Today, we have lost one of the bravest public intellectuals engaged in the Israeli-Arab conflict. I just noticed in his NY Times obituary that he was born in that seminal year, 1948, an irony that undoubtedly would not have been lost on him.
During Operation Cast Lead, he was one of the first of the “celebrity intellectuals” Jerry Haber and I approached to sign a petition we organized. He signed willingly.
I remember his famous (or notorious depending on one’s point of view) op-ed in the Times in which he advocated a one-state solution. I thought his essay at the time a bit Pollyannish, and I still maintain profound skepticism of the notion. But it reminds me of the old saying about democracy: it’s the worst form of government–except for everything else. Unfortunately, the bankruptcy of the present political situation renders the two state solution ever less credible. And Tony Judt looks smarter every day.
I first learned he was ill when I invited him to speak at an event I planned about Israel-Iran relations last December. The news came as a deep shock. I can only articulate my profound respect via the Jewish form of honoring the dead: zichrono livracha (“may his memory be for a blessing”).
He will be missed! A great man. May he rest in peace.
Well done, Richard.
“May his memory be a blessing.” Amen.
BTW: The op-ed piece was in the NYRB, not the Times.
Anybody wanting to read more on Judt, there is a compendium of well-written obits to be found at Arts & Letters Daily (google it). The best is from the Chronicle of Higher Education.
More recently, simple sanity —
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/opinion/10judt.html?ref=books
A terrible end, managed with grace.
Baruch Dayan Emet
Odd fellow. He made a career of celebrating post-war Europe, but in the end refused to live there.
Tony Judt wasn’t odd. Anyone who would call him that is the one who’s odd.
Perhaps we will be allowed to see the day when Motor Neuron disease is overcome. Although, whatever genetic mishap is associated with it, does seem also to be associated with better than average thinking powers.
medawar, whatever your political inclinations, that statement is really DUMB. I guess you’re safe.
Political inclinations?
I was thinking of certain highly focused minds, such as that of Stephen Hawking.
All of these inheritable diseases start with damage to a single healthy gene in one generation or another. So, or at least the Darwinists maintain, do advancements and improvements to any species, us included. Something that changes the way that NEURONS work can hardly escape being linked to mental acuity and intelligence, and so there might be a very narrow gap between a “defect” and a “talent”. An argument against eugenics, of course.
Not every thought can be judged against one’s political dogmas. And whether you agree with Mr Judt’s thoughts or not, the fact remains that they were thoughts, and he was having lots of them, which places him far ahead of some contributors here.
That’s as forthright as I care to be on a thread about someone who’s just gone before us.
Some (not all) MND patients lose the ability to control what matters they concentrate on, and they can lose the ability to break down a problem into its component parts.
However, this does not mean that they cannot think, and in some individuals, it might just lead to them grasping connections inherent in a problem as a whole, and therefore to insight not easily available to a normal brain that’s automatically knocked the problem down into its component parts and put them in different mental boxes.
This could account for Mr Judt having quite sweeping ideas that seem “pollyanaish” and for Prof. Hawking being able to develop ideas that integrate into one train of thought, almost the entire sum of human knowledge on a subject.
In other individuals, of course, this kind of effect may only be disorientating and frustrating.
By “inheritable” I meant very specifically not to say “inherited”. There’s a damaged gene apparently involved, but it’s not established that the damage is always there since birth, or that the damaged gene always leads to symptoms.
We need to strive to be rid of the disease, if we can, one day. In lifting that curse, there’s a blessing in that we will, in the process, discover how we work.
Ill start by saying im really sorry im responding on this thread, as i feel this is not the most approppriate place, however as u’ve chosen to post a link to ur response to Tony Judts article, i dont see how ill have a better chance to raise this subject.
I read your own response to Tony Judt’s article, and i was literally shocked:
“Don’t you just love Judt’s enthusiastic proposal that Israel become the guinea pig in his experiment proving the day of the nation state has passed. The theory goes something like this: we westerners no longer identify with our ethnicity or religions as we used to. Even the idea of being British, French, German or American loses relevance in an age of the internet, international travel and worldwide free trade. The world is now a United Colors of Bennetton. All of this is well and good. But I’m afraid Judt’s blithe willingness to experiment with the lives and well being of the Israeli populace is quite callous. Judt isn’t quite ready to give up his own ethnic, religious or national identity. But he would have Israelis do that very thing in the heart of one of the most dangerous and incendiary regions in the world. I’m sorry but that’s not an experiment that I, or most Israelis would want to make”
How was he different from you, Richard? You define yourself as a jew, and you expect israel to become a state of all of its citizens. Do u really donnt understand you call for EXACTLY the same experiment Tony Judt has called for 7 years ago, from exactly the same position (someone who doesnt live in israel, someone whos not ready to give up on his own national / religious identity, etc).
