel has on many occasions under several different administrations willingly negotiated to cede the vast majority of the West Bank to a Palestinian state, which the Palestinians have repeatedly refused because Israel would not give in to impossible demands (demands which would doom Israel's future, such as letting millions of Arabs return to Israel). The situation is a temporary occupation, continuing until negotiations are at last successful, not an intended permanent state of affairs. The only reason it has lasted as long as it has is where any other occupied people would have jumped at the chance to get independence on 98% of the territory they demand, the Arabs would rather suffer and complain and reject any realistic proposal.

The whole "Israeli Apartheid" crowd is tragically misinformed, useful tools for Arab propaganda, nothing more.

Being the devils advocate, one could draw some parallels between the two “struggles”……….The Israelis have the West Bank and Gaza Strip…….The South Africans the Bantustans……..I would say where the differences start to appear is that the division of South Africa into separate self governed “Black Homelands” was never given a chance to succeed………….Though it was far from ideal, the Zulu and several other historic tribes started showing progress in terms of self governance and self reliance, only to be swallowed by the Xhosa dominated, ANC governed “Rainbow Nation”……..And here we are today, not only is South Africa dominated by white/black division, but also by the various indigenous tribal groups…….

Would this happen in Israel without Jewish control? To answer that, just look at the birthrates of the two peoples…….

[WIP]

I'm not sure how many European South Afrikans have been murdered in total...but over 4,000 farmers & their families have been murdered*. Genocide Watch puts South Afrika at level 6 which is one stage away from actually eliminating the target population.

*raped, tortured and murdered.

Does the term "blowback" mean anything to you?

[DogOnPorch]

Does the term "blowback" mean anything to you?

She was just asking to be raped...

[Bonam]

Does the term "blowback" mean anything to you?

Oh so it's alright to kill white people. Got it.

[bud]

South Africa is a mess, by many objective standards worse now than before. Certainly, that does not justify the system it had before. But the system it has today is also inexcusable and needs major reform, just as badly as the one preceding it, if not even more so. Not sure of the relevance that has to Israel, because the two situations are not comparable.

Now, as for Israel, there is no question that Arabs in the West Bank are not treated the same as Israeli citizens. The reasons and necessities for why this is so are obvious. The entire arrangement is temporary, and Israel has on many occasions under several different administrations willingly negotiated to cede the vast majority of the West Bank to a Palestinian state, which the Palestinians have repeatedly refused because Israel would not give in to impossible demands (demands which would doom Israel's future, such as letting millions of Arabs return to Israel). The situation is a temporary occupation, continuing until negotiations are at last successful, not an intended permanent state of affairs. The only reason it has lasted as long as it has is where any other occupied people would have jumped at the chance to get independence on 98% of the territory they demand, the Arabs would rather suffer and complain and reject any realistic proposal.

The whole "Israeli Apartheid" crowd is tragically misinformed, useful tools for Arab propaganda, nothing more.

propaganda:

- it's all temporary

- it's not going to continue

- israel made painful concessions

- israel wants a palestinian state

- they could have had 98% of the land

reality:

- israel has never defined its borders because their plan has always been expansionism

- the government of israel has been expanding the settlements and permanently annexing palesitnian land since 1967. there is nothing temporary about their actions

- the best offer given to palestinians (which was informally given by barak) was 98% of land, no east jerusalem and the west bank split into 4 cantons, separated by israeli only roads. no jerusalem, no control of borders, air and sea. how amazingly generous!

- there are over 600,000 illegal jewish settlers on palestinian land and they continue to increase

- the likud platform explicitly states that they will never allow a palestinian state

do you believe what you type or are you desperately wanting others to believe it? it's time to stop the propaganda and accept the truth that the ball is and has always been in israel's court. they are the ones who are against a real and just palestinian state.

Edited January 30, 2013 by bud

[bush_cheney2004]

Does the term "blowback" mean anything to you?

So it would be "blowback" if First Nations started killing "European Canadians" ?

[DogOnPorch]

So it would be "blowback" if First Nations started killing "European Canadians" ?

In BC, there were no 'Indian massacres'...quite the opposite.

For example...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilcotin_War

[WIP]

She was just asking to be raped...

