We can exchange snippets from authors aligning with our views all day without making any progress at all.
I mean I quoted a fact; you quoted an opinion. Notice that as an avowed Zionist and Nakba apologist Benny Morris isn’t an unbiased actor here, so while his statements of fact do mean something as a historian his opinions mean jack shit.
Fact is: there won’t be the necessary trust from Palestinians towards actors such as the IDF for them to live under their rule - there won’t be the necessary trust of Israelis towards actors auch as Hamas for them to live under their rule.
Who said anything about either of that? In the event of a one-state solution, military apparatuses on both sides should be dismantled, in the same way militias stopped operating in post-Troubles Ireland.
As far as I can tell, we both stated something Morris said. I wouldn’t consider one thing a fact and the other a biased view, no matter which one. I wouldn’t consider both things “a fact” per se. But as I said, we can exchange those snippets all day long and won’t get anywhere, so I don’t see a point.
Who said anything about either of that?
Well, afaik, both Hamas and expansionist Israelis each think of a solution where they take over the entire other part, not of one where they equally cohabit in one common nation together.
Well, afaik, both Hamas and expansionist Israelis each think of a solution where they take over the entire other part, not of one where they equally cohabit in one common nation together.
I don’t think Hamas has been pitching itself as the future rulers of Palestine (they’re not anywhere near that delusional), but either way there’s no reason for us to accept either of those. If the international community gives Israel an ultimatum saying “equal rights for Palestinians now or no weapons” the whole problem will fix itself in a few election cycles as Israel is forced to accept and Palestinians are in no position to refuse the prospect of not being genocided.
I don’t think Hamas has been pitching itself as the future rulers of Palestine
They certainly were very keen on becoming rulers of Gaza at leaat and conveniently forgot to allow free elections ever after. Hamas has indeed a strong political agenda and their main goal is and was to destroy Israel.
If the international community gives Israel an ultimatum saying “equal rights for Palestinians now or no weapons” the whole problem will fix itself
Only if the international community can effectively exert the same pressure on actors such as Hamas. If only Israel is militarily weakened while Hamas can then resume their terror again, this absolutely won’t fly. This is why Hamas and/or their main goal would need to disappear, too.
They certainly were very keen on becoming rulers of Gaza at leaat and conveniently forgot to allow free elections ever after.
Hamas has agreed to peace conditions that would include letting go of Gaza more than once before, most recently in the Trump-brokered ceasefire. Not ruling Gaza has never been a deal-breaker for them.
Only if the international community can effectively exert the same pressure on actors such as Hamas.
Again the Troubles in Ireland are a good reference here. If the injustices cease groups such as Hamas will have no way of selling themselves to the people of Palestine, and if that doesn’t happen there are multiple ways of exerting pressure to stop them from doing anything too flashy, the most obvious of which would be threatening to arm Israel again.
Not ruling Gaza has never been a deal-breaker for them.
No, but disarming has. Giving up their rule in Gaza is one thing, but they’d also need to agree on disarming and effectively dissolving themselves. So far, I can’t see them make that step.
If the injustices cease groups such as Hamas will have no way of selling themselves to the people
The problem is that it already is an injustice for too many people on both sides that the other ones should have their own state. Here, the injustice for Hamas is the mere existence of Israel. The Good Friday Agreement includes both sides to acknowledge the other side, this would have to happen here as well.
Giving up their rule in Gaza is one thing, but they’d also need to agree on disarming and effectively dissolving themselves. So far, I can’t see them make that step.
Because Israel hasn’t engaged in good faith negotiations in almost 30 years? If anything why do you expect them to make that step now? I mean they agreed to not rebuild militarily in the ceasefire Israel then proceeded to completely shit on so it’s not like they’re vehemently opposed to the idea, but there needs to be a good faith effort from, well, anyone.
effectively dissolving themselves.
True for the military branch, but remember that Hamas is also a political party. There’s no reason they should be disallowed from running for elections in a post-conflict Palestine.
Here, the injustice for Hamas is the mere existence of Israel.
You say “mere” but the existence of Israel as a Jewish state built by Jews for Jews is already full of injustices. I mean their constitution literally denies the Palestinian people the right to self-determination. Israel, if it’s not dissolved entirely, needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. Oh, and also: Hamas accepts a two-state solution as stated in their charter, and has entered into multiple agreements with Israel to that effect that Israel predictably proceeded to completely shit on. That’s the most you can expect Hamas to let up on their ideological program before real good faith negotiations start.
