Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
xbl

Israel And The Palestinians

Recommended Posts

Yes it does. It has a UN mandate and is recognised as a state. Whether it is morally correct or not is a whole different ball game.

Not the land it took in 1967.

A number of international bodies, including the United Nations Security Council, the International Court of Justice, the European Union, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and many legal scholars have characterized the settlements as a violation of international law, but other legal scholars, Israel, and the Anti-Defamation League disagree with this assessment. (See Legal background)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are one of the most powerful lobbies within the US, along with the Cubans.

Now I am sure the US would fund Israel to some extent anyway, but they are very good at keeping issues that effect Israel near the top of American foreign policy. Obviously this comes into play at election time when parties are trying to raise campaign funds.

You just need to look at the candidates in the last US election both made great play that Israel and Cuban issues would remain a US priority and they would not soften their foreign policies where these countries were concerned. In fact even in the primaries Hilary Clinton made a great play of this, so I don't think the influence of the Israeli lobby on American foreign policy can be understated.

There is nothing wrong with any of that. Lobbying is perfectly permissable in a democratic state. I just don't agree with the idea that the military aid to Israel is motivated by an Israeli/Jewish lobby. Defending Israel is clearly in the interest of teh US in the region.

With regards to Cuba, I imagine the strength of that particular lobby is due to it's geographical concentration in Florida, which is a marginal state. Perhaps if Al Gore had kept Elian Gonzalez in Miami, he'd have won the 2000 election! :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is nothing wrong with any of that. Lobbying is perfectly permissable in a democratic state. I just don't agree with the idea that the military aid to Israel is motivated by an Israeli/Jewish lobby. Defending Israel is clearly in the interest of teh US in the region.

No, you wouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it will play a part yes,but the biggest factor is its location

Exactly.

The lobby plays a part, the Abrahamic death cultists play a part... but the biggest part is the raw self-interest of having a friendly democracy in the area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is nothing wrong with any of that. Lobbying is perfectly permissable in a democratic state. I just don't agree with the idea that the military aid to Israel is motivated by an Israeli/Jewish lobby. Defending Israel is clearly in the interest of teh US in the region.

I agree with most of that. However I do think you are down playing the power of the Israeli lobby. I don't think a President looking for a second term in office would bode well if he cut military aid to Israel and softened US policy against the likes of Iran et al, even if he wanted to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No-one would dispute that the US provides a significant level of military aid to Israel. I don't think this is because of a mendacious Jewish lobby. Israel is an ally of the US in an important strategic region, you'd expect it to provide aid to this country.

The US provides almost as much military aid to Egypt as it does to Israel but no-one would suggest that the Egyptian lobby have influenced this.

Who said Mendacious? I didn't, you're putting words into my mouth here. Israel is a pretty rich country, and receiving a hell of a lot more American "aid" than it's poorer neighbours. The US can't be expected to be neutral, given the money it throws at Israel (one of the reasons diplomacy won't work).

I cannot see Gaza and the West Bank being one viable Palestinian state. Perhaps it'd be easier (if not necessarily better) to create two Paestinian states, both of which seem from my very limited view to be economically viable. If Hamas in Gaza then continued with aggressive acts, Israel could play them off against the West Bank. Reading from Aaranovitch's article (I think), we certainly need more carrots in this peace process. Treating the West bank seperately from Gaza might just do that.

That's a sensible idea - it'd allow the Palestinians in the West Bank to reach some degree of standing on their own foot, and the Isrealis to have a mature relationship with them (even if the Palestinians in Gaza don't want that path - it'd show them a way out was possible).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i do,but they had a ceasefire in place and things were happening(not very quickly)but hamas didnt even ask for talks about a new one they just started up again with the rockets

You seem to be obsessed by Hamas starting to fire rockets as soon as the ceasefire ended. At the end of the ceasefire Hamas asked for some small concessions from the israelis like limited opening of the borders and some lifting of the blockade, the zionists refused and then the rockets were fired, killing one israeli. So then we have the usual isreali response (as xbass says the final solution to the Hamas problem?). It's the excuse the zionists have been waiting for the get rid of the Palestinian democratically elected government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You seem to be obsessed by Hamas starting to fire rockets as soon as the ceasefire ended. At the end of the ceasefire Hamas asked for some small concessions from the israelis like limited opening of the borders and some lifting of the blockade, the zionists refused and then the rockets were fired, killing one israeli. So then we have the usual isreali response (as xbass says the final solution to the Hamas problem?). It's the excuse the zionists have been waiting for the get rid of the Palestinian democratically elected government.

not obsessed but if they didnt decide to lob in a few rockets they wouldnt be getting the shit kicked out of them now!!!

and they would be sitting round the table arguing there point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not obsessed but if they didnt decide to lob in a few rockets they wouldnt be getting the shit kicked out of them now!!!

and they would be sitting round the table arguing there point

I think you mean they wouldn't be receiving the proportionate response 1 jew = 300 Palestinians <_< . I think i mentioned they did ask for some reasonable consessions (imo) from the israelis but as said before, these were rejected and the final solution to the Hamas problem was opted for instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not obsessed but if they didnt decide to lob in a few rockets they wouldnt be getting the shit kicked out of them now!!!

and they would be sitting round the table arguing there point

They certainty wouldn't be sitting round the table enjoying a hearty meal anyway. Israel refused to deal with them when they were the official Palestinian Government, why would they deal with them now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who said Mendacious? I didn't, you're putting words into my mouth here. Israel is a pretty rich country, and receiving a hell of a lot more American "aid" than it's poorer neighbours. The US can't be expected to be neutral, given the money it throws at Israel (one of the reasons diplomacy won't work).

I didn't mean to imply that you said that, apologies if that's how it came across. I think that a common characterisation is that the Jewish/Israel lobby is a nefarious force.

American aid to Israel (or anywhere else) isn't done on the basis of how rich a country is but how important strategically it is the US.

That's a sensible idea - it'd allow the Palestinians in the West Bank to reach some degree of standing on their own foot, and the Isrealis to have a mature relationship with them (even if the Palestinians in Gaza don't want that path - it'd show them a way out was possible).

I really doubt that declaring two Palestinian states would have any positive impact. I doubt that any Palestinian would back that move and it would simply serve to increase ill feeling and conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you mean they wouldn't be receiving the proportionate response 1 jew = 300 Palestinians <_< . I think i mentioned they did ask for some reasonable consessions (imo) from the israelis but as said before, these were rejected and the final solution to the Hamas problem was opted for instead.

so did they try and get talks resumed???

They certainty wouldn't be sitting round the table enjoying a hearty meal anyway. Israel refused to deal with them when they were the official Palestinian Government, why would they deal with them now?

so your saying that the last peace deal was done by semaphore??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You didn't.

Sorry I've missed the point here. Why wouldn't I agree with that? I don't really understand what you are getting at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George Bush said he was pro democracy.

Why didn't he back the democratically elected government in Palestine?

Are they more or less violent than America?

hmm tough one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...