"It Wasn't Muslims"

[orz]

You don't know the history of the conflict between Britain and Ireland, then, or it seems, anything about the consequences of British Imperialism on any of its colonial subjects.

Something about potatoes right?

Also, nobody bothers to explain how Europe, the U.S., and the Middle East are morally superior to Israel. Somebody please explain that to me.
PLEASE!

They aren't and nobody here is claiming they are but that doesn't mean 'MAYBE THE REAL TRUTH IS IN THE MIDDLE LOL' and also doesn't mean that Israel isn't committing genocide.

Meanwhile AFRICA.

[jlaw172364]

@Orz

Well, I'm not sure if the Nazis were the worst ever, but if you look at their stuff, it's pretty twisted in a lot of respects, and their actions applied modern methods to ancient barbarity. If the Nazis had their way, the world would only be filled with blonde-haired, blue-eyed Aryans; that's pretty screwed up. It's not like totalitarian tendencies in Islam or Christianity want to make everyone look alike, they just want all the donations funneled to one temple and all butts under the same pew.

I'm not saying that the Palestinians should be wiped out. I don't want them to be wiped out. I don't think it's in Israel's best interest that they be wiped out. I think Israel should give back the East side of the West Bank, get rid of the settlements, and maybe build some sort chunnel or skyway to Gaza. I think they should share Jerusalem. I think that's only fair. It's obvious though, that the extremists in Israel have gotten the upper hand and are moving things more towards taking territory. It's also obvious that outside forces don't want there to be peace. The Arab states don't want it; the U.S. doesn't want it. They keep playing this stupid fucking chess-game with the region to make propaganda points and to distract their domestic populations in collaboration with extremists on both sides. I think the moderates on both sides should ban together, take the extremists into a corner, shoot them, go about redistributing the land, then make pacts to ensure that their demographics don't go about creating future wars. Unfortunately, I don't think it will play out this way. Sociopathic extremists always seem to get their way because they scare or kill everyone else into submission. If any settlement is reached, the Palestinians will probably get the short end of the stick. But you know what, if they focused all their energy on development and if Israel could be made not to provoke them or them not provoke Israel, then in the future, they could possibly get more territory or more of what they want.

I think the best thing people can do for the region is not to point fingers and demonize one or the other side, but to get people to sit down at the table and try to talk it out with end goal being in mind that the two parties work on creating a future for both of them; that's the important thing, that there be peace in the future.


But at the same time, I don't want people to say Nazi Germany = Israel, nor do I want people to pretend that what Israel does is unique. I think that what Israel does is part of a larger phenomenon of ethnocentric nationalism; namely, what it does is the dark underbelly.

Groups want, rightly or wrongly, to preserve a coherent identity. In the U.S., the identity is based more on a set of chosen ideas then on a collective history and series of traditions. The Jews managed to preserve the identity for thousands of years without a nation state, but then the pogroms and the Nazis threatened it, so they went and built one in Palestine. Like most nations, it was founded on blood, treachery, and conquest, but remember, they also exploited private property rights to buy out the land from the Palestinian tenant class. The other stuff came after it became clear that they were going to have to fight.

I also don't think Israel should disband, or that it is "illegal" or "rogue;" I think it has the same right to exist as every other nation state, which is to say none except that which it creates for itself.

I also find it hypocritical when prominent people in Europe, the U.S. or other countries criticize Israel, because virtually all do the same things as Israel.

[lightningBugout]

@Lightning bug

You don't know the history of the conflict between Britain and Ireland, then, or it seems, anything about the consequences of British Imperialism on any of its colonial subjects.

Hard to say quite how much I dislike condescending snark about my lack of knowledge - I know rather more about the history of British Imperialism than I might like to. Palestine can not be understood properly through the lens of empire. By virtue of the post-WWII legitimization of a barbaric *exceptionalism* that put the territories in opposition to the contemporary liberation of the colonial subject that was happening elsewher, it was the identities that were shaped in that context that, IMHO, are what distinguish the conflict and that draw comparison to Rwanda, South Africa, Darfur.

