Israel: An issue many in the liberty movement get wrong

[twomp]

Relax. First of all, I absolutely do NOT hate all things Muslim, that is a lie. Like I told you, I lived in a Muslim country, and I have good memories of the people, for the most part. In fact, I have a heart for both Muslims and Jews. And maybe (at some point) I would like to do missions work in a place where there are Muslims and Jews.

And for the second time, I don't watch any of the network news channels. Nobody tells me what to think. I am an independent thinker, and I'm more than able to come to a position, based on the things I have seen with my own eyes.

Of course not EVERY Muslim teaches their kids to hate Jews. But to ignore that there is a hatred that is deeply woven into their society is to be willfully blind.

And what you aren't acknowledging is that there ARE extreme Muslims who not only teach their young kids to hate Jews, but teach that it's an honor to strap a bomb to yourself and blow up civilians. This is not from "Fox News." It's the reality that you are choosing to either disbelieve, or ignore. The majority of palestinians support using terror as a tactic. They use women and children for human shields. Again, not Fox News, this is happening, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

The only people I have sympathy for are the children, or the ones who truly DO want peace and do NOT support Hamas or using underhanded, evil tactics. The problem is, the majority do not fit that description.

Like I already said.... I'm not here to debate the entire conflict or to defend Israel. All I wanted to do is point out the one-sidedness.

Yes, you are indoctrinated. You spew the same stuff out that the MSM does. I know this because I used to believe the same thing. Have you lived in Palestine? How do you know they use "women and children" as shields? Did you pull out your satellite and zoom in to find this out? Or did the MSM tell you? For someone who claims to be an "independent thinker", you sure sound like someone that's been brain washed.

The "one-sideness" that you seem to be pointing out exists throughout the world. It's just that it doesn't exist here on these forums. Something you Israel firsters are trying to change. Please don't tell me again you aren't an Israel cheerleader, your words speak louder than your simple denials. It is equivalent to me saying, "black people are all freeloading criminals" then turning around and saying " but i'm not racist, i'm just pointing it out."

I'm sorry m'am/sir. Your shit don't smell like roses. It smells like poo poo.

 

[lilymc]

Yes, you are indoctrinated. You spew the same stuff out that the MSM does. I know this because I used to believe the same thing. Have you lived in Palestine? How do you know they use "women and children" as shields? Did you pull out your satellite and zoom in to find this out? Or did the MSM tell you? For someone who claims to be an "independent thinker", you sure sound like someone that's been brain washed.

The "one-sideness" that you seem to be pointing out exists throughout the world. It's just that it doesn't exist here on these forums. Something you Israel firsters are trying to change. Please don't tell me again you aren't an Israel cheerleader, your words speak louder than your simple denials. It is equivalent to me saying, "black people are all freeloading criminals" then turning around and saying " but i'm not racist, i'm just pointing it out."

I'm sorry m'am/sir. Your shit don't smell like roses. It smells like poo poo.

I can see now that you're an unreasonable person, at least on this issue. So I'm not going to waste any more time trying to have a discussion with you.

Here's some advice for you, for future debating. Don't tell people what they believe, especially when you don't know them. Don't tell people what their position is. And when they clearly correct you, as I did, don't ignore what they say and continue to mischaracterize their position. That is not only a bad way to debate or have a conversation with someone... but that type of closed minded unreasonableness speaks volumes about who is the indoctrinated one here.

 

[twomp]

I can see now that you're an unreasonable person, at least on this issue. So I'm not going to waste any more time trying to have a discussion with you.

Here's some advice for you, for future debating. Don't tell people what they believe, especially when you don't know them. Don't tell people what their position is. And when they clearly correct you, as I did, don't ignore what they say and continue to mischaracterize their position. That is not only a bad way to debate or have a conversation with someone... but that type of closed minded unreasonableness speaks volumes about who is the indoctrinated one here.

Thanks for telling me what to do then hide it under the disguise of "advice". You are the one being unreasonable. You believe what the majority of the world believes and you seek to enter these forums and have it think the way you do as well. I hope you are able to open your eyes one day.

 

[ibaghdadi]

The Palestinians, until their relatively recent PR stunt, always considered themselves members of Syria and Egypt. I'm no fan of the zionists but people are blind to the facts:

Let a Palestinian whose family have lived in Jaffa to (at least) the seventh generation answer this.

Two words: BULL. SHIT.

