Do you support a war against Israel to liberate Palestinians?

[Bankotsu]

Do you support a war against Israel to liberate Palestinians?

A coalition of states(maybe arab states) under UN mandate will invade Israel and liberate Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967 and declare Palestinian state.

All the illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank will be destroyed as well and the people driven back into Israel.

A peace conference will then be convened to sign a peace treaty between Israel and the Palestinian state.

http://www.shunpiking.com/ol0405/image/maps_before_after_1967.jpg

[9]

LOL wut?
Do you support a truce initiated by the capitalist class between itself and the working class wherein the capitalist class dissolves itself out of benevolence and lovingly hands the state and the means of production to the working class? 'Cause the likelihood of my scenario is about equal to the likelihood of yours...

[Bankotsu]

LOL wut?
Do you support a truce initiated by the capitalist class between itself and the working class wherein the capitalist class dissolves itself out of benevolence and lovingly hands the state and the means of production to the working class? 'Cause the likelihood of my scenario is about equal to the likelihood of yours...

But if there was a movement for this war, would you support it?

[RGacky3]

I would, but I think a US backed mandate would be enough, no one would have to be invaded.

[9]

But if there was a movement for this war, would you support it?
The premise is nonsensical. The US and Israel (at the least, and they would be accompanied by the rest of the pro-imperialist states) would veto any UN resolution calling for such actions, and that's already taking the make-believe scenario to ridiculous extremes by pretending that such a resolution would ever be tabled in the UN to begin with. The imperialist countries that would be invading Israel would be defying all the basic premises of capitalism and imperialism by acting directly against their interests. The scenario is too far-fetched to even warrant consideration of what position I may or may not be in favor of in the event of such an unfathomable reality-defying occurrence.

[Bankotsu]

The premise is nonsensical.

If you feel the premise is nonsensical we can change from UN to just a normal coalition of say arabs states to liberate Palestine.

So do you support?

[RGacky3]

The imperialist countries that would be invading Israel would be defying all the basic premises of capitalism and imperialism by acting directly against their interests. The scenario is too far-fetched to even warrant consideration of what position I may or may not be in favor of in the event of such an unfathomable reality-defying occurrence.

Most countries, even pro imperialist countries, want to dismantle the settlements, the reason the US supports them is ideological, its not really (as far as I know) about profits.

[Bankotsu]

The imperialist countries that would be invading Israel would be defying all the basic premises of capitalism and imperialism by acting directly against their interests.

How so?

What is your logic?

[Conquer or Die]

Israel is hovering around the idea of war for Iran. You think the United States is interested in letting NATO attack Israel? You think Nato attacking Israel is going to go down well with the Jews?

An analogous argument would be America bombing Beijing; or Mecca.

[Bankotsu]

You think Nato attacking Israel is going to go down well with the Jews?

I didn't mention NATO.

What about arab coalition liberating Palestine, would you support?

[Conquer or Die]

I didn't mention NATO.

My mistake; you said a UN mandate. This will not happen.


What about arab coalition liberating Palestine, would you support?

Turkey and Egypt have alliances with the west (for some pernicious reasons) so they wouldn't be inclined to attack Israel at all. Syria and Iran probably would ally with Palestine - and perhaps Jordan - if there wouldn't be a huge backlash with the international community which would almost unanimously condemn those states to destruction from all powers west with limited support from the aforementioned bought off arab (or semi arab) states.

Assuming a situation arises where Israel is left alone (which it wouldn't be unless they went ultra right) then they still have the atomic bomb and arguably the world's finest military for its size and sphere of influence.

This whole concept is faulty; the whole situation is international on both sides. Moreover, it's no longer Zionist labor versus PLO. It's the descendants of Irgun versus Hamas. The shit is religious, apocalyptic. There are too many hands in finances everywhere on all sides to somehow let this be a sustained and conscious regional + economic versus religious and international conflict.

[Bankotsu]

My mistake; you said a UN mandate. This will not happen.


Turkey and Egypt have alliances with the west (for some pernicious reasons) so they wouldn't be inclined to attack Israel at all. Syria and Iran probably would ally with Palestine - and perhaps Jordan - if there wouldn't be a huge backlash with the international community which would almost unanimously condemn those states to destruction from all powers west with limited support from the aforementioned bought off arab (or semi arab) states.