[genericsyncretic]

Well, I'm not sure if the Nazis were the worst ever, but if you look at their stuff, it's pretty twisted in a lot of respects, and their actions applied modern methods to ancient barbarity. If the Nazis had their way, the world would only be filled with blonde-haired, blue-eyed Aryans; that's pretty screwed up.

I'm not saying that the Palestinians should be wiped out. I don't want them to be wiped out.

I think they should share Jerusalem. I think that's only fair. It's obvious though, that the extremists in Israel have gotten the upper hand and are moving things more towards taking territory.

I think the moderates on both sides should ban together, take the extremists into a corner, shoot them, go about redistributing the land

But you know what, if they focused all their energy on development and if Israel could be made not to provoke them or them not provoke Israel, then in the future, they could possibly get more territory or more of what they want.

I think the best thing people can do for the region is not to point fingers and demonize one or the other side, but to get people to sit down at the table and try to talk it out with end goal being in mind that the two parties work on creating a future for both of them; that's the important thing, that there be peace in the future.


But at the same time, I don't want people to say Nazi Germany = Israel, nor do I want people to pretend that what Israel does is unique. I think that what Israel does is part of a larger phenomenon of ethnocentric nationalism; namely, what it does is the dark underbelly.

Groups want, rightly or wrongly, to preserve a coherent identity. In the U.S., the identity is based more on a set of chosen ideas then on a collective history and series of traditions. The Jews managed to preserve the identity for thousands of years without a nation state, but then the pogroms and the Nazis threatened it, so they went and built one in Palestine.

I'll try to go point by point with this, though in all honesty I get the impression that you're just looking to disagree for the sake of disagreement and it won't matter.

First off, the Nazi's were "pretty twisted in a lot of respects", and "pretty screwed up?" I don't know if this is just an example of your let's not point fingers at anyone attitude but that has to be the weakest condemnation of the third reich I've ever heard. And for someone who claims a deep understanding of the nuances of global conflict your comments on the aryan ideal read like an elementary school history project.

Which dovetails nicely into the "i don't think..." and "i think that's only fair" of your later statements. It's all lacking in much historical context and wishy washy. Getting the moderates to "ban"d (i assume you meant band) together and kill the extremists? You should hold your own Camp David summit, it's that kind of fresh thinking that will get you far in life.

Don't you think the vast majority of Palestinians already want to focus on building a viable infrastructure? Unfortunately that's difficult when you're cut off from water, shipping, trade, and the rest of your people by walls, fences, and the IDF.

I don't think Israel equals Nazi Germany. I don't think anyone really thinks that, it's rhetoric pure and simple. I think both states are guilty of abominable crimes though. And I think you're fighting straw men when you suggest that anyone here overlooks the atrocities of other countries. We're kinda big on fighting evil 'round these parts. I don't know if it's just because your sole focus seems to be this issue, but trust me when I tell you no one here is ignorant to the crimes other nations commit. Yes, sometimes the focus is heavily on Israel, that has more to do with the personal experiences of some of our posters and the U.S. governments complicity in Israel's actions than anything else. Basically it's a big issue here because it's a big issue now.

Finally, as far as identity goes that is the problem. I personally don't think any state should be allowed to officially sanction the superiority of one faith or ethnicity over another. Unless, y'know, that country is Vatican City. If you're building a nation any bigger than the world's largest shopping mall though expect trouble when discrimination is your official doctrine. I'm a big fan of democracy, or at least the facade of it to begin with.

I'm not pretending to be an expert on the conflict, which is why I'm avoiding oversimplified explanations of what goes on. Pretending you know more about it than anyone here simply because of your fair and balanced tone is disingenuous though.

[compared2what?]

Hey, jlaw172364 --

I repeat:

Could you please either (a) quote from the replies in which other posters pretended like every single Palestinian was being tied to a torture rack and stretched by every single blood-thirsty Israeli; or (b) acknowledge that no one has done anything remotely like that?