Before the "nationalism" era, Palestinians considered themselves to belong to their respective cities. When asked, they'd say "I'm Yafawi" (from Jaffa), "We're Maqdisis" (from Jerusalem), "We're Safadis" (from Safad) etc.

No, we did not consider ourselves Syrians or Egyptians. This is complete, utter, stinking BS.

Since nationalism (late 19th/early 20th century) we have considered ourselves Palestinians.

Also, it's besides the point since the fact that we never had sovereignty (Turkish, then British, then Israeli occupation) doesn't change the fact that we existed in that land for many, many generations.

(BTW, it really amazes me that some people regularly come back to positions that educated, articulate Zionist Israeli Jews no longer push because they know it's bullshit. This is one of these positions.)

 

[ibaghdadi]

But the point is that there is not a distinct Palestine people. There never has been one. It's a myth. Palestine was a location and a largely uninhabited one at that due to swampland. Both sides lie their ass off so as to conjure sympathy for their causes. This is no different.

Wow. Seems my grandparents were swamp dwellers. That would be a nice conversation opener the next time I speak to my grandmom.

 

[ibaghdadi]

How many of you here have lived in, or even visited a Muslim country? How many of you have been to Israel?

Allow me to answer your post starting from the last question (which you said wasn't rhetorical.) I've lived all my life in the Middle East and have never stepped foot in a non-Muslim country. My father was born in Jaffa (which is now a suburb of Tel Aviv) but we can't go back there because we're Palestinian. We've basically been refugees all our lives.

Hello???? Am I in the twilight zone here, or what? If you don't realize how extreme the Muslim hatred is against Jews, and how they are raised to hate Jews with a passion, and how they do NOT want peace, they want all Jews dead..... then you guys are either willfully blind, or woefully misinformed.

OK, so here's the thing. I am (a) Muslim; (b) Palestinian; (c) a lifelong refugee. And I (a) Do not hate Jews; (b) Do not want all the Jews dead; (c) Do want peace.

you better talk about the Muslim extreme hatred, to the point of being diabolical. And how they teach their kids from the youngest age that Jews should die, and how they DON'T want peace. They never have. They have always wanted Jews dead, or out of the Middle East.

My mom (and grandmom) never told me at any age that Jews should die, and speaking on behalf of most Palestinians (being victims of war for generations), we do want peace. We just don't want a peace that is called "peace" but is really just an improvement in the conditions of our subjugation.

If you're going to talk about institutional racism, then talk about how in certain Muslim countries (like Saudi Arabia) Jews aren't allowed to live there...

You're correct to criticize Saudi Arabia (and the lack of freedom of religion in nearly all Muslim countries). However you should note that we Muslims are the first victims of these regimes, and that the US government funds many of them and considers many of them to be allies.

So while you're right in saying that the actions of the Israeli government does not reflect all Israelis (let alone all Jews), it should also follow that the actions of the governments of Muslim-majority countries does not reflect all Muslims.


Now: Do we have a Jewish hatred problem in the (Muslim) Middle East? We absolutely do and anyone who denies that is being disingenuous or willfully blind. And many of us - as young activists - have been working very hard to expose and counter that rhetoric (and we're in the line of fire, mind you, not half a globe away).

However, do realize that the actions of the state of Israel makes our task very hard indeed. It's difficult to present a balanced view - that Jews belong in the Middle East and have lived among us for centuries, that Israel's war crimes and its brutal occupation does not reflect the true ethics of Judaism, etc - it's difficult to push this narrative when Israel's crimes are screaming much louder than we ever could.

But we persevere. No offense, but to most people who would read this, this is a very distant crisis that won't affect your lives immediately in any way. But for us, this is real. This is here & now. This is our life.

 

[Danke]

Is Nightmares a town in Pa?
(actually, it would be called "Nightmaresville", then)

You are evading the question, Yes or No.

 

[Danke]

How many of you here have lived in, or even visited a Muslim country? How many of you have been to Israel?

That's not a rhetorical question, I honestly want to know.

Spent a fair amount of time in Turkey and been to Israel twice on military exercises.

I answered your question, no response?

 

[otherone]

You are evading the question, Yes or No.

Yes.

 

[robert68]

It's been a while since I posted here - nothing's changed. But I chose this thread to interject a thought which I haven't seen discussed.

It's a given that, as policy, the U.S. should follow a foreign policy of non-interventionism. But it's also commonly commented upon that our interference in the middle-east is the reason behind the anti-Americanism and the hostility held by Muslim extremists toward the U.S.; and if we would only stop intervening, then this anomosity would gradually dissipate.