Assuming a situation arises where Israel is left alone (which it wouldn't be unless they went ultra right) then they still have the atomic bomb and arguably the world's finest military for its size and sphere of influence.

This whole concept is faulty; the whole situation is international on both sides. Moreover, it's no longer Zionist labor versus PLO. It's the descendants of Irgun versus Hamas. The shit is religious, apocalyptic. There are too many hands in finances everywhere on all sides to somehow let this be a sustained and conscious regional + economic versus religious and international conflict.

You don't have to worry so much about current political situation, I am talking about a movement that pushes this; would you support?

There is no need to factor in current real politics.

[Conquer or Die]

You don't have to worry so much about current political situation, I am talking about a movement that pushes this; would you support?

There is no need to factor in current real politics.

It's like asking whether or not 2 + 2 should equal 5 or 5.5.

[Bankotsu]

It's like asking whether or not 2 + 2 should equal 5 or 5.5.

So you oppose a war to liberate Palestine?

I think a war against Israel to end occupation of Palestine is a good idea.

[ls]

Most people are not going to answer your nonsensical question, Bankotsu.

[Conquer or Die]

So you oppose a war to liberate Palestine?

In actual conditions such an alliance would allow for the utter destruction of independent states to imperialist hegemony.

[Bankotsu]

Most people are not going to answer your nonsensical question, Bankotsu.

Why nonsensical?

What about USA invasion of Iraq to disarm it of weapons of mass destruction?

Which is more nonsensical?

[Bankotsu]

In actual conditions such an alliance would allow for the utter destruction of independent states to imperialist hegemony.

But the war is not to occupy Israeli territory or destroy zionist regime but to liberate illegal occupied territory.

It is not annexing any territory for example.

[KarlMarx1989]

What happens there is their business. Don't be such christian-Americans about it.

[Dean]

Sounds like a disaster.

[Bud Struggle]

If there was a war the Israelis would win and win big time and blow the Palestinian cause back 1000 years.

But it isn't going to happen so why bother asking the question?

[Atrus]

But it isn't going to happen so why bother asking the question?

What an inspiring attitude. I'm sure much development happens that way.

If an uprising were to occur, of course I would support Palestine. Contrary to the Western Media and Governments' views on this, Palestine are by far the victims, not the "terrorists" they're painted to be, and any war would be nothing more than a reclaiming of land.

[Die Rote Fahne]

It's a good way to start world war 3, so I chose no.

What should be done is the UN set a mandate that Israel end the occupation, withdraw all illegal settlements and give the right of return for refugees as well as the 1967 border.

If refused, UN peacekeepers will be deployed to monitor what is going on, keep the peace and enforce international law.

The security council should be reformed to force two vetoes to trash something. If the General Assembly has more than 80% approval, then the Security council cannot veto, but choose not to participate.

[Bud Struggle]

What an inspiring attitude. I'm sure much development happens that way.

If an uprising were to occur, of course I would support Palestine. Contrary to the Western Media and Governments' views on this, Palestine are by far the victims, not the "terrorists" they're painted to be, and any war would be nothing more than a reclaiming of land.

No one wants it to happen. The Arabs learned their lesson in 1967. The Jordanians and the Egyptians certainly wouldn't join in the battle. Iraq is in the hands of the Americans. So is Arabia. What countries exactly do the Palestinians have on their side in the Middle East?

[Revy]

Depends on what you mean by "war against Israel to liberate Palestinians". Of course, by the context of the question and how you have presented it, I have to answer no. But a revolution within Israel could do the job.

There's this thing about invading countries under the premise of bringing "freedom". Do you really want the Zionists to feel as if they are somehow anti-imperialist? Because that is what such a war will do.

If you believe what happens in Israel is much different than what happens in other parts of the world, then you are sadly mistaken. From Sri Lanka to the Congo to Darfur and lots of other places. You're going to have to be doing a whole lot of invading....

[gorillafuck]

What happens there is their business. Don't be such christian-Americans about it.
All religions are bad, why do you single out Christianity?

