Apartheid? in the West Bank and Gaza

[TheNewTeddy]

A visual which shows how Palestinians in the occupied territories live in cantons, surrounded and separated by Israel controlled roads. This image is quite telling and explains why Israel is considered an apartheid state:

This was posted in the other thread and I thought it'd be wise to open a discussion on the treatment of those who live in Gaza and the West Bank. East Jerusalem is in play here as well as it is in the other thread.

The "rules" for this thread are as follows:

1 - "How DARE you limit MY rights to FREE SPEECH with your rules"

A: I'm more concerned with a healthy debate than I am with your rights.

2 - "What are these rules?"

A: This is not a debate on anything outside of Israel and Palestine. I don't want to hear about what other Arabs did in another time in another place, or, what Arabs in countries outside of Israel/Palestine are doing, or, what a very small number of terrorists within Israel are doing. This is a debate on Gaza, the West Bank, Palestine, and Israel

3 - "Well I'm going to post here JUST to stick it to you and ignore your rules!"

A: If you want to troll that is your business.

[TheNewTeddy]

I'll go first.

I say yes.The image is just a small part of it. Israel allows settlers in the West Bank to vote, but not Palestinians. It also prohibits Palestinians in East Jerusalem from voting and limits their rights, despite barking at the world that Jerusalem, undivided, is the capital of Israel.

Israel may counter that the West Bank and Gaza are not part of Israel. If that is the case, then you (Israel) need to stop giving those (Jews) who live there the same rights as citizens in Israel. You need to stop using your military and your urban "planning" to force your people to settle there while not giving anyone else a say. If the West Bank and Gaza are not a part of Israel, get the hell out of there.

Israel may counter that these areas are under occupation. If these are then part of Israel, you need to give rights and provide services for all the citizens, that means Palestinians. That means free healthcare for all of them, and, votes for all of them too.

Israel may counter that these areas are not a part of Israel, but, are under occupation, and thus, because of that special status, only the Jews there get any rights, that the Palestinians are not Palestinians but just "Arabs" and that there are plenty of Arab countries out there, so any Palestinians not living in one of those countries, should get limited rights. I say there's a word for that. Apartheid.

Remember that this is not a discussion about Terrorism. I thought that this should be made clear before any further debate takes place.

[WIP]

Yes, it's apartheid pure and simple! All you have to do is look at the maps and you can see that Israel has made it effectively impossible for an independent Palestinian state to function. So, what do they do with all of the Palestinians? Remember that South Africa was almost 80% non-white, and they were still able to function as a state until international pressure on the U.S., England and Israel, forced them to drop their support of the Apartheid Government. As long as Israel has the U.S. in their hip pocket and afraid to criticize any of their policies, it won't matter how big the occupied population becomes.

[TimG]

Israel may counter that the West Bank and Gaza are not part of Israel. If that is the case, then you (Israel) need to stop giving those (Jews) who live there the same rights as citizens in Israel.

Canadians abroad have the same rights as Canadians living in Canada.

You need to stop using your military and your urban "planning" to force your people to settle there while not giving anyone else a say. If the West Bank and Gaza are not a part of Israel, get the hell out of there.

A lovely sentiment, except Israelis are only doing this because they fear endless attacks on civilians by residents of West Bank and Gaza. Until you provide some solution to that problem your philosophical moralizing is quite irrelevant. Edited January 27, 2013 by TimG

[Canuckistani]

A lovely sentiment, except [/size]Israelis are only doing this because they fear endless attacks on civilians by residents of West Bank and Gaza. Until you provide some solution to that problem your philosophical moralizing is quite irrelevant.

Please explain how having civilian Jewish Israelis living among the attackers, requiring military protection, and representing a continued provocation to the Palestinians in any way reduces the fear or likelihood of endless attacks on Israeli civilians?

[TimG]

Please explain how having civilian Jewish Israelis living among the attackers, requiring military protection, and representing a continued provocation to the Palestinians in any way reduces the fear or likelihood of endless attacks on Israeli civilians?

I did not say I thought the strategy was sensible - I was just pointing out that ranting about actions done by one side is not particularly helpful.

[Canuckistani]

I did not say I thought the strategy was sensible - I was just pointing out that ranting about actions done by one side is not particularly helpful.

So the strategy is not sensible - what's wrong with ranting about it?

[TimG]

So the strategy is not sensible - what's wrong with ranting about it?

Nothing will change unless the underlying problems are addressed. Trying to vilify the Israelis without acknowledging the context does not help.

[Canuckistani]

Nothing will change unless the underlying problems are addressed. Trying to vilify the Israelis without acknowledging the context does not help.

Agree with the first part. Vilifying Israelis for aggression expansionism and policies that are harmful even to themselves doesn't seem any worse to me than the vilification the Palestinians are exposed to. Both sides here have not been playing well with others, both sides claim victimhood while being an aggressor. Israelis need to give Palestinians something to make peace for, ie a viable state. Palestinians need to quit the attacks. But settlements and their military defense are also a form of attack, taking land is about aggressive as it gets, so the Israelis need to stop their aggression as well.

[TimG]

Both sides here have not been playing well with others, both sides claim victimhood while being an aggressor.

I agree. There are many things which the Isrealis do which I believe are not called for. I defend Isrealis only when I think the person doing the attacking is not acknowledging or aware of the two sided nature of the problem. Acknowledge that and I have no issue with criticizing Israelis when criticism is warranted. In this case, settling the West Bank is counter productive. But setting up a network of roads where Palestinians are not allowed is a necessary precaution. Edited January 27, 2013 by TimG

[Canuckistani]

I agree. There are many things which the Isrealis do which I believe are not called for. I defend Isrealis only when I think the person doing the attacking is not acknowledging or aware of the two sided nature of the problem. Acknowledge that and I have no issue with criticizing Israelis when criticism is warranted. In this case, settling the West Bank is counter productive. But setting up a network of roads where Palestinians are not allowed is a necessary precaution.