Thanks.

[compared2what?]

I'd also very much appreciate it if you just stopped using rhetorical goal-post-shifting techniques entirely. Or at least started using them with a little more flair, character and originality.

Also, no offense or anything else of a personal nature is intended by this request, but would you mind if I henceforth addressed you as "j-lo"? Your nom-de-post doesn't flow very naturally from one's fingers to the keyboard. Yet neither does it lend itself to any very obvious form of nicknaming-via-conflation.

But please feel free to say so if you do mind. Or to propose preferred alternatives, should you have any. It's not like I'm particularly attached to "j-lo." Nor do I attach any particular meaning to it. It's just happened to be the closest thing to a naturally occurring nickname that sprang to mind.

Thanks.

[Nordic]

And to think I really wanted to delete this thread entirely a few days ago.

I'm actually quite sorry I posted it, but now ...?

Who was complaining recently about this place being "dead"?

At least it jolted the site a bit.

I'm still sorry I posted the link without checking it out far enough.

[sunny]

Nordic, the link in the op is vile, the worst. But I do appreciate the discussion that has ensued. RI'ers are the best.

[jlaw172364]

This discussion is a bit more difficult for me because I'm expressing an unpopular viewpoint on this forum, and because I'm addressing points made by 4-5 different people. And let's face it, this not an ideal forum for debate because it doesn't take place face to face in real time.

I'm glad comparedtowhat admits that the Nazi=Israel thing is mostly rhetoric. But see, this kind of rhetoric confuses people and misleads them because people begin to actually equate the Nazis with the Israelis. I actually thought people held the Israelis in the same esteem as the Nazis.

As for the "maybe the Nazis weren't the worst;" I don't have a God's eye view of history. It would be over-reaching me to say that the Nazis were the worst of the worst. Maybe the Soviets were worse. Maybe Communist China is worst. Maybe the U.S. is worse. What are the metrics? Sure, Nazi Germany was vicious and evil, but they were so acutely vicious and evil that they brought about the end of their regime. One could argue that regimes that were clever enough to outlast the Nazis were more evil. For example, the Nazis promoted the idea that their domestic population be healthy, physically fit; they were health nuts. Contrast this with what goes in the U.S., where people are fed all kinds of crap so that the parasitic health care industry can bleed them dry with treatments that don't work. Maybe the Nazis would have resorted to this later, who knows. Some have suggested that their regime, if successful, would have had a limited shelf life and would have mutated or devolved into something else. History has seen a lot of bloodshed. Looks, it's easy to make blanket condemnations of the Nazis, and any nations or groups that commit atrocities. But it gets boring, why not try to understand what they did, why they did it, the differences between what they did and what others did. The Nazis took a lot of inspiration from what the U.S. did to its Native American populations, and in terms of its national mythmaking, i.e. manifest destiny as a tool of conquest.

Anyone read the article about the theory that homo sapiens ate all the Neanderthals for food?

[compared2what?]

Hey, jlaw172364 --

I repeat for the second time:

Could you please either (a) quote from the replies in which other posters pretended like every single Palestinian was being tied to a torture rack and stretched by every single blood-thirsty Israeli; or (b) acknowledge that no one has done anything remotely like that?

Thanks.

[MacCruiskeen]

Anyone read the article about the theory that homo sapiens ate all the Neanderthals for food?

Ah yes... in which it's suggested that a single scratched jawbone supports the idea that human beings are intrinsically, or at least incorrigibly, cruel, warlike and bloodthirsty.

Certainly it would be naive to suspect that some scientists and journalists have an axe to grind. It's simply not in their nature, though it may be in their contract.

[OP ED]

And to think I really wanted to delete this thread entirely a few days ago.

I'm actually quite sorry I posted it, but now ...?

Who was complaining recently about this place being "dead"?

At least it jolted the site a bit.

I'm still sorry I posted the link without checking it out far enough.

i'm not sure undead is much of an improvement.