Anywho, this situation isn't plausible. No country is naive enough to think they could win a war against Israel.

[Muzk]

You guys DO remember this is considered terrorism and anti semitism to the government? And that they monitor this site?

[Bud Struggle]

You guys DO remember this is considered terrorism and anti semitism to the government? And that they monitor this site?

I hope you guys aren't afraid to discuss stuff (no matter how nasty) because you are afraid of the governnment? I don't know where you're from Muzk, but I'm an American and fuck the American government if they don't like what I say.

[Revy]

You guys DO remember this is considered terrorism and anti semitism to the government? And that they monitor this site?

This is terrorism? Right, but one can support the war in Iraq or Afghanistan and be considered a patriot by the government:rolleyes:

[JohannGE]

No war except class war!

[Atrus]

I don't see how it is terrorism in the slightest. I am not advocating violence toward Israel in any way, I'm simply saying that their state is illegitimate, and they frequently commit war crimes against Palestine, so who would take Israel's side in a war? Only bastards who condone war crimes.
And I have no issue with the Jewish people. I only have issue with Zionism.

I don't see how there could be any legal problem with any of the things that have been said in this thread, unless of course the British Government has made it illegal to disagree with them. And frankly, they're not far away from that.
Authoritarian twats...

[gorillafuck]

You guys DO remember this is considered terrorism and anti semitism to the government? And that they monitor this site?
Being anti-semetic isn't something that's illegal (not that anyone is being anti-semetic here), and neither is discussing war. Terrorism would be if someone said "Should I blow up Building X?" or urging someone to blow up Building X.

(I, Hammer And Pickle, do not endorse or advocate the blowing up of any buildings or any illegal action against buildings, regardless of whether they may be known as Building X)

[Muzk]

Kind of feels like you are talking to me rather than to the police officers browsing revleft.

[Comrade B]

I said yes, because if the Palestinians stop fighting, they will be fucked over completely, however I do not see anyone taking control any time soon.

The Palestinians are fighting in self defense.
Israel is too strong to be defeated, and the West would never allow it.

If Israel were to be defeated, magically, the major power, Hamas, would take power, and I am quite sure this would result in a great deal of religious violence. If Israel were to take control, the people of Palestine will be forced even further into poverty, and continue to be treated as less than the white residents of the country.

[Trystan]

I don't really agree with either of the above, but I lean towards option 2.

[☭World Views]

I support the Jewish and Palestinian working classes laying down their religions, adopting proletariat internationalism, and simultaneously fighting the bourgeois elements of Israel and Palestinian regions. After that the Jewish and Palestinian working class can co-exist and help advance class struggle in the Middle East while at the same time nationalizing the oil supply of the Middle East under a worker's state.


How does that sound to you? The probability of such a chain of events occurring during present day social and material conditions are the same as your UN proposal.

The UN is good if you want to watch mildly entertaining conferences and scripted talks, but it is useless organization for anything else.

[Bud Struggle]

I support the Jewish and Palestinian working classes laying down their religions, adopting proletariat internationalism, and simultaneously fighting the bourgeois elements of Israel and Palestinian regions. After that the Jewish and Palestinian working class can co-exist and help advance class struggle in the Middle East while at the same time nationalizing the oil supply of the Middle East under a worker's state.


How does that sound to you? The probability of such a chain of events occurring during present day social and material conditions are the same as your UN proposal.

The print in bold couldn't be more right.

[☭World Views]

The print in bold couldn't be more right.

True. However, this does not mean I think we should wait around and hope that some day the conditions will magically be correct for a world-wide revolution.

Sometimes people are going to have to get their hands dirty and engage with movements in order to influence their direction. The idea that a perfect political and pure marxist movement is going to come along anytime and that there won't be counter-revolutionaries is fantasy to paraphrase Lenin.

[Bud Struggle]

True. However, this does not mean I think we should wait around and hope that some day the conditions will magically be correct for a world-wide revolution.

Sometimes people are going to have to get their hands dirty and engage with movements in order to influence their direction. The idea that a perfect political and pure marxist movement is going to come along anytime and that there won't be counter-revolutionaries is fantasy to paraphrase Lenin.

Wise words.