But is this an accurate assessment?

If you are truly libertarian, then you believe in free trade. And American arms manufacturers would have the freedom to deal with Israel. Or would you use the force of government to prohibit this commerce?

And if Americans, as individuals, continued to support Israel, would the terrorism, or the potential for terrorism, against Americans slacken? And what would be your response if we were attacked on American soil? Of course, we could continue to tighten our border security to insure that such an attack didn't occur, but at what cost to our nation?

One assumption in your argument is that with a non-interventionist US foreign policy, the state of Israel would be able to survive. There are around 9 million Palestinians in and near historic Palestine, and between 5 and 6 million Israelis there. Firstly, Israel has never gone without western military and financial backing. Secondly, the Palestinians are weak and defenseless against the state of Israel, their tormentors and occupier, precisely because of US intervention in the region.

It only took a few hundred Hezbollah fighters with some hi-tech defensive weapons to stop Israel’s invasion of Lebanon a few years ago. It’s US intervention in Jordan (2/3 Palestinian), Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, the Mediterranean Sea, Turkey, Iraq, and it’s enormous support for the state of Israel, that prevents millions of Palestinians from having hi-tech weapons and waging a successful guerrilla war against the occupiers of their land.

No economy stays afloat in war, and even the expectation of an unending guerrilla war with millions of Palestinians would tank Israel’s economy, over night. Palestinians have nothing to lose in fighting their occupiers, the state of Israel; they already have a low standard of living and no rights on their native land. Israeli’s on the other hand, live 1st world comfortable with all the rights, and the loss of that 1st world comfort, will cause many Israeli’s to grab those passports for other countries that they’ve maintained for an emergency, head to the airport and leave. As this all continues, many Israeli soldiers, knowing Israel is all alone in this unending struggle, would desert in increasing numbers. Eventually Israel, the settler colony/apartheid Jewish state in historic Palestine, would go the way East Germany did.

 

[lilymc]

I answered your question, no response?

Thanks for your reply. I was just curious. I see a lot of people (especially young people) who have very strong opinions, but the way they portray it goes against what I saw when I was in the Middle East. And it goes against what some other people I know (from another discussion forum) who actually live in Israel have to say.

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

you live in KY, have you ever met one IRL?

Several, all from Louisville though, I can't think of any Jews who went to my high school 15 minutes away from the city. My mother used to work with a lot of Jews before I was born and my parents lived in Louisville.

They're nice people from my experiences, and mostly similar to everyone else.

 

[Number19]

Allow me to answer your post starting from the last question (which you said wasn't rhetorical.) I've lived all my life in the Middle East and have never stepped foot in a non-Muslim country. My father was born in Jaffa (which is now a suburb of Tel Aviv) but we can't go back there because we're Palestinian. We've basically been refugees all our lives.


OK, so here's the thing. I am (a) Muslim; (b) Palestinian; (c) a lifelong refugee. And I (a) Do not hate Jews; (b) Do not want all the Jews dead; (c) Do want peace.


My mom (and grandmom) never told me at any age that Jews should die, and speaking on behalf of most Palestinians (being victims of war for generations), we do want peace. We just don't want a peace that is called "peace" but is really just an improvement in the conditions of our subjugation.


You're correct to criticize Saudi Arabia (and the lack of freedom of religion in nearly all Muslim countries). However you should note that we Muslims are the first victims of these regimes, and that the US government funds many of them and considers many of them to be allies.

So while you're right in saying that the actions of the Israeli government does not reflect all Israelis (let alone all Jews), it should also follow that the actions of the governments of Muslim-majority countries does not reflect all Muslims.


Now: Do we have a Jewish hatred problem in the (Muslim) Middle East? We absolutely do and anyone who denies that is being disingenuous or willfully blind. And many of us - as young activists - have been working very hard to expose and counter that rhetoric (and we're in the line of fire, mind you, not half a globe away).

However, do realize that the actions of the state of Israel makes our task very hard indeed. It's difficult to present a balanced view - that Jews belong in the Middle East and have lived among us for centuries, that Israel's war crimes and its brutal occupation does not reflect the true ethics of Judaism, etc - it's difficult to push this narrative when Israel's crimes are screaming much louder than we ever could.

But we persevere. No offense, but to most people who would read this, this is a very distant crisis that won't affect your lives immediately in any way. But for us, this is real. This is here & now. This is our life.