I actually thought people held the Israelis in the same esteem as the Nazis

i try not to consciously recognize arbitrary categories of humans as something that can be "esteemed" in a literal sense. however, even the nazis had a few good ideas here and there.
[that torch running thing was killer]

It would be over-reaching me to say that the Nazis were the worst of the worst.

probably. they're just one of the most obvious.

Maybe the Soviets were worse. Maybe Communist China is worst. Maybe the U.S. is worse. What are the metrics? Sure, Nazi Germany was vicious and evil, but they were so acutely vicious and evil that they brought about the end of their regime.

that is pretty acutely vicious. Caligulan even. Caligulatic? Caligulish? maybe Caligulous?

One could argue that regimes that were clever enough to outlast the Nazis were more evil.

it depends on what one means when one uses an abstract term like "evil". but yes, one could argue.

For example, the Nazis promoted the idea that their domestic population be healthy, physically fit; they were health nuts. Contrast this with what goes in the U.S., where people are fed all kinds of crap so that the parasitic health care industry can bleed them dry with treatments that don't work. Maybe the Nazis would have resorted to this later, who knows. Some have suggested that their regime, if successful, would have had a limited shelf life and would have mutated or devolved into something else.

sure, why not.

History has seen a lot of bloodshed. Looks, it's easy to make blanket condemnations of the Nazis, and any nations or groups that commit atrocities. But it gets boring, why not try to understand what they did, why they did it, the differences between what they did and what others did.

um, why not try to stop them?

The Nazis took a lot of inspiration from what the U.S. did to its Native American populations, and in terms of its national mythmaking, i.e. manifest destiny as a tool of conquest.

okay.

This led to massacres, and eventually a war. The war continues to this day.

it doesn't look like a war to me.

[compared2what?]

I'm glad comparedtowhat admits that the Nazi=Israel thing is mostly rhetoric.

I didn't do that, actually.

Rather, I correctly observed that the entire Nazi=Israel conceit had been concocted by you and you alone and that therefore your false attribution of it to others is a dishonest and evasive rhetorical tactic.

Goal posts, dude.

[jlaw172364]

I know you didn't personally compare Nazi Germany and Israel; I think it was Alice. But then if you appear to side with Alice, then it suggests an endorsement even without an explicit statement. This is what happens when a discussion played out in this manner, with one person expresses a viewpoint critiqued by 4-5 people.

But I don't think that anyone on this particular thread seriously believes Israel = Nazi Germany; I think people on this thread have been exposed to evidence of Israeli brutality against Palestinians, somewhat out of context, and are expressing their outrage in a somewhat understandably strident manner, as in "Israel = Nazi Germany" or "Israel = illegal rogue state," or "Israel stole Palestinian land."

I think it is fair to say that Israel employs police state tactics that some factions of the global community rhetorically declare to be illegal, but which are no different from police state tactics seen in other police states.

I think it is also fair to say that Israel acquired some land through legitimate purchase, although at the expense of Palestinian tenants, some land through conquest, and in addition, is neglecting the fact that extremists are taking measures that eventually result on the further erosion of Palestinian territories. I think this last phenomenon is the most problematic, and I think extremely harsh measures need to be taken to prevent it.

What I said about the moderates vis-a-vis the extremist is a result of my frustration that this conflict has been allowed to fester for 70 f*cking years! To me, it seems like the two sides need to be forced to agree that this is primarily a land dispute and that land will need to be redistributed for there to be a lasting peace. The two sides cannot be allowed to attack each other with the mindset that eventually they will get more land.

But see, the extremists always seem to have more power, because they are energetic, manichean, and therefore can act with less psychological encumbrances. The moderates sit back and debate back and forth, but they don't seem to act to restrain the extremists because it goes against their nature. Plus the extremists can always play on the fear of extermination, which is a realistic fear for both sides.