We need to make this future together--Marx may come, Christ may come, Santa may come hell, the Tooth Fairy may come. But chances are that no one's going to come and we have to work out this future together.

[Phalanx]

No, I believe if Arab countries were to attack, they should first look at their own oppressive governments. Maybe they'd think twice who the real enemy is.

[Bud Struggle]

No, I believe if Arab countries were to attack, they should first look at their own oppressive governments. Maybe they'd think twice who the real enemy is.

Really? From the post above you'd think they were all Marxist not Feudal. :blink:

[Comrade B]

No, I believe if Arab countries were to attack, they should first look at their own oppressive governments. Maybe they'd think twice who the real enemy is.
These are the Palestinians we are talking about.... who aren't the Iranians...

The Palestinian's representative governments are declared false by Israel and fought wherever they are found...
You would be hard pressed to find a single Palestinian who prefers to be lead by Israel rather than the PLO or Hamas.

[Bankotsu]

If you believe what happens in Israel is much different than what happens in other parts of the world, then you are sadly mistaken. From Sri Lanka to the Congo to Darfur and lots of other places. You're going to have to be doing a whole lot of invading....

How can that be?

West Bank and Gaza strip doesn't belong to Israel.

Sri Lanka, Congo, Darfur, the case is completely different, the governments are fighting on their own territory against their own citizens.

It's a totally different story from Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory.

[Bankotsu]

You guys DO remember this is considered terrorism and anti semitism to the government?

What sort of fucking crap is that? Liberate palestinians from oppressive illegal Israel occupation is terrorism?

I'm not talking about throwing a few bombs, killing some random people in the streets, I'm talking about sending in a whole army to push out Israeli army from west bank, gaza strip.

Like liberation of France in WWII is terrorism?

WTF?

Don't be brainwashed by false propaganda.

[Rosa Provokateur]

War is not an option. Both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to live in these places and it is the Israeli State and Palestinian terrorists that get in the way of this. Considering that Israel is surrounded by Arab territory and that, to my knowledge, Palestine as a nation has never existed I think Israelis are more a minority than anybody in this whole situation. I dont believe in Zionism but it must be recognized that Palestinians dont have much evidence to back up the need for a country; they need equal treatment as human beings and must be allowed the same rights as Israeli citizens. State aggression and revisionist interpretations of Islam are the enemy in all this but Israel itself is innocent.

[Bankotsu]

War is not an option. Both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to live in these places and it is the Israeli State and Palestinian terrorists that get in the way of this. Considering that Israel is surrounded by Arab territory and that, to my knowledge, Palestine as a nation has never existed I think Israelis are more a minority than anybody in this whole situation. I dont believe in Zionism but it must be recognized that Palestinians dont have much evidence to back up the need for a country; they need equal treatment as human beings and must be allowed the same rights as Israeli citizens. State aggression and revisionist interpretations of Islam are the enemy in all this but Israel itself is innocent.


What sort of fuck shit is that?

It's the same zionist horseshit again.

What the hell is zionist horseshit doing on this site?:confused:

I thought this was a left wing forum?

[KarlMarx1989]

All religions are bad, why do you single out Christianity?
What I mean by christian-American is the same as calling someone Canadian or Chinese. I call the US 'christian-America' [Full title: The Imperialist States of christian-America] because it has always been dominated by christianity and its title if the original plan had gone through would be America [Full title: The Imperialist States of America] by me. According to the 2008 census, the US is 78.5 christian. That is why I call it christian-America.

No country is naive enough to think they could win a war against Israel.
There are obviously countries which have waged war and conquered them in the past. What makes today different? If it is christian-America being allies with Israel, well most of the countries in Western Asia have already dealt with christian-America for the last 20-30 years.

[KarlMarx1989]

Anyway, I don't think anyone else except Israel and whoever wants to fight them should have a say on what happens.

[Bankotsu]

No country is naive enough to think they could win a war against Israel.

How about Russia?

[Rosa Provokateur]

What sort of fuck shit is that?

It's the same zionist horseshit again.

What the hell is zionist horseshit doing on this site?:confused:

I thought this was a left wing forum?

