Quote from John Freeman on January 17, 2024, 9:44 am

Hello Jack, Lucio, Maverick,

I think it's a very interesting topic. My take on it is that I agree: there are our own biases that come into the picture. So when we talk about Israel and Palestine, we talk less about them than about us. It's like euthanasia, legal prostitution, drug policy, abortion, etc.

It's mostly our opinions on the matter as there is no right nor wrong. When we talk about this topic, we actually talk about our values through the lense of our understanding of the situation.

In this case: were the allies wrong to give Israel to the jew people? Impossible to tell. Was sionism too extreme or an extreme response to an extreme situation (holocaust)? Impossible to tell. Are the palestinians right to fight back or should they accept the situation? Impossible to tell.

So who's wrong and right is impossible to tell for me. Of course I have my own opinion and I think killing people is not justifiable. Of course I think that taking someone's land is unacceptable. And then what? So there's a guilty and an innocent? There's a weak and a strong?

It's more complicated than that. As Lucio said it ends up being about power. And the most powerful ends up writing history (that's basically Israel's plan: if they win, morals don't matter anymore).

So these are a couple of thoughts as I do my best not to tip my toes in choosing a side.

So what led to the current situation is what I call the eternal war: a conflict birthing a conflict birthing a conflict. From the dawn of time until the twilight of the sun.

Example here: 1st World was born out of serbian nationalism (basically east vs west) this led to germany being "humiliated" (a country is not humiliated, but its government and people might feel humiliated and not all of them), this led to a sense of revenge in the german government that led to World war II. Since Hitler was antisemitic (among other things), it led to the genocide of jew people. This led to the allies giving Israel to the jew people because they knew they were indebted (many allied governments knew and tolerated for many reasons the genocide). This led to the creation of Israel which created a conflict with the people already living there: the palestinians. (Apologies if there approximations, this is a reflection of my limited understanding).

Same with Ben Laden and Afghanistan, which is a war (Afghanistan) who's the child of the cold war who's the child of the 2nd world war, etc.

So it's the nature of wars: a conflict with a "bad* resolution (not win-win) give birth to another conflict. Same with current China, etc.

So to me. that's the mechanism.

Now about the topic of the thread.

My opinion: it's too complex to analyze for us as laymans. I think even the CIA, etc. have trouble understanding what is happening.

I think we can talk about the conflict, but we cannot understand it with the little information we have that is even further twisted by the media's lens.

I'll give an example: we talk about "palestinians", but there are many sub-groups with conflicting interests: not only in government but in societies: extremists, normal people, etc. Same with "israelians": there are many inner conflicts and inner conflicts of interests. There are also individual interests and a LOT of corruption.

Hopefully those people give us plenty of examples:

1. Netanyahu: I don't have all the details but he has 1 or several trials for corruption if I'm not mistaken. Not even talking about the justice reform. Enough said. But he passes for many (before these events) as a savior.
2. Arafat: as corrupt as possible. Stole about 1 billion dollars (and more?) from his people. But yeah nah he's a hero (with full pockets).

So as usual and now I'll state my opinion: it's a leadership issue. And both countries have corrupted leaders (I assume), extremists violent groups among some are funded by foreign countries (talking about Palestine here). Let's not even talk about foreign influence (US having a strategic interest in having a strong Israel), Saudis and Iranians having their own interests in their, whether in the Sunnis vs Chiites or some other shit dark reason.

So due to its strategic location and the actors involved, it's a conflict that has many conflicts inside of it, outside participants, inside participants in the 2 parties and the 2 parties against each others. So minimum 3 levels of conflicts. Nested conflicts.

So the problem is and Lucio also talked about this before: there are too many people having an interest for the conflict not to be solved. Or at least not being solved in a win-win way.

And of course arm dealers providing both sides with weapons actually love this conflict: it's like the christmas sale to them. The gift that keeps on giving.

My perspective. That will be my only message. Full right to disagree with me of course, I prevently say I won't get further into the debate. I feel sad for what is happening and for all the people suffering, no matter their side. That's how I feel.

And of course it's a 70 years conflict, there's much more to say. And I admit I know very very little. So take my opinion as a layman's opinion watching the news and having googled this stuff a few times in my life.

Quote from Maverick on January 18, 2024, 11:03 pm

Quote from John Freeman on January 17, 2024, 9:44 am

Hello Jack, Lucio, Maverick,

I think it's a very interesting topic. My take on it is that I agree: there are our own biases that come into the picture. So when we talk about Israel and Palestine, we talk less about them than about us. It's like euthanasia, legal prostitution, drug policy, abortion, etc.

It's mostly our opinions on the matter as there is no right nor wrong. When we talk about this topic, we actually talk about our values through the lense of our understanding of the situation.

