Israel

[anitram]

Originally Posted by Diemen

iron horse, what are your thoughts on the Israeli governments policy of bulldozing Arab communities in the West Bank to make room for Jewish settlements?

Is that on Wikipedia?

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by anitram

Is that on Wikipedia?

Heh.

[nbelcik]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

This is in response to the Israel and Apartheid Analogy Post 34.



From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel...rtheid_analogy



Opponents of the analogy claim that the comparison is factually,[13] morally,[13] and historically[14] inaccurate and intended to delegitimize Israel.[1][15][16][17] Opponents state that the West Bank and Gaza are not part of sovereign Israel. They argue that though the internal free movement of Palestinians is heavily regulated by the Israeli government, the territories are governed by the elected Palestinian Authority and Hamas leaders, so they cannot be compared to the internal policies of apartheid South Africa.[18][19][20]



With regard to the situation within Israel itself, critics of the analogy argue that Israel cannot be called an apartheid state because unlike South Africa, which enshrined its racial segregation policies in law, Israeli law is the same for Jewish citizens and other Israeli citizens, with no explicit distinction between race, creed or sex.[23] However, others believe that even if Israeli law does not make explicit distinction between categories of citizens, in effect it privileges Jewish citizens and discriminates against non-Jewish, and particularly Arab, citizens of the state, by creating benefits for IDF service, which is not mandatory for Arabs (but is optional)





Note: I would add that mandatory service in the military is not required for Arabs because Israel did not want to force Arabs in a position where they might have to fight against other Arabs.

So let's see, even though there isn't free movement for Palestinians within Gaza and the West Bank we shouldn't count them because technically they aren't part of Israel, even though Israel is building settlements in them that are guarded by the IDF?

Secondly, it's not apartheid because it's not explicitly enshrined in law, even though discrimination does occur?

Those are both incredibly weak arguments.





Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[Vlad n U 2]

iron horse would have supported apartheid era South Africa.

[digitize]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

iron horse would have supported apartheid era South Africa.

It is... perhaps humbling... to my sensibilities as a supporter of Western liberal democracy how recently governments like the US and especially the UK either supported or just shrugged at the apartheid regime.

(Though I recognize that you and I have rather different political ideologies.)

[Vlad n U 2]

Originally Posted by digitize

It is... perhaps humbling... to my sensibilities as a supporter of Western liberal democracy how recently governments like the US and especially the UK either supported or just shrugged at the apartheid regime.

(Though I recognize that you and I have rather different political ideologies.)

To both of us, it's a case of how easy it is to support these sorts of regimes when they're current - when those in the past are almost unthinkable to support nowadays. Hence it is easy for me to assume that a person as conservative as iron horse would have supported it at the time.

[Kieran McConville]

Probably the most salient point about Apartheid era South Africa is that they were on the 'right' side of the Cold War. That was about the beginning and end of it (not discounting actual racism among a number of prominent Anglosphere politicians of the era).

[the iron horse]

quote:

On this Holocaust Memorial Day, I beseech Americans to stop dropping the H*(for Hitler) bomb on America’s political divide.

Love him or hate him, President Donald Trump is no Hitler. Denouncing the democratically elected leader of our country and his cabinet as Nazis denigrates the victims of the past and could cripple our ability to confront and defeat future tyrants and terrorists.

Stop dropping the H* (Hitler) bomb and other crucial lessons for 2017 on Holocaust Memorial Day | Fox News

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by the iron horse

quote:

On this Holocaust Memorial Day, I beseech Americans to stop dropping the H*(for Hitler) bomb on America’s political divide.

Love him or hate him, President Donald Trump is no Hitler. Denouncing the democratically elected leader of our country and his cabinet as Nazis denigrates the victims of the past and could cripple our ability to confront and defeat future tyrants and terrorists.

Stop dropping the H* (Hitler) bomb and other crucial lessons for 2017 on Holocaust Memorial Day | Fox News

Still no comment on Israel continuing to destroy existing Palestinian communities to build Jewish settlements on the West Bank?

If you're complaining about dialogue getting shut down, why not take steps to rectify it by not ignoring questions?

[DaveC]

hitler and the nazi party were also democratically elected. learn some history ffs. aren't you a school teacher?

[Vlad n U 2]

Originally Posted by DaveC

hitler and the nazi party were also democratically elected. learn some history ffs. aren't you a school teacher?

Unfortunately, he seems like he represents a poor indictment on the US education system.

[Kieran McConville]

Strictly speaking, Hitler was not elected. The Nazi party made significant gains (although had already peaked and declined before the end of 1932) in parliamentary seats in a series of elections. But in the event, Hitler was appointed chancellor by president Hindenberg, in an atmosphere of crisis aided in no small party by his private street army's agitation. Under the letter of law, but by no means by popular acclaim.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Kieran McConville

Strictly speaking, Hitler was not elected. The Nazi party made significant gains (although had already peaked and declined before the end of 1932) in parliamentary seats in a series of elections. But in the event, Hitler was appointed chancellor by president Hindenberg, in an atmosphere of crisis aided in no small party by his private street army's agitation. Under the letter of law, but by no means by popular acclaim.

The Nazis were democratically elected. And ultimately, Hitler, who got one huge foot in the door from a democratic-republic system even though second in pure vote... was legally appointed chancellor.

And then what happened? Hitler took advantage of pandemonium in his country. Civil unrest. During that pandemonium, a series of power grabbing decisions were made.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

sounds familiar.

[iron yuppie]

Originally Posted by Kieran McConville

Strictly speaking, Hitler was not elected. The Nazi party made significant gains (although had already peaked and declined before the end of 1932) in parliamentary seats in a series of elections. But in the event, Hitler was appointed chancellor by president Hindenberg, in an atmosphere of crisis aided in no small party by his private street army's agitation. Under the letter of law, but by no means by popular acclaim.

This is an important detail IMO. The Weimar Constitution had an emergency empowerment mechanism that does not exist in the United States, as far as I know.

[Vlad n U 2]

I have to wonder about liberal/Democrat support for Israel when their main figure is in the same league as Trump. See Netanyahu's tweet.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

I have to wonder about liberal/Democrat support for Israel when their main figure is in the same league as Trump. See Netanyahu's tweet.

One of the best things Obama did with foreign policy was stick it to Israel. His message was loud and clear: no "special relationship" going on there.

[anitram]

Obama hardly stuck it to them, they had massive expansions of the settlements and pretty much nobody batted an eye.

It's a terrible government there, and I think very antithetical to liberal values to defend it in any way.

[Vlad n U 2]

If that was Obama sticking it to Israel, that's borderline depressing - and indicative of how sycophantic others have been.

[LuckyNumber7]

Obama broke the decades long unwritten rule that Israel is a holy ally who must be protected at all costs and can do no wrong.

He engaged in relations with Iran, and ignored their pleas against the Iran nuclear deal.

On his way out the door, his administration again unexpectedly did not side with Israel during that UN vote. By US standards, that's sticking it to them.