The only difference between you too is that u also suggest therell be another – palestinian only – state.
Do you really think this will make the difference between his and ur experiments?
“History is riddled with visionary experiments in democracy bludgeoned to death by authoritarian power. Does anyone remember the liberals of the Weimar Republic crushed beneath the boot of Nazi terror? Why wouldn’t or couldn’t this happen in Judt’s bi-national state? Ah yes, there would be ‘international forces’ (what a vague term) guaranteeing the peace. I don’t know about you, but I feel a bit squeamish having my very life and limb guaranteed by an amorphous “international force.””
This what ive been telling ever since i started posting here. You cant assume making democratic laws (or constiution) will prevent raise of radical islam in bi national israel (or state of all of its citizens, for that matters) – especially when ur leading muslim readers here constantly remind its the palestinians right to NOT choose democracy, and write apologist responses about people like saddam hussein.
And yes, you also cant assume those laws will prevent the raise of radical judaism and will stop israel from turning into theocracy – but thats another subject for another discussion.
“Can any of us say definitively after the history of this century that we will never again face the race hatred of the Hitlers and Stalins of this world?? I think not.”
7 years ago you thought that no one can say definitivley we wont see another hitler. I raised this question less than a month ago, and got this as a response:
” how can u guarrantee next time they have a financial crisis people wont chose nazis again?)
Because they’re in the middle of the most serious economic crisis since the Great Depression & haven’t turned to the Nazis.”
I still dont see what has changed in the world around us, that made u change ur opinion on that subject. Sorry.
“that once Israel gives up its current form and becomes subsumed into a bi-national state, then the lion, in the form of a Palestinian majority surrounded by a sea of Arab countries would gobble up the lamb. I fear that even with an Israeli-Jewish population that might dominate in economic terms, political dominance would fall to the Palestinians. Then the former would play a precarious minority role in their society much like Maronites in Lebanon or ethnic Chinese in Indonesia or Malaysia. Have the Palestinians shown us they would be any more tolerant of minority rights in such a bi-national state than Israel has been of the rights of its Arab minority”
And this wont happen if israel becomes a state of all of its citizens, right?
“My argument is rather that lacking strong political leadership and a longstanding tradition of civic tolerance, no majority in the Middle East, whether it be an Arab or Jewish majority, should be expected to behave like model western-style democrats”
Wow, you practicly used the same arguement ive been trying to use – when i wrote israel was not located in norway – and which was so quickly disregarded by you.
So 7 years ago you realised that, what has changed ever since? Palestinians, Jews, or others in the middle east developed “longstanding tradition of civic tolerance” ever since? As far as i can tell both sides became only less tolerant towards the other side. Israeli jews keep constantly voting for right wingers, and palestinians chosen hamas when they could.
“One of Judt’s greatest weaknesses here is to omit any reference to what this bi-national state would look like. How would it govern itself? How would it guarantee religious freedom? How would it define majority-minority political roles and guarantee civil, political and human rights to both the majority and the minority?”
I saw people asking those questions on ur forums during the last few months, and u simply disregarded them with simple utopic answers. Im asking again: what has changed during those 7 years?
I literaly cannot believe my own eyes when i see the differences in ur position in 2003 and today, as ive already said. I understand ur opionions have changed during the years, and you’ve started criticizing israel more than u did 7 years ago, but does that mean that the objective facts
around us have changed as well?
did the palestinians or israelis managed to develope strong demoratic traditions during those 7 years? im affraid the answer is no.
As someone whos opinions are probably closer to the posting from 2003, i really wish to understand what has made you to change ur opionions so much.