Excellent commentary. Greatly appreciated.

First, the contrarian comment. I don't recognize as legitimate any claim of "war crimes". War is hell. And has been throughout history. It's purpose is to kill and to keep killing until you win. In WW2, the Japanese did not surrender until we had nuked the civilian populations of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Claims of "excessive force" and "disproportionality" by the Israelis are laughable. Also, statements by U.N. spokesmen that Israel needs "to respect its obligations under international law" hold no standing in my eyes as the U.N. has no standing.

You're Palestinian advocating for peace. I've asked this question elsewhere, but I'll ask again : What would be an acceptable solution by Palestinians to advance a peaceful solution to the problems of the middle-east?

 

[Number19]

One assumption in your argument is that with a non-interventionist US foreign policy, the state of Israel would be able to survive. There are around 9 million Palestinians in and near historic Palestine, and between 5 and 6 million Israelis there. Firstly, Israel has never gone without western military and financial backing. Secondly, the Palestinians are weak and defenseless against the state of Israel, their tormentors and occupier, precisely because of US intervention in the region.

It only took a few hundred Hezbollah fighters with some hi-tech defensive weapons to stop Israel’s invasion of Lebanon a few years ago. It’s US intervention in Jordan (2/3 Palestinian), Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, the Mediterranean Sea, Turkey, Iraq, and it’s enormous support for the state of Israel, that prevents millions of Palestinians from having hi-tech weapons and waging a successful guerrilla war against the occupiers of their land.

No economy stays afloat in war, and even the expectation of an unending guerrilla war with millions of Palestinians would tank Israel’s economy, over night. Palestinians have nothing to lose in fighting their occupiers, the state of Israel; they already have a low standard of living and no rights on their native land. Israeli’s on the other hand, live 1st world comfortable with all the rights, and the loss of that 1st world comfort, will cause many Israeli’s to grab those passports for other countries that they’ve maintained for an emergency, head to the airport and leave. As this all continues, many Israeli soldiers, knowing Israel is all alone in this unending struggle, would desert in increasing numbers. Eventually Israel, the settler colony/apartheid Jewish state in historic Palestine, would go the way East Germany did.

I appreciate your reasoned response.

But, in my opinion, what you are not taking into account in your assessment of a non-interventionist American policy, is that this would result in a paradigm shift in military strategy. Confronted with a military threat such as you describe, short term, this would result in an all out defensive strategy more intense than the six day war, resulting in the total decimation of Gaza and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths. Longer term, if the entire middle-east were to unite against Israel, this would almost certainly result in the use of nuclear weapons and the death of millions. You seem to believe that Israel would quietly accept defeat; I think, when faced with a national threat to their existence, Israel would unite.

My question is : Is the use of nuclear weapons and the total obliteration of the middle-east acceptable to you? And, as libertarians, do we have a responsibility to help prevent such an apocalypse, keeping in mind the fallout which would spread around the world?

 

[kcchiefs6465]

I appreciate your reasoned response.

But, in my opinion, what you are not taking into account in your assessment of a non-interventionist American policy, is that this would result in a paradigm shift in military strategy. Confronted with a military threat such as you describe, short term, this would result in an all out defensive strategy more intense than the six day war, resulting in the total decimation of Gaza and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths. Longer term, if the entire middle-east were to unite against Israel, this would almost certainly result in the use of nuclear weapons and the death of millions. You seem to believe that Israel would quietly accept defeat; I think, when faced with a national threat to their existence, Israel would unite.

My question is : Is the use of nuclear weapons and the total obliteration of the middle-east acceptable to you? And, as libertarians, do we have a responsibility to help prevent such an apocalypse, keeping in mind the fallout which would spread around the world?

Your question is a loaded one. Incredibly so, at that. So what are the options, as you propose? We either unconditionally and eternally supply Israel with foreign aid and military assistance, or Gaza will be destroyed entirely, instead of simply the amount that it is being destroyed today, and the Middle East obliterated with nuclear fallout affecting the entire world.

What sort of response do you expect?

One, Israel could defend itself. Two, they aren't the only country in the region with nuclear arms. Three, they aren't particularly suicidal. Four, it isn't our concern. And five, if you wish to defend Israel the honorable thing to do would be to go there. Yourself. Not to take money from all or use political means to send other's children there. I doubt Bill Kristol is ever going to take up arms for Israel.