Charming. If you'll notice I said I dont believe in Zionism

[Bankotsu]

Charming. If you'll notice I said I dont believe in Zionism

But some of your arguments are the same arguments used by zionists to defend policies of Israel.

Sorry if I mistaken you for a zionist.



Considering that Israel is surrounded by Arab territory and that, to my knowledge, Palestine as a nation has never existed I think Israelis are more a minority than anybody in this whole situation.

I dont believe in Zionism but it must be recognized that Palestinians dont have much evidence to back up the need for a country;

[Rosa Provokateur]

What I mean by christian-American is the same as calling someone Canadian or Chinese. I call the US 'christian-America' [Full title: The Imperialist States of christian-America] because it has always been dominated by christianity and its title if the original plan had gone through would be America [Full title: The Imperialist States of America] by me. According to the 2008 census, the US is 78.5 christian. That is why I call it christian-America.



The problem is that more Americans follow Christianity than actually follow Jesus.

[9]

Originally Posted by Green Apostle http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1555225#post1555225)
War is not an option. Both Israelis and Palestinians have the right to live in these places and it is the Israeli State and Palestinian terrorists that get in the way of this. Considering that Israel is surrounded by Arab territory and that, to my knowledge, Palestine as a nation has never existed I think Israelis are more a minority than anybody in this whole situation. I dont believe in Zionism but it must be recognized that Palestinians dont have much evidence to back up the need for a country; they need equal treatment as human beings and must be allowed the same rights as Israeli citizens. State aggression and revisionist interpretations of Islam are the enemy in all this but Israel itself is innocent.

What sort of fuck shit is that?

It's the same zionist horseshit again.

What the hell is zionist horseshit doing on this site?:confused:

I thought this was a left wing forum?
It is a left wing forum, which is why Zionists like Green Apostle who proclaim moral purity while condemning an oppressed people and defending their oppressors, get their accounts restricted and are permitted to post only in the Opposing Ideologies portion of the forum.

[Bankotsu]

It is a left wing forum, which is why Zionists like Green Apostle who proclaim moral purity while condemning an oppressed people and defending their oppressors, get their accounts restricted and are permitted to post only in the Opposing Ideologies portion of the forum.

Please don't remind me of why I was restricted.

It fucking pisses me off.

[☭World Views]

Green Apostle I can't help but wonder what you mean when you say that the Jews are the minority.
In sociology, the majority group is the group with the most power and influence. I would think that the Israel bourgeois is the majority group, while the Palestinians are the minority group. The Gaza Massacre should get rid of any doubt that Israel govt. can get away with almost anything under the pretense of Zionism.

[Pogue]

I support the Intifadah.

[Comrade B]

Palestine may not have been an independent country, but the people of Palestine were always there, and the Zionists were not.
I do not, at this point, support throwing all Zionist immigrants to Israel out of Israel controlled land, because they would have no homes and many are second or third generation, but the settlements are newly constructed enough that they must be destroyed and the land given back to the Palestinians.
The wall must also be destroyed. Don't you capitalist westerners realize yourselves repeating the same things you condemn in the past?

[Revy]

How can that be?

West Bank and Gaza strip doesn't belong to Israel.

Sri Lanka, Congo, Darfur, the case is completely different, the governments are fighting on their own territory against their own citizens.

It's a totally different story from Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian territory.

So?

Actually, the Tamil Eelam nationalists do not believe that the whole of Sri Lanka belongs to the current regime.

My original point was that Israel is not the only place in the world where atrocities and oppression on that scale occurs. It was made to support the general idea that the solution is a world revolution against capitalism and imperialism.

[Rosa Provokateur]

Green Apostle I can't help but wonder what you mean when you say that the Jews are the minority.
In sociology, the majority group is the group with the most power and influence. I would think that the Israel bourgeois is the majority group, while the Palestinians are the minority group. The Gaza Massacre should get rid of any doubt that Israel govt. can get away with almost anything under the pretense of Zionism.

I meant it in that, based on the region as a whole, Israelis are vastly outnumbered by Arabs and thus are a minority in that respect. To my knowledge Palestine was never really a nation but I concede that I could be wrong and I do advocate equal treatment for Palestinians as I do for Israelis.