Good day
Tony Judt is arguing for a one-state solution & for the end of religious traditions dividing ethnic groups in Israel. I’m not calling for that at all. I’m arguing that a state that already exists, claims falsely it is a democracy, & contains non-Jewish citizens–honor its own founding documents & become the state it claims it is. He’s arguing if I recall his article properly that religion is poison & destroys the ability for the state to function & succeed. I’m not arguing that at all since I respect the various religious traditions as long as they don’t poison the national well. Jews in Israel don’t have to stop being Jews or stop being represented in the Knesset or stop speaking Hebrew or stop receiving state benefits. They merely have to give precisely the same rights to non Jews, which isn’t the case now.
You also don’t seem to understand that my views have changed over 7 yrs. I don’t believe now what I believed then. Israel has shown itself incapable of reforming or ending the Occupation. Other solutions like international peacekeeping & unilateral imposed settlements become much more attractive. The two state solution has become much less feasible as well. So don’t make the mistake of pigeonholing me based on what I wrote 7 yrs ago. Israel has gotten worse. The situation demands different ideas & solutions than it did then.
I told you that the yrs made Tony Judt appear much smarter than he appeared in 2003. I still don’t fully agree w. his views. But they’re a lot more cogent give how much worse the situation has become.
You certainly can. That’s what a constitution would be for. It serves that role here. Why else do you think the USA is not a Christian republic by now?
This is utter blather. Provide a single piece of evidence that this is the case. Which leading Muslim leader has advocated turning Israel into a Sharia state?
Are you really in your right mind? What has changed since 2003 to make me less tolerant of coddling Israelis? Try everything. Everything’s changed. Nothing’s the same. Things are about as bad as they can be. They were bad in 2003, they’re worse now. MUCH worse.
Of course they have. Israel has changed them. Thousands have died in the interval. Wars have been waged. All false wars with false goals & false achievements & nothing has changed for the better. Only for the worse.
I want to warn you that I have very little interest in going back over old ground in this thread or my blog in general. If you want to parse things go right ahead. But you’re wasting yr time if you try to draw me into some long drawn out discussion here. I’m simply not interested.
I dont have an interest in a long discussion either. Ill end the discussion on this topic with this response (however i must say, you never are interested in having a discussion when someone disagrees with you, ro even worse – shows u any contradictions within ur beliefes – but thats ur problem, and not mine).
I dont seem to understand??? and i thought i explictily wrote “richard, i understand ur views have changed..”.
I also explictly mentiojned that both the jews and the arabs here became more extreme/right wing oriented.
7 years ago u claimed we dont have strong democratic traditions like in the west, and that creating a bi national west like democracy here is a dangerous experiment.
Now you’re saying things got worse, but somehow you thinkNOW this expiriment will work. Interesting.
So now, when things got so much worse and thousands of people have been kliled, you expect any majority here – be that majority jewish or muslim – to behave like “model western-style democrats”?
7 years ago you knew antisemitism hadnt died, and there was a need in JEWISH state. what has changed on that subject every since?
Btw, something i probably should have started with, but ive already said it more than once: Mr Judt advocated one state solution. You apparentyly advocated two state solutions, but in ur scenario israel is expected to give up on its judaistic properties, and become de-facto bi national state. How exactly your solutions are different? because you also suggest therell be a palestinian state for palestinians who will decide they dont want to be citizens of democratic bi national israel? what reason there will be for an existance of a second, palestinian only state, in such case?
Your solutions efficently lead to the same place: Bi national israel, a state of all of its citizens, or whatever name u chose to give to it.
Interesting. 7 years ago you brought the weimar republic as a great example of a place where laws didnt help. now you contradict urself and say a constitution will fix everything. You do realise if theres a majority in state which doesnt agree with the constitution it simply becomes irrelevant, right? a constitution is another form of law. not a word of god automaticly respected by all.
Your simplistic questions about usas government dont have a one liner answer. Im pretty sure more than enough people have dedicated their lifes to researches about democratic traditions in usa/western europe. Im also sure they got longer answers than “constitution”. USSR also had constitution, btw, and so does egypt. so what?
This is the only reason im writing all this btw:
Do YOU have answers to this questoins?
So many people around the world are so sure they have the ultimate solution to the i-p conflict. 7 years ago u were among those who asked legitime questions, and didnt just bring up impossible and simplistic answers like “peace”, “constitution”, etc, which eventually might only lead to greater disasters – for both sides here. Too bad that has changed.
Richard, there are people except for you and me who read those arguements. They probably see – just like i do – how often you put words in ur oponents mouths. Why do insist on doing it?