Oh so it's alright to kill white people. Got it.

Not what I said, but the South African whites - both the Afrikaanders and the less fanatical English who briefly ran things, sowed the seeds of their misfortune long, long ago, when, they created the Apartheid system rather than extending equal rights to blacks and coloureds (the fact that South Africa had over a million mixed white/black people should tell you something about hypocrisy of the Apartheid Era when, supposedly, there was no race-mixing allowed.....apparently rape was permitted though!)

The Afrikaanders had their own bullshit story about how providence led the 17th century Dutch migrants there after religious persecution at home, and their nation had God's blessing.....haven't we heard that one before? And because God told them to create their own white homeland, God could not permit them to extend equal rights and allow mixing with blacks....which happened anyway, legitimate or not. So, the white "tribe" created a bunch of separate, unviable little Bantustans so each black tribe could go back to their own "nation" at night, after working all day for meagre wages in the white nation (except for black farm workers who were provided separate quarters). And they couldn't understand why blacks weren't overjoyed about this arrangement!

When the system was collapsing, that's when we heard talk again about reviving the Orange Free State as a white homeland. If they were so adamant about having their white nation, why didn't they set it up to begin with, rather than hogging the whole thing and all its resources and marginalizing the majority population?

For the record, not all the stories about being white in present day South Africa paint the picture you guys portray -- a bunch of dark savages preying on white women and killing white men, but I used the world "blowback" for a reason. Because the policies of wars of opportunity and aggression you seem to be so enthusiastic about, will eventually result in some sort of blowback against the U.S., Canada and who knows who else!

As for Israel...I don't know what to advise anyone living there today, since if I use the example of an animal control officer who has just seized the jaws of an alligator - he can't let go of the alligator once he's grabbed hold of it, and if he doesn't have the backup to get the alligator into a cage, he's stuck holding on for as long as he can. Don't know how far the analogy fits, but it's safe to say that in both cases, a little forward thinking is advised before plunging ahead.

[DogOnPorch]

The above cries the beloved country for a soundtrack.

How are the Zulus, anyways?

Edited January 30, 2013 by DogOnPorch

[TheNewTeddy]

The above cries the beloved country for a soundtrack.

How are the Zulus, anyways?

This is not exactly related to the West Bank?

[DogOnPorch]

This is not exactly related to the West Bank?

Apartheid...you brought it up.

[TheNewTeddy]

This is not a discussion on Apartheid. This is a discussion on the West Bank and Gaza.

[DogOnPorch]

But not Apartheid...

Thread Title:

Apartheid? in the West Bank and Gaza

Edited January 31, 2013 by DogOnPorch

[TheNewTeddy]

Apartheid in the West Bank and Gaza.

You are fully aware of that and are simply trying to troll.

[jbg]

When the system was collapsing, that's when we heard talk again about reviving the Orange Free State as a white homeland. If they were so adamant about having their white nation, why didn't they set it up to begin with, rather than hogging the whole thing and all its resources and marginalizing the majority population?

For the record, not all the stories about being white in present day South Africa paint the picture you guys portray -- a bunch of dark savages preying on white women and killing white men, but I used the world "blowback" for a reason. Because the policies of wars of opportunity and aggression you seem to be so enthusiastic about, will eventually result in some sort of blowback against the U.S., Canada and who knows who else!

As for Israel...I don't know what to advise anyone living there today, since if I use the example of an animal control officer who has just seized the jaws of an alligator - he can't let go of the alligator once he's grabbed hold of it, and if he doesn't have the backup to get the alligator into a cage, he's stuck holding on for as long as he can. Don't know how far the analogy fits, but it's safe to say that in both cases, a little forward thinking is advised before plunging ahead.

And I wonder how well either a "majority" Palestine or South Africa would do without Western subsidies. Or for that matter how well the real people, other than the ruling thugs, would do.

[GostHacked]

And I wonder how well either a "majority" Palestine or South Africa would do without Western subsidies. Or for that matter how well the real people, other than the ruling thugs, would do.

How well would Israel do without western support?

[Bonam]

How well would Israel do without western support?

Just fine.

[GostHacked]

Just fine.