The point I want to make is: Everything you want should come as part of negotiations between the two sides, not as a mere prelude to negotiations. It takes two to tango here, because I certainly haven’t seen Israel accept the idea of a two-state solution.
PS: I’m slightly self-censoring because of rule 4.
If anything why do you expect them to make that step now?
I don’t expect them to make that step. But there must be true willingness apparent to take that step, should this conflict ever come to an end.
there needs to be a good faith effort from, well, anyone.
True!
There’s no reason they should be disallowed from running for elections in a post-conflict Palestine.
If they give up their current main goal, the destruction of Israel, yes.
Israel as a Jewish state built by Jews for Jews is already full of injustices
How much Jewish life is there left in Palestine or even Gaza? Is Gaza, run by the Hamas, a secular entity open to all religions, protecting also their rights?
I mean, I completely agree with you concerning equal rights for all regions, but this shouldn’t only apply to one side of the conflict. As far as I can tell, the problem of Hamas with Israel is not that a minority religion is not granted full rights along the states “main religion”, it is only that Judaism is the main religion and not Islam. That’s however no basis for a solution, only changing to opposite signs.
Everything you want should come as part of negotiations between the two sides, not as a mere prelude to negotiations. It takes two to tango here
Absolutely agree! However, speaking of pressure to be exerted by supporting nations on Israel, there has to be at least a perspective of achieving something positive with that and not just switching the upper hand to the other radical side. Then, there’s not only Hamas but also Iran that is set to destroy Israel. The potential pressure hence is also limited by the fact that Israel still needs to be able to fully deter this regime. And that’s where it becomes completely complicated…
How much Jewish life is there left in Palestine or even Gaza?
How in the actual fuck is that relevant to what I was saying?
As far as I can tell, the problem of Hamas with Israel is not that a minority religion is not granted full rights along the states “main religion”, it is only that Judaism is the main religion and not Islam.
You should consume less Israeli propaganda. Hamas’s problem with Israel is that Israel occupies Palestinian land and oppresses the Palestinian people. Do you grasp the scale of injustices Israel has subjected Palestinians to for almost eighty years by now? There’s no shortage of problems Palestinians of all shapes and stripes have with Israel.
Absolutely agree! However, speaking of pressure to be exerted by supporting nations on Israel, there has to be at least a perspective of achieving something positive with that and not just switching the upper hand to the other radical side.
So fucking do that. It’s not that complicated.
The potential pressure hence is also limited by the fact that Israel still needs to be able to fully deter this regime. And that’s where it becomes completely complicated.
Why does Israel deserve protection and not Palestine? Why does Palestine need to be subjected to genocide until some perfect solution the international community clearly doesn’t care for happens? If Israel doesn’t want peace, why should they be supported in war? Clearly the worst case scenario of genocide is already happening. Your point only makes sense if you assume that Jewish lives are more worthy of protection than Palestinian or Iranian lives (Israel has been trying to drag America into a war against Iran for over a year).
I mean I quoted a fact; you quoted an opinion. Notice that as an avowed Zionist and Nakba apologist Benny Morris isn’t an unbiased actor here, so while his statements of fact do mean something as a historian his opinions mean jack shit.
Who said anything about either of that? In the event of a one-state solution, military apparatuses on both sides should be dismantled, in the same way militias stopped operating in post-Troubles Ireland.
As far as I can tell, we both stated something Morris said. I wouldn’t consider one thing a fact and the other a biased view, no matter which one. I wouldn’t consider both things “a fact” per se. But as I said, we can exchange those snippets all day long and won’t get anywhere, so I don’t see a point.
Well, afaik, both Hamas and expansionist Israelis each think of a solution where they take over the entire other part, not of one where they equally cohabit in one common nation together.
I don’t think Hamas has been pitching itself as the future rulers of Palestine (they’re not anywhere near that delusional), but either way there’s no reason for us to accept either of those. If the international community gives Israel an ultimatum saying “equal rights for Palestinians now or no weapons” the whole problem will fix itself in a few election cycles as Israel is forced to accept and Palestinians are in no position to refuse the prospect of not being genocided.