I said that ur leading muslim readers remind us the palestinians have the right to not choose demoracy. You turned my words and +- misquoted me as if i was saying someone here called for creating a sharia state.
Anyway, heres a quote from mary – one of the leading muslim readers here (judging by her responses number at least) saying exactly what i said – that the palestinians have the right to chose whatever government they want, and that it doesnt have to be democracy – just because u or mister Judt wish them to pick democracy:
I agree with mary on this one, btw, and pretty sure they wont exactly create Netherlands #2 when given the chance – not because im racist, but because of what u urself said – there are no strong democratic traditions in this region, theres no even one real democacy around us (including us for that matters), and the last 80 years of conflict surely didnt help with that.
The two states solution is dying not because the idea itself is not good, but because it was efficiently burried by our leaders (and i mean both palestinian and jewish ones).
It doesnt mean that forcing us to share a state, and giving up on ur own believes from the past is a better solution.
It wont be easier for jews and arabs here to develope stronger democratic traditions( especially when so many of them are religious/ or what we call in hebrew “masortiim”, and are not interested in disconnecting religion from the laws of the state ) within one state, or two states with one of them acting de facto lke one bi national state tony judt was calling for.
No, I don’t expect that. I don’t expect either side to behave much better than it does right now. However, I fully expect that in order to avoid a nuclear holocaust or some other similar conflagration the west will come round to the understanding that if they don’t intervene & impose a settlement, that the worst will happen. With 10,000-20,000 or so international peacekeepers on Israel’s borders in the north & south, I do expect ea. side will behave itself…or face the consequences. We no longer have any luxuries as we had in 2003. It’s do or die time. Either the world comes up w. a satisfactory solution & gets the sides to agree or imposes it on them–or else Israel will not survive (& Palestinians along w. them depending on the megatonage used).
Anti-Semitism hasn’t died. There IS still a need for a state for Jews who may need a haven in the event of a massacre or pogrom. But that doesn’t mean there’s a need for a state as Israel is currently constituted. I believe a truly democratic state of Israel could still absorb Jews who need to emigrate on an emergency basis (just as it could absorb Palestinians who might need to emigrate on an emergency basis).
NO!! And I’m sick & tired of you lugheads deliberately misunderstanding & misrepresenting my real views. The Israel I envision would not require any Jew to give up on their religion or on the importance of their religion as part of the heritage of the nation. But the nation I envision would have to make room for precisely those views & traditions among its non Jewish citizens.
For the simple reason that there are Israeli Palestinians citizens of the supposedly democratic state of Israel who demand & deserve full rights & citizenship in that state. While there are other Palestinians living outside the state of Israel & not citizens of it who are under illegal, unjust Occupation. Those Palestinians deserve a state of their own.
Unless of course you want to lump everyone together & adopt a one state solution. If you don’t like that option & don’t like my option then you’re left w. 2 possibilities: either Israel expels its Palestinian citizens in which case it would raise holy hell w. the international community & turn Israel into apartheid S. Africa if not worse; or else you maintain Israel under its present terms, in which case it turns into apartheid S. Africa at a slightly slower pace. But in the end you be in virtually the same place: a Jewish supremacist state.
There are major differences bet. Israel & Weimar. The world allowed Weimar to fail. I don’t believe if the world gets the moxie to intervene in the current conflict it can afford to allow this to happen. Indeed, I am sure it will not. The world knows what came after Weimar & it knows something equally bad could come fr. a failure to finally resolve the IP conflict.
I don’t know where you grew up. Perhaps not in a country w. a constitutional tradition. The entire pt. of a constitution is that the majority CANNOT render the document irrelevant. And in Israel’s case, there would be not just internal guarantees, there would external ones as well as in Kosovo or Bosnia.
As for Mary’s views, I differ with her on this one. Both Israelis & Palestinians will be closely scrutinized under any international peace agreement. No one will allow an Al Qaeda/Taliban/Muslim Brotherhood gov’t (note I didn’t include Hamas in this list) to take over Palestine, just as no one will allow a arch right-wing settler gov’t to take over Israel. If either of these scenarios happen it could completely destroy the chance for peace. So I believe it won’t happen.
You are much more agreeable and pleasant to read when you don’t constantly blurt out insults and belittle those you disagree with. I agree with almost everything you have written, BUT like y said, I am an Israeli and I don’t want to be a part of this experiment. Your belief that such a solution is nice but not very comforting for the millions of Israelis who believe otherwise. Israelis (and the Palestinians, too, for that matter) need a substantial guarantee that any suggested solution will work, and not just assume it will.