 

[Number19]

Your question is a loaded one. Incredibly so, at that. So what are the options, as you propose? We either unconditionally and eternally supply Israel with foreign aid and military assistance, or Gaza will be destroyed entirely, instead of simply the amount that it is being destroyed today, and the Middle East obliterated with nuclear fallout affecting the entire world.

What sort of response do you expect?

One, Israel could defend itself. Two, they aren't the only country in the region with nuclear arms. Three, they aren't particularly suicidal. Four, it isn't our concern. And five, if you wish to defend Israel the honorable thing to do would be to go there. Yourself. Not to take money from all or use political means to send other's children there. I doubt Bill Kristol is ever going to take up arms for Israel.

I've stated previously that I support a policy of non-intervention. But one must reasonably recognize that decisions have consequences and withdrawing American support increases the risk significantly that nuclear weapons will be used in the middle-east.

The best solution I can come up with is for control of Gaza to be assumed by an international tribunal & police force, for a period of not less than 50 years, and with all other rights being guaranteed for the Palestinian citizens.

Helping to negotiate such a solution, acceptable to all parties, would not violate my libertarian principles. But I don't think this solution would be acceptable to the Muslim extremists.

 

[pcosmar]

I've stated previously that I support a policy of non-intervention.

So do I,, but I have never seen one.
It is not a reality.. but it is a very nice fantasy.

As it is,, I personally do not support the invasion of Palestine by the Zionists.

Thus says the Lord GOD, "It will come about on that day, that thoughts will come into your mind and you will devise an evil plan, and you will say, 'I will go up against the land of unwalled villages. I will go against those who are at rest, that live securely, all of them living without walls and having no bars or gates, to capture spoil and to seize plunder, to turn your hand against the waste places which are now inhabited, and against the people who are gathered from the nations, who have acquired cattle and goods, who live at the center of the world.'

 

[jjdoyle]

But one must reasonably recognize that decisions have consequences and withdrawing American support increases the risk significantly that nuclear weapons will be used in the middle-east.

What is this based on? I'm guessing since "one must reasonably recognize", you have something to back this up?
I would say WITH American support the risk of nuclear weapons being used in the Middle East, INCREASES significantly.
I'm just basing that on the history of nations that have used nuclear weapons in a time of war....

 

[kcchiefs6465]

I've stated previously that I support a policy of non-intervention. But one must reasonably recognize that decisions have consequences and withdrawing American support increases the risk significantly that nuclear weapons will be used in the middle-east.

The best solution I can come up with is for control of Gaza to be assumed by an international tribunal & police force, for a period of not less than 50 years, and with all other rights being guaranteed for the Palestinian citizens.

Helping to negotiate such a solution, acceptable to all parties, would not violate my libertarian principles. But I don't think this solution would be acceptable to the Muslim extremists.

Is this a joke?

 

[robert68]

I appreciate your reasoned response.

But, in my opinion, what you are not taking into account in your assessment of a non-interventionist American policy, is that this would result in a paradigm shift in military strategy. Confronted with a military threat such as you describe, short term, this would result in an all out defensive strategy more intense than the six day war, resulting in the total decimation of Gaza and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths. Longer term, if the entire middle-east were to unite against Israel, this would almost certainly result in the use of nuclear weapons and the death of millions. You seem to believe that Israel would quietly accept defeat; I think, when faced with a national threat to their existence, Israel would unite.

My question is : Is the use of nuclear weapons and the total obliteration of the middle-east acceptable to you? And, as libertarians, do we have a responsibility to help prevent such an apocalypse, keeping in mind the fallout which would spread around the world?

I wasn’t trying to suggest all the states of the Middle East would unite against Israel, but that the states mentioned just wouldn’t be doing Israel any favors like they are now, in preventing the Palestinians from getting hi-tech weapons, from wherever (like Hezbollah did), maybe even Russian made. And Israel’s nukes will be useless against the Palestinians.

Israel needs international legitimacy for many things. It won’t be able to just nuke every country it wants that isn’t cowing to its every wish, and do whatever it wants to the Palestinians, and retain that legitimacy, especially without the US government covering for it at the UN.

Also, in 1967, Israel had the benefit of French, British, German, and US intervention on their behalf, both directly to them, and in the region, especially in Britain's backing of the Kingdom of Jordan. In 1973, Israel’s survival required the US to become their main military and financial backer, and it’s been that way ever since. Israel's never survived alone.