They certainly were very keen on becoming rulers of Gaza at leaat and conveniently forgot to allow free elections ever after. Hamas has indeed a strong political agenda and their main goal is and was to destroy Israel.
Only if the international community can effectively exert the same pressure on actors such as Hamas. If only Israel is militarily weakened while Hamas can then resume their terror again, this absolutely won’t fly. This is why Hamas and/or their main goal would need to disappear, too.
Hamas has agreed to peace conditions that would include letting go of Gaza more than once before, most recently in the Trump-brokered ceasefire. Not ruling Gaza has never been a deal-breaker for them.
Again the Troubles in Ireland are a good reference here. If the injustices cease groups such as Hamas will have no way of selling themselves to the people of Palestine, and if that doesn’t happen there are multiple ways of exerting pressure to stop them from doing anything too flashy, the most obvious of which would be threatening to arm Israel again.
No, but disarming has. Giving up their rule in Gaza is one thing, but they’d also need to agree on disarming and effectively dissolving themselves. So far, I can’t see them make that step.
The problem is that it already is an injustice for too many people on both sides that the other ones should have their own state. Here, the injustice for Hamas is the mere existence of Israel. The Good Friday Agreement includes both sides to acknowledge the other side, this would have to happen here as well.
Because Israel hasn’t engaged in good faith negotiations in almost 30 years? If anything why do you expect them to make that step now? I mean they agreed to not rebuild militarily in the ceasefire Israel then proceeded to completely shit on so it’s not like they’re vehemently opposed to the idea, but there needs to be a good faith effort from, well, anyone.
True for the military branch, but remember that Hamas is also a political party. There’s no reason they should be disallowed from running for elections in a post-conflict Palestine.
You say “mere” but the existence of Israel as a Jewish state built by Jews for Jews is already full of injustices. I mean their constitution literally denies the Palestinian people the right to self-determination. Israel, if it’s not dissolved entirely, needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. Oh, and also: Hamas accepts a two-state solution as stated in their charter, and has entered into multiple agreements with Israel to that effect that Israel predictably proceeded to completely shit on. That’s the most you can expect Hamas to let up on their ideological program before real good faith negotiations start.
The point I want to make is: Everything you want should come as part of negotiations between the two sides, not as a mere prelude to negotiations. It takes two to tango here, because I certainly haven’t seen Israel accept the idea of a two-state solution.
PS: I’m slightly self-censoring because of rule 4.
I don’t expect them to make that step. But there must be true willingness apparent to take that step, should this conflict ever come to an end.
True!
If they give up their current main goal, the destruction of Israel, yes.
How much Jewish life is there left in Palestine or even Gaza? Is Gaza, run by the Hamas, a secular entity open to all religions, protecting also their rights?
I mean, I completely agree with you concerning equal rights for all regions, but this shouldn’t only apply to one side of the conflict. As far as I can tell, the problem of Hamas with Israel is not that a minority religion is not granted full rights along the states “main religion”, it is only that Judaism is the main religion and not Islam. That’s however no basis for a solution, only changing to opposite signs.
Absolutely agree! However, speaking of pressure to be exerted by supporting nations on Israel, there has to be at least a perspective of achieving something positive with that and not just switching the upper hand to the other radical side. Then, there’s not only Hamas but also Iran that is set to destroy Israel. The potential pressure hence is also limited by the fact that Israel still needs to be able to fully deter this regime. And that’s where it becomes completely complicated…
How in the actual fuck is that relevant to what I was saying?
You should consume less Israeli propaganda. Hamas’s problem with Israel is that Israel occupies Palestinian land and oppresses the Palestinian people. Do you grasp the scale of injustices Israel has subjected Palestinians to for almost eighty years by now? There’s no shortage of problems Palestinians of all shapes and stripes have with Israel.
So fucking do that. It’s not that complicated.
Why does Israel deserve protection and not Palestine? Why does Palestine need to be subjected to genocide until some perfect solution the international community clearly doesn’t care for happens? If Israel doesn’t want peace, why should they be supported in war? Clearly the worst case scenario of genocide is already happening. Your point only makes sense if you assume that Jewish lives are more worthy of protection than Palestinian or Iranian lives (Israel has been trying to drag America into a war against Iran for over a year).