I’m not even sure what would be satisfactory; perhaps the full backing of the international community for any response to a violation of such an agreement (from both sides).
Sorry about the double post, but I’m baffled about one of your statements. You say that “no one” (who exactly is no one?) will allow an Al Queda/Taliban/Muslim Brotherhood government”, but you’re fine with Hamas. I’m sure you have read the Hamas Covenant before, but have you chosen to disregard this?:
And most importantly, here’s what Hamas supporters think about your suggested solution to the I-P conflict:
I mean, seriously…
Richard, the world has allowed more than only Weimar to fall. Last year we all watched Russian troops marching into Georgia, and no one did anything (to be honest, i dont know who was right or wrong there – if at all – but thats a good example of a conflict where no one simply gave a damn).
“NO!! And I’m sick & tired of you lugheads deliberately misunderstanding & misrepresenting my real views. The Israel I envision would not require any Jew to give up on their religion or on the importance of their religion as part of the heritage of the nation. But the nation I envision would have to make room for precisely those views & traditions among its non Jewish citizens.”
Mayhaps i didnt express myself well.
What i meant was that more than enough israelis (judging by knesset mandats) want to live in a state where the law is at least partially based on judaism. Im sure this is no different on the palestinian side, only they believe in islam.
I dont see how both sides would agree to compromise on that. How all the people who vote sha”s and other religious parties will agree to cancel all the religion based laws in israel, unless u expect the international community to force us into that, and this is exactly why i think its abit too simplistic to assume any soltuion of “real democracy” is an option here.
“Unless of course you want to lump everyone together & adopt a one state solution. If you don’t like that option & don’t like my option then you’re left w. 2 possibilities: either Israel expels its Palestinian citizens in which case it would raise holy hell w. the international community & turn Israel into apartheid S. Africa if not worse; or else you maintain Israel under its present terms, in which case it turns into apartheid S. Africa at a slightly slower pace. But in the end you be in virtually the same place: a Jewish supremacist state”
Honestly, I dont think i really have the solution. I dont want to live in an apartheid state, but i dont want to see us becoming yet another middle eastern state either. I dont believe its possible to develope new usa or canada here, because both sides are simply not interested.
In my opinion the solutoin with most chances for success is two states, where palestine is for palestinians only and israel is for jews (or anyone else who realises the laws here will always be somewhat based on judaism, and that the national anthem will remain “hatikva” and will not try to change it). you can see such soluion as an apartheid one, and yes – its not a 100% western democracy, but itll ensure israel will remain as close as it can to such, and itll allow palestinians to create their own government (based on islamic rules if they wish).
To sum it up, i can tell you that i really dont care/mind what kind of government the palestinians will chose to themselves, as this is their own right, but ill probably immigrate out of israel the day a party like hamas will get to rule here (and it might happen with ur solution or mr judt’s solution).
as i said, what i wrote might be disturbing for you, but i tried being as honest as i can, and i also do believe 2 states for 2 nations is the best solution there can be.
You’re likening Georgia to Weimar? What do you know about history? Apparently, very little. Georgia it appears may have started this war & is certainly not an innocent party. No one intervened because no one wanted a war with Russia. Israel is a far different story. If the U.S. wanted an international solution to work it would force it to. There would be no one who would brook U.S. opposition. No Arab force or country could destroy or even harm Israel in the face of U.S. opposition & an international mandate to maintain a peaceful border bet. Israel & its neighbors.
In fact, that’s not true & shows you know very little about the Palestinians. The West Bank is run by Fatah which is a secular nationalist movement.
Nope, won’t work. No way, no how. You’re leaving out Israel’s Palestinian citizens who won’t stand for it & shouldn’t. It’s their state too. You will simply be unable in the long term to render them 2nd class citizens. It is completely untenable.
That’s a bogeyman & you’re full of stuff & nonsense. There are very few Israeli Palestinians with any political vision that comes close to this.