I'm not denying that the Israeli State is guilty of war-crimes; it has mistreated and abused it's Palestinian neighbors beyond comprehension and this must stop. Nothing political or theological justifies these things and the cause of Zion is a weak and flimsy defense.

As a christian, I do hold a place in my heart for the jewish people. I also hold a place in my heart for muslims and, from what I've read, more christians live in Palestine than in Israel. For me to support Zionism would mean I would have to turn my back on these people and ignore violence being perpetrated in the name of the God I believe in.

I cant do that. I am not a Zionist. My words were mis-understood and I appologize to all for not clarifying.

[Rosa Provokateur]

Don't you capitalist westerners realize yourselves repeating the same things you condemn in the past?

The west had nothing to do with it. That wall was built by Israeli hands with Israeli concrete.

The problem is extremists, on both sides, and their unwillingness to come to the table and learn to co-exist.

[Rosa Provokateur]

But some of your arguments are the same arguments used by zionists to defend policies of Israel.

Sorry if I mistaken you for a zionist.

So, and some of my arguments for evolution are the same ones used by atheists yet I'm not an atheist.

[synthesis]

I've said it before - in these scenarios, things have to get worse before they can get better. The Palestinians need to step it up, violently, and provoke retribution that can be thoroughly documented; the violence will mobilize moderates on both sides and eventually some kind of compromise will be reached.

There will be much more civilian death before this conflict is resolved, even if no one takes my advice into account. It's not going to end until people get tired of senseless violence, and that might as well happen sooner rather than later.

[Rosa Provokateur]

I've said it before - in these scenarios, things have to get worse before they can get better. The Palestinians need to step it up, violently, and provoke retribution that can be thoroughly documented; the violence will mobilize moderates on both sides and eventually some kind of compromise will be reached.

There will be much more civilian death before this conflict is resolved, even if no one takes my advice into account. It's not going to end until people get tired of senseless violence, and that might as well happen sooner rather than later.

That strategy is terrorism, plain and simple. With as many different groups as there are committing suicide bombings, etc. against Israel it would be impossible to work coherently with all of them; these groups dont even trust eachother and I see no reason why anyone else should either.

The conflict is un-wanted, the Israeli and Palestinian people have voiced that they want an end to the fighting. It's the Israeli State and terrorists operating out of Palestine that make this impossible.

[Outinleftfield]

Even if it could happen it sounds as bad as the idea of an American war to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein.

If a coalition of Arab states invaded Israel and forced it to remove its settlements and recognize Palestine as independent you can bet the new Palestinian government would be set up in a way that serves those states interests and what ever capitalists hold power there. Given the international nature of the world's most powerful corporations most likely it would be the same people with power as before.

If those Arab countries do decide to do that then you can bet the United States would be sending in troops to defend Israel and so would many other countries, probably all of NATO. It could escalate to a nuclear standoff leading to many deaths. If this did happen I'd suspect that the multinational corporations influenced the decision on both sides and just wanted more money from a long, drawn out war.

And lets not forget as sympathetic as Arab states pretend to be to Palestine Jordan and Egypt both cut a deal with Israel after the 1948 War and gained territory that was supposed to become part of a new state of "Palestine" that hadn't been set up yet.

[synthesis]

That strategy is terrorism, plain and simple.

If you wish to use the language of imperialism, be my guest. The philosophy of collateral damage, in practice, is only called "terrorism" when the warfare is asymmetric and the winning side feels the need to exert moral superiority so as to influence world opinion in its favor.



The conflict is un-wanted, the Israeli and Palestinian people have voiced that they want an end to the fighting. It's the Israeli State and terrorists operating out of Palestine that make this impossible.

If it's impossible, what the fuck is the point of even talking about it?

The problem is that the moderates on both sides are still outnumbered by the militants. The violence needs to be consummated before anything can be done about it.

Only Israelis can affect what the Israeli state does, and as long as they perceive Palestinians as a larger threat than their own militants, they will support strategies that, in practice, fuel the militancy on the Palestinian side. Same goes for the Palestinians. The violence will only end when it is unbearable to the majority of the Israeli populace.

[Bud Struggle]

On the other hand the Saudis appear that