In this case: were the allies wrong to give Israel to the jew people? Impossible to tell. Was sionism too extreme or an extreme response to an extreme situation (holocaust)? Impossible to tell. Are the palestinians right to fight back or should they accept the situation? Impossible to tell.

Hey John,
I agree it is hard to characterize anything as right or wrong, but I feel there is one ingredient missing here, that is "context" when context is considered it becomes almost  impossible to be undecided on whether something is right or wrong, the problem lies in understanding the entire context, and this is where Israel has proved to be very good at..muddying up the context, putting a smokescreen if front, but once the context is gleaned and learnt it becomes abundantly clear who is right and who is wrong. Yes, right or wrong boils down to values of the individual,, but I think I can safety say most people's values are universal and fundamental.

In this case: were the allies wrong to give Israel to the jew people? Impossible to tell. Was sionism too extreme or an extreme response to an extreme situation (holocaust)? Impossible to tell. Are the palestinians right to fight back or should they accept the situation? Impossible to tell.

In my opinion and many others, the allies had no business handing anything over to anyone cause it was not their Pop's playground, I would love to talk about Zionism and the Holocaust, as long as there is a  topic of Holocaust, there must be talks  of the Holodomor, Porajmos (Romani Gypsies), Aghet (Armenian Genocide), and not to forget Deir Yassin massacre, Jallianwallah Bagh massacre and the Hindu Genocide,  none of these groups have got justice or for that matter a voice  but that would be another topic in itself and this might not be the right platform for those discussions. I always subscribed to the thought "better die fighting and than live on the knees" going by that value, the  Palestinians  are right, but of course there are other thoughts and values.

Example here: 1st World was born out of serbian nationalism (basically east vs west) this led to germany being "humiliated" (a country is not humiliated, but its government and people might feel humiliated and not all of them), this led to a sense of revenge in the german government that led to World war II. Since Hitler was antisemitic (among other things), it led to the genocide of jew people. This led to the allies giving Israel to the jew people because they knew they were indebted (many allied governments knew and tolerated for many reasons the genocide). This led to the creation of Israel which created a conflict with the people already living there: the palestinians. (Apologies if there approximations, this is a reflection of my limited understanding).

ww1 was the result of  machinations of  the British empire, Germans were the victims of this plan,  since they lost the war, history was written by the victors and Germany made to look like the aggressor and the villain, which  is a blatant lie and were made to sign a treaty which everyone knew was unfair to Germany, it was designed to make Germany attack once again.

The Afghanistan, Pakistan situation was similar to the Palestinians, the Brits, Yanks, Soviets all  tried to hold onto/ rule  a land that was not theirs and to the surprise of no one except theirs they were thrown out.

My opinion: it's too complex to analyze for us as laymans. I think even the CIA, etc. have trouble understanding what is happening.

I think we can talk about the conflict, but we cannot understand it with the little information we have that is even further twisted by the media's lens.

I'm not so sure of this, as we know victors write  history and they also muddy history, try to change the context and hide the truth, spin an elaborate web of lies, even centuries later also, but once we get the real information then it is not hard to analyze, it is straightforward. When the defeated give another account of history the victors dismiss it as "alternative history", "fiction", "conspiracy theories". I agree it is especially difficult to get past all cooked up lies and arrive at the truth.

So as usual and now I'll state my opinion: it's a leadership issue. And both countries have corrupted leaders (I assume), extremists violent groups among some are funded by foreign countries (talking about Palestine here). Let's not even talk about foreign influence (US having a strategic interest in having a strong Israel), Saudis and Iranians having their own interests in their, whether in the Sunnis vs Chiites or some other shit dark reason.

So due to its strategic location and the actors involved, it's a conflict that has many conflicts inside of it, outside participants, inside participants in the 2 parties and the 2 parties against each others. So minimum 3 levels of conflicts. Nested conflicts.

So the problem is and Lucio also talked about this before: there are too many people having an interest for the conflict not to be solved. Or at least not being solved in a win-win way.

And of course arm dealers providing both sides with weapons actually love this conflict: it's like the christmas sale to them. The gift that keeps on giving.

My perspective. That will be my only message. Full right to disagree with me of course, I prevently say I won't get further into the debate. I feel sad for what is happening and for all the people suffering, no matter their side. That's how I feel.

And of course it's a 70 years conflict, there's much more to say. And I admit I know very very little. So take my opinion as a layman's opinion watching the news and having googled this stuff a few times in my life.

I agree that lot of people have a vested interest in see this conflict continue, and any strong leader that appears to provide a solutions is assassinated or  done away with in some manner,

I must confess I know little of the details regarding Arafat, I thought he was  poisoned coz he was a threat to the countries with vested interests, it is a sad plight when people who can make a difference don't do anything.

Of course, I might be wrong on some views or points and welcome any disagreements, opinions or thoughts.

Mav