Y-
Yes, we all remember those “international forces” such as the Dutch peacekeepers in Srebrenice (sp?) in former Yugoslavia who stood aside when a massacre of civilains took place. Then there were the international peacekeepers in the Congo who ended up becoming drug and precious gems smugglers. And who can forget the UNEF peacekeepers in the Sinai before the Six-Day War who were ordered out by Nasser, paving the way for the war to begin. How about the coalition forces in Iraq who are leaving a VERY fragile situation behind without waiting to see if a stable, peaceful regime can be established?
NO ONE in Israel is prepared to have his life guaranteed by “international peacekeepers” who have their own agenda and not necessarily the best interests of the local population at heart. That was the situation during the British Mandate 1918-1948. We all see how that fell apart.
I wonder if Judt, in his opposition to “ethnic or religious states” was condemning the Muslims of India for separating and creating their own state, or was Judt one of those who only worry about these things when Jews do them?
The massacre there happened because the Dutch had no weapons & no mandate to prevent the killing. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that there are diff. mandates for peacekeeping & diff. levels of weaponry & instructions for various operations indicates yr bad faith in dealing w. the issue. Frankly, I don’t care what you think about peacekeeping & its possibility for success in Israel. It will eventually happen whether you want it to or not.
There have been numerous successful peacekeeping operations & unsuccessful ones. YOu’ve pointed out a few of the unsuccessful & conveniently omitted the successful. I wonder why?
This discussion is complicating & obscuring some essential albeit embarrassing facts. One: Israel stole the Palestinian homeland. The Zionist conquerers have no legitimate right to an inch of that land. Two: Israel expelled the rightful owners & stole all their property. Those people have a right under international law to have their homes and other property returned. Three: Israel is (and has been from day one) a thoroughly racist, brutal, expansionist state. Four: racism, expansionism, militarism & brutality are the salient characteristics of a fascist state, not a democratic state. Only primitive tribal allegiance keeps American (& of course Israeli) Jews from acknowledging the truth that most other people of conscience see at once– that the State of Israel must be transformed into a democracy. The two-state solution was a naive delusion from the start: no Israeli government ever had the slightest genuine interest in the proposition: each pretended to favor it merely as a holding action while they stole more of the Palestinian homeland. That this is true of the present far-right government seems so patently true that again only those who “love Israel,” much as the Good German loved Germany, would like to see that settler-colonialist state continue its racist, apartheid, supremacist ways, but with a tiny pseudo-Palestinian state (demilitarized & helpless) existing (as a dependent colony) next door.
Steve tells it like it is. That takes guts in the face of some of the contributions to this blog. The only thing he leaves out is the complicit US role behind Israel’s ideology and actions. Both countries are connected by an umbilical cord of hegemonic imperialism. As long as that connection persists, there will be no chance of change.
What kind of contributions to this blog? I fail to see how it takes guts to say something that’s been said here countless times before.
[comment deleted for violation of comment rules]
Richard-
How does Kowit’s piece correspond to your commenting rules-re: denying the Jewish people’s connection to Eretz Israel?
The only word I didn’t like in his comment was “fascist,” which I think is histrionic & overdoing things. Israel has only itself & its policies to blame for comments like that.
@y.
Several years ago, I saw mention of a poll revealing that of all the local Arab populations queried, Palestinians demonstrated the highest favorability ratings for democracy.
You Israelis need to be concerned with those among you who more and more, disdain it. Disturbing to me, is the strength of this trend among those who claim American heritage.
Go figger.
In English history, the two-state solution (ie: put all the Vikings in Essex and tell them to stay there) became a one-state solution relatively soon after, as Vikings and Saxons traded with each other, married, and so on.
Building a huge wall was also tried, coincidentally by the same Roman who decided to sack Jerusalem.
Offa’s Dyke differed from Hadrian’s Wall, in that it was really constructed to show the Welsh the limit of King Offa’s ambitions, rather than as a defence against the Welsh.
Israel’s border fences and security barriers seem to owe more to Hadrian than Offa, in that they’re more like a secure jumping-off point for further adventures than a self-imposed limit to expansion.
”
You’re likening Georgia to Weimar? What do you know about history? Apparently, very little. Georgia it appears may have started this war & is certainly not an innocent party. No one intervened because no one wanted a war with Russia.”
What does it have to do with history knowledge? The world allowed weimar to fall, and the world allowed russians to march into Georgia (or Chechna) because no one wanted to mess with Russia. The world also allowed USSR to gain control over eastern europe in 1945 for the same reason.
Today USA is enough to guarrantee any regime in israel. Do u relieve believe itll remain like this forever?