I'd love to see it.

[DogOnPorch]

Just fine.

Yup...they won both the 6 Day War and Yom Kippur with WW2 surplus, The '48 War they won with bolt action rifles and armored buses.

[DogOnPorch]

I'd love to see it.

Already has happened 2 times in a major way.

[WIP]

This is not a discussion on Apartheid. This is a discussion on the West Bank and Gaza.

So, you started a thread using the South African term for separating tribes as a comparison with the Israeli/Palestinian divide, but tried to keep out any comparisons with the South African situation! If you use an incendiary term like Apartheid to start the title, you should expect the comparison from all sides whether you want it or not.

[BC_chick]

Now, as for Israel, there is no question that Arabs in the West Bank are not treated the same as Israeli citizens. The reasons and necessities for why this is so are obvious. The entire arrangement is temporary, and Israel has on many occasions under several different administrations willingly negotiated to cede the vast majority of the West Bank to a Palestinian state, which the Palestinians have repeatedly refused because Israel would not give in to impossible demands (demands which would doom Israel's future, such as letting millions of Arabs return to Israel). The situation is a temporary occupation, continuing until negotiations are at last successful, not an intended permanent state of affairs. The only reason it has lasted as long as it has is where any other occupied people would have jumped at the chance to get independence on 98% of the territory they demand, the Arabs would rather suffer and complain and reject any realistic proposal.

The whole "Israeli Apartheid" crowd is tragically misinformed, useful tools for Arab propaganda, nothing more.

Wow, that was a powerful argument about Israel wanting to give that land back. If they weren't so busy building settlements and expanding, I might even be convinced.

As for the 98% of land being given back and that Palestinians are making outrageous demands... well, to borrow your expression, both those points are pretty "useful tools for propaganda". Except that they're for the Israeli side.

Included in that 2% is East Jerusalem. That's equally outrageous to the Palestinian side as the right-of-return is to the Israeli side.

Meanwhile the settlements continue.... as Israel keeps singing the tune that it really really really wants to give the land back.

Edited January 31, 2013 by BC_chick

[Canuckistani]

They can't give the land back because they need it for security. They can't have Arabs living so close to their major population centers. Somehow having settlers on that land with the military protecting them will keep Israel safer. Those aren't settlers, they're security guards.

This is my understanding of JGB's argument. Really the only way it makes sense to me is if Israel annexes the West Bank. And then what do they do with all the Palestinians there? Let them stay and force them to take birth control? Because otherwise the Jews will be swamped by the much greater birthrate of the Arabs? Push all the Palestinians across the Jordan? Isn't that ethnic cleansing? I admit, I don't get it.

Edited January 31, 2013 by Canuckistani

[WIP]

Just fine.

Sure they would! They are the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid, and that's the official aid. Thanks to the power of AIPAC and associated pro-Israel lobbies, they receive many indirect subsidies that are not given to any other nations, as well as special tax deferments set up to give Israeli exporters an advantage; U.S. military hardware sold to Israel at low cost has often been resold to third parties like China and even Iraq - during the Saddam Hussein era; so besides the direct subsidies, there are likely many more indirect subsidies of Israel that have been obscured by other labels. And I don't think Israel would be trying so hard to manipulate U.S. elections if they really were as independent as you claim.

Yup...they won both the 6 Day War and Yom Kippur with WW2 surplus, The '48 War they won with bolt action rifles and armored buses.

And that was a long time ago! I was a child when the Six Day War happened, and still in high school when they had the Yom Kippur War. Those wars have been used as the justification for turning Israel into a modern day version of the ancient Greek "city of soldiers" - Sparta. The Israeli military-industrial complex is the main game in town now, and a big part of the reason why the last thing Israeli policy makers would want is for peace to break out.

[bush_cheney2004]

Sure they would! They are the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid, and that's the official aid.

Actually, at least for current outlays, Afghanistan is now officially #1:

Afghanistan is a poor country and even under normal circumstances would qualify for aid. But as a result of the war, the country is a U.S. strategic priority, and has received almost $52 billion in total foreign assistance. The aid is used to rebuild the country, stabilize and strengthen the economic, social, political and security structure, and for anti-terrorism measures.