Reasonable US Position on Israel-Palestine

Posts: 800
in A Moving Train
Here's what I arrived after lengthy discussion in another thread, some of which has been productive, some not:


"Look dude, I get the history of the Jews - both recent and ancient. When people keep trying to kill you, you get paranoid and unbalanced. You can think of Israel as the ultimate response to trauma - 'we've been fucked over for so long we're gonna make ourselves so strong that nobody can fuck with us, and we're gonna hurt some people along the way so those people feel a little bit of what we felt, even though they weren't the people who hurt us.'

But you have to get over it. You can't hurt other people anymore. Israel is secure as a state - never mind the holocaust, it's not even 1948 anymore, or 1967, or 1973. If Iran ever actually seems like it's getting close to launcing on you, we've got your back. But until then, this shit you're doing must stop. We sever funding to your military, and if it doesn't look like you're a legitimate partner in the peace process (ie move to relinquish land, air sea control of Gaza, etc), we start supporting BDS too."

As I said, this is far from a perfect US position - there are flaws that both Palestinians and Israelis could point out with it. But it's a reasonable starting point.

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register
«134

Comments

  • Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,662
    Sounds reasonable enough to me.

    Side note question: Is your user name a nod to the line in NY's "Cortez the Killer"? Love that song!
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • Posts: 800
    Yeah. It's an old username from when I was first getting into Neil.
  • Posts: 9,617

    Why do most people think the goal is peace? The goal is control!
  • Posts: 16,256
    JC29856 said:


    Why do most people think the goal is peace? The goal is control!

    For which side? Both sides?
  • Posts: 800
    edited August 2014
    People feeling more in control of their lives does increase the odds of peace, I'd wager
    Post edited by dancinacrossthewater on
  • Posts: 49,594
    dancinacrossthewater said:

    Here's what I arrived after lengthy discussion in another thread, some of which has been productive, some not:


    "Look dude, I get the history of the Jews - both recent and ancient. When people keep trying to kill you, you get paranoid and unbalanced. You can think of Israel as the ultimate response to trauma - 'we've been fucked over for so long we're gonna make ourselves so strong that nobody can fuck with us, and we're gonna hurt some people along the way so those people feel a little bit of what we felt, even though they weren't the people who hurt us.'

    But you have to get over it. You can't hurt other people anymore. Israel is secure as a state - never mind the holocaust, it's not even 1948 anymore, or 1967, or 1973. If Iran ever actually seems like it's getting close to launcing on you, we've got your back. But until then, this shit you're doing must stop. We sever funding to your military, and if it doesn't look like you're a legitimate partner in the peace process (ie move to relinquish land, air sea control of Gaza, etc), we start supporting BDS too."

    As I said, this is far from a perfect US position - there are flaws that both Palestinians and Israelis could point out with it. But it's a reasonable starting point.

    as someone who has just been reading these threads....it's a pleasure to read your posts. if everyone on both sides of this argument could debate in such a civilized, well thought out manner, i think we'd be much closer to finding common ground.

    god speed!
    www.myspace.com
  • Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,598
    Peace is the goal. Many realize that without an agreement that both sides can accept there will be no peace. Any such agreement would need to include Palestinian control over their own lives to truly take hold and truly end the hostilities. Not just for a week or a month, but forever. I look at control as a given when stating that peace is the goal.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • Posts: 800
    The Juggler said:

    show previous quotes
    as someone who has just been reading these threads....it's a pleasure to read your posts. if everyone on both sides of this argument could debate in such a civilized, well thought out manner, i think we'd be much closer to finding common ground.

    god speed!
    Thanks dude. It takes time and hard work to get to a middle place on complex issues.

    A thread titled "Gaza - graphic pics", for example, is predisposed not to get to a middle place. It's a bit weird that the mods locked the thread in the other forum, which I felt was moving in a positive direction, but not some of the ones here. (In the end, though, I'd rather all threads on the issue stay open)
  • Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,598
    I thought the timing of the lock was strange, too. There were certainly more hostile points in that discussion that may have warranted a lock that didn't come. By the end it seemed like progress was being made.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • Posts: 10,255
    dancinacrossthewater said:

    show previous quotes
    Thanks dude. It takes time and hard work to get to a middle place on complex issues.

    A thread titled "Gaza - graphic pics", for example, is predisposed not to get to a middle place. It's a bit weird that the mods locked the thread in the other forum, which I felt was moving in a positive direction, but not some of the ones here. (In the end, though, I'd rather all threads on the issue stay open)
    FYI- I added the "graphic pics" to the thread after someone suggested it. So the debate in the gaza thread was always Gaza, just added the graphic so people knew what to expect.
  • Posts: 800
    Oh it's like a warning. Ok. I thought it was the original thread title
  • Posts: 5,697
    edited August 2014
    I think for the most part it has been a civil discussion.
  • Posts: 10,255
    dancinacrossthewater said:

    Oh it's like a warning. Ok. I thought it was the original thread title

    Ya man, just a little heads up warning cuz the pics are pretty fucked up.
  • Posts: 2,312
    brianlux said:

    Sounds reasonable enough to me.

    Side note question: Is your user name a nod to the line in NY's "Cortez the Killer"? Love that song!

    I have a cat we named Cortez… because she's a killer. (and we love Uncle Neil in my house)
  • Posts: 800
    Looks like they actually closed the Gaza thread for review too. My point in that thread was that even smaller decisions like what to lock and what to keep open can make a difference as far as a large group of people trying to understand a conflict with complex roots and have a reasonable discussion about it.
  • Posts: 800
    Basically, this shit isn't easy.
  • Posts: 800
    backseatLover12 said:

    show previous quotes
    I have a cat we named Cortez… because she's a killer. (and we love Uncle Neil in my house)
    Cortez is a great song, but gimme Dangerbird any day.
  • Posts: 21,037
    dancinacrossthewater said:

    It takes time and hard work to get to a middle place on complex issues.

    It's not a complex issue. Not complex at all.

  • Posts: 21,037
    JimmyV said:

    Peace is the goal. Many realize that without an agreement that both sides can accept there will be no peace. Any such agreement would need to include Palestinian control over their own lives to truly take hold and truly end the hostilities. Not just for a week or a month, but forever. I look at control as a given when stating that peace is the goal.

    The Israeli's have already stated that they will not relinquish full military control of the West Bank. Also, did you not read 'The Palestine Papers' released by Wikileaks? They show that the Israeli's have no intention of accepting anything that gives the Palestinians even a semblance of a viable state.

    Once again, this has nothing to do with trying to reach 'an agreement that both sides can accept'. It has nothing to do with what either side is willing, or unwilling, to accept. It boils down to what their obligations are under International law. And what their obligations are under international law are perfectly unambiguous.

  • Posts: 21,037
    edited August 2014
    "When the current attacks are called off, Israel hopes to be free to pursue its criminal policies in the occupied territories without interference, and with the U.S. support it has enjoyed in the past. Gazans will be free to return to the norm in their Israeli-run prison, while in the West Bank, Palestinians can watch in peace as Israel dismantles what remains of their possessions. That is the likely outcome if the U.S. maintains its decisive and virtually unilateral support for Israeli crimes and its rejection of the long-standing international consensus on diplomatic settlement. But the future will be quite different if the U.S. withdraws that support." - Noam Chomsky
    http://www.alternet.org/world/noam-chomsky-nightmare-gaza?page=0,1

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register

Quick Links

Categories