Besides, im not even talking about ruinning israel from outside but from inside. For u hamas and muslim brothers are two different things – for me it wont really make a difference being ruled by these or these. U keep talking about “constituion”, but again – its based upon some agreement in the society to play by the rules. Do ureally think that if tommorow hamas becomes the ruling party and israel, and changes this constitution in a way that says only muslims can be P.M here usa forces would march into israel and remove hamas government?
“In fact, that’s not true & shows you know very little about the Palestinians. The West Bank is run by Fatah which is a secular nationalist movement.”
Richard, in another thread u claimed we cant say hamas is the chosen government of the palestinians, as they didnt have elections in 4 years, and now u imply u CAN say the same statement about fatah? Who told u the palestinians wish to be ruled by Fatah?
Fatah is there because IDF prevents them from collapsing.
I repeat what ive already said: I dont know what would the palestinians choose if they had elections now. I know what they chose when they had the last opporunity to do so, and it wasnt the secular fatah.
“Nope, won’t work. No way, no how. You’re leaving out Israel’s Palestinian citizens who won’t stand for it & shouldn’t. It’s their state too. You will simply be unable in the long term to render them 2nd class citizens. It is completely untenable.”
I dont render no one as 2nd class citizen. If someone thinks singing hatikva or having magen david as the state symbol makes him second class citizen – i can only pitty him. Notice i do want to discrimantion to end – when talking about chances to get a certain job, or certain education (though many of those problems come out of certain traditions of the palestinians, and not nessesarily from state discrimnation), but it doesnt mean having state symbols and laws based on judaism automaticly makes any non jew a second class citizen. Ive already told u in Germany most of the public holidays are based on christian tradition. Does this mean the muslims there cant celebreate ramadan? Does that mean any non christian there is a second class citizen?
“That’s a bogeyman & you’re full of stuff & nonsense. There are very few Israeli Palestinians with any political vision that comes close to this.”
I dont know, and im not sure you do.
Raad salah and his organization manage to bring 10,000’s of people to their demonstrations, and being ruled by Raad salah wont be different for me to being rulled by Khaled Mashal
Pls. restrain yourself to three comments maximum in any one day. Otherwise, you’re hijacking the threads. I understand you feel you have a lot to say & I have no problem with you saying it. Just not to the extent you are now.
The U.S. will not have to guarantee Israel’s security “forever.” Once Israel has adapted to the peace agreement & found its niche in the reconstituted Middle East & accomodated to realities there, the U.S. won’t be needed. An equilibrium will develop, trade relations will develop, tourism, other bonds & connections will be made. Israel will eventually find its way & be more or less accepted there. When that happens there will be a certain normality in M.E. relations which doesn’t exist now.
The main political parties of Israeli Palestinians are nationalist, not religious. So again you’re blowin’ smoke. I can’t believe you’re showing good faith in these comments you’re writing because there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Israeli Palestinians are preponderantly Islamist. None.
In Bosnia & other UN protectorates that’s precisely what happens, except that the overseer never allows groups to run for office which violate the parameters of co existence among the various ethnic parties. So you don’t have to march anyone into anything to overthrow anyone.
Fatah is the party in control of the W. Bank & they are secular nationalists. That’s all I said & no more. Islamists control Gaza it is true. If Israel would allow a free & fair election in the two areas there would be a return to political normalcy & either Hamas would win again (narrowly as it did last time) or Fatah or some independent body would win. Whoever won, it would not be an Al Qaeda/Taliban type group of the sort you put forward as your bogeyman.
You’ve just contradicted yrself. With 1 breath you claim you make no man 2nd class & with the 2nd you say you pity the man who can’t sing HaTikvah as his national anthem, which fully 25% of your own fellow citizens cannot. So you’ve in fact just rendered them 2nd class.
Yes, those “traditions” which forbid them from study at the University, or to attend officer training in the IDF, or study for medical school, or become Israeli artists, or build homes for themselves, or maintain municipal services in their villages–all of which ISRAEL (& not their ethnic “traditions”) prevent them from doing. BTW, your statement is not only ignorant, but racist.
Raad Salah has a following because Israel shows itself to be utterly rejectionist in dealing w. the Palestinians both inside Israel & outside (in Palestine). YOU yrself & yr gov’t’s policies have manufactured Salah’s popularity. You have only yrself to blame for it.