Every time an extremist on either side acts, the extremist on the opposing side benefits. A Palestinian suicide bomber kills 5 people; the extremists in the Israeli government gets to say, "See, they're animals, let us do this crack-down or we'll denounce you as self-hating Jews." Then the crack-down kills a bunch of Palestinians, who then say, "This faction at least will get revenge for those deaths; at least they fight back, if we go down, we go down fighting."

But this dynamic clearly seems to be benefiting Israel at the expense of the Palestinians. However, if it continues, it will get really bad for the Palestinians, and then it will really look like actual genocide, and then all hell will break loose in the region, which is of course, good for nobody except the arms merchants and the predatory outside powers.

[compared2what?]

I know you didn't personally compare Nazi Germany and Israel; I think it was Alice.

I actually compared them quite explicitly in clearly defined terms. I also explained why those terms are the only meaningful terms on which such a comparison can be made, by my standards. Measured against which, I find the terms on which you've been making that same comparison to be indecent, inhuman, and morally repugnant, incidentally. I then plainly stated that within the only meaningful terms that the actions of Nazi Germany and Israel are comparable, I hold them to be equivalent.

Sorry you didn't get that. I refer you to my previous posts.

But then if you appear to side with Alice, then it suggests an endorsement even without an explicit statement. This is what happens when a discussion played out in this manner, with one person expresses a viewpoint critiqued by 4-5 people.

It's really very simple. My views are the ones expressed, explicated and posted by me. Alice's views are the ones expressed, explicated and posted by her. OP ED's views are the ones expressed, explicated [and so forth].

But I don't think that anyone on this particular thread seriously believes Israel = Nazi Germany; I think people on this thread have been exposed to evidence of Israeli brutality against Palestinians, somewhat out of context, and are expressing their outrage in a somewhat understandably strident manner, as in "Israel = Nazi Germany" or "Israel = illegal rogue state," or "Israel stole Palestinian land."

I think it is fair to say that Israel employs police state tactics that some factions of the global community rhetorically declare to be illegal, but which are no different from police state tactics seen in other police states.

I think it is also fair to say that Israel acquired some land through legitimate purchase, although at the expense of Palestinian tenants, some land through conquest, and in addition, is neglecting the fact that extremists are taking measures that eventually result on the further erosion of Palestinian territories. I think this last phenomenon is the most problematic, and I think extremely harsh measures need to be taken to prevent it.

What I said about the moderates vis-a-vis the extremist is a result of my frustration that this conflict has been allowed to fester for 70 f*cking years! To me, it seems like the two sides need to be forced to agree that this is primarily a land dispute and that land will need to be redistributed for there to be a lasting peace. The two sides cannot be allowed to attack each other with the mindset that eventually they will get more land.

But see, the extremists always seem to have more power, because they are energetic, manichean, and therefore can act with less psychological encumbrances. The moderates sit back and debate back and forth, but they don't seem to act to restrain the extremists because it goes against their nature. Plus the extremists can always play on the fear of extermination, which is a realistic fear for both sides.

Every time an extremist on either side acts, the extremist on the opposing side benefits. A Palestinian suicide bomber kills 5 people; the extremists in the Israeli government gets to say, "See, they're animals, let us do this crack-down or we'll denounce you as self-hating Jews." Then the crack-down kills a bunch of Palestinians, who then say, "This faction at least will get revenge for those deaths; at least they fight back, if we go down, we go down fighting."

But this dynamic clearly seems to be benefiting Israel at the expense of the Palestinians. However, if it continues, it will get really bad for the Palestinians, and then it will really look like actual genocide, and then all hell will break loose in the region, which is of course, good for nobody except the arms merchants and the predatory outside powers.

Move to strike as non-responsive.

Also, I'm really not at all interested in continuing to play round after round of a tediously familiar cat-and-mouse game with you any longer, jlaw172364sy-from-the-block.

Consequently, until such time (if any) as that ceases apparently to be the only game you play, I'm afraid that I've pretty much got nothing more to say to you other than that I wish you well.

Which I do.