Glad you're evenhanded about it, many people here aren't' in one way or another. I guess I'm not, since I think Israel needs to make the first move here, close the settlements. They are continued, day to day attacks on Palestine, so some Palestinians attacking back is understandable. But, if Israel did close the settlements, and attacks continued, I would have no problem with the Israeli military kicking ass and taking names as far as Palestinians are concerned.

But your last sentence makes no sense. The precaution being taken is to support the actions that make no sense, therefore this action makes no sense. It's quite understandable that if I want to punch you in the nose, as a precaution I also hold a gun to stop you from retaliating. Nobody would agree that it's justified tho.

[TimG]

I guess I'm not, since I think Israel needs to make the first move here, close the settlements.

There is a viscous circle of blame going on that requires good will on both sides to break. i.e. Fatah formally acknowledges Isreal's right to exist in return for an end to settlements. The trouble is Fatah would never do that which is what makes the situation completely intractable. Edited January 27, 2013 by TimG

[Canuckistani]

There is a viscous circle of blame going on that requires good will on both sides to break. i.e. Fatah formally acknowledges Isreal's right to exist in return for an end to settlements. The trouble is Fatah would never do that which is what makes the situation completely intractable.

I always thought the quid pro quo would be each side formally acknowledging the other's right to exist.

[jbg]

There is a viscous circle of blame going on that requires good will on both sides to break. i.e. Fatah formally acknowledges Isreal's right to exist in return for an end to settlements. The trouble is Fatah would never do that which is what makes the situation completely intractable.

Remember they have acknowledged Israel's right to exist but not as a Jewish state.

[WIP]

Please explain how having civilian Jewish Israelis living among the attackers, requiring military protection, and representing a continued provocation to the Palestinians in any way reduces the fear or likelihood of endless attacks on Israeli civilians?

What I want explained is why that has to be our fight too? It's one thing if Israelis want to build settlements in occupied territory and spend eternity defending them, but why does the U.S. and now Canada also (thanks Harper) has to be a part of it.

[GostHacked]

Canadians abroad have the same rights as Canadians living in Canada.

Actually no we don't. We have to go by the rules of the country we are visiting.

A lovely sentiment, except [/size]Israelis are only doing this because they fear endless attacks on civilians by residents of West Bank and Gaza. Until you provide some solution to that problem your philosophical moralizing is quite irrelevant.

The proposal which has gone unanswered has been the removal of the illegal Jewish settlements in Gaza/West Bank. The solution has already been provided.

[jbg]

Please explain how having civilian Jewish Israelis living among the attackers, requiring military protection, and representing a continued provocation to the Palestinians in any way reduces the fear or likelihood of endless attacks on Israeli civilians?

What I want explained is why that has to be our fight too? It's one thing if Israelis want to build settlements in occupied territory and spend eternity defending them, but why does the U.S. and now Canada also (thanks Harper) has to be a part of it.

Under pre-1967 boundaries the Arabs were way too close for comfort to Israel's population centers. If the Arabs would make real peace and not just enter a temporary truce the two of you would be 100% correct as far as what you call "occupied territories." The problem is that under no conditions will they accept Israel as a Jewish state in the region. They will only accept an Israel that can be swamped by Arab immigration and thus use Israel's democratic structure to upend it. Thus there is a reason that Israel has to hold very fast.

The Arabs are the ones who have repeatedly made decisions to continue warfare against Israel. Unless they yield their footprint in Israel west of the Jordan River will inevitably shrink. The "world" will call it ethnic cleansing. This is a survival issue for Israel since their Jewish inhabitants have no where to go.

[GostHacked]

Under pre-1967 boundaries the Arabs were way too close for comfort to Israel's population centers.

They were too close because they were living on the same land Israel wanted to occupy. it's like building your house near a busy highway and complaining about the noise levels then having the audacity to have the highway moved.

[DogOnPorch]

Actually no we don't. We have to go by the rules of the country we are visiting.

The proposal which has gone unanswered has been the removal of the illegal Jewish settlements in Gaza/West Bank. The solution has already been provided.

Uhhh...settlers in Gaza?

Edited January 28, 2013 by DogOnPorch

[Canuckistani]

They were too close because they were living on the same land Israel wanted to occupy. it's like building your house near a busy highway and complaining about the noise levels then having the audacity to have the highway moved.

Yes. Nice try, but by jbg's logic, Israel should expand until there are no Arab or Persian or Muslim states left, since Israel is building population centers in the occupied territories. Next it will be Jordan is just across the Jordan from our population centers so we have to start settling Jordan. Etc.

If Israel withdraws to 67 borders and keeps getting attacked, I would have no problem with them putting military outposts in the West Bank until security is established. Under these conditions I would also be in favor of our govt providing any and all support. But what kind of country uses civilians as their security measure? Oh, I know, not a country but terrorists are always accused of hiding behind civilians.

[GostHacked]

Uhhh...settlers in Gaza?

Right on queue. Good stuff, at least you did not disappoint me.

[DogOnPorch]

Right on queue. Good stuff, at least you did not disappoint me.

Of course...how silly of me. Surely Gaza is overrun with settlers.

[GostHacked]

Of course...how silly of me. Surely Gaza is overrun with settlers.

I did it just for you, knowing I'd get a response. Good stuff.

[DogOnPorch]

I did it just for you, knowing I'd get a response. Good stuff.

Sure you did.

[GostHacked]

Sure you did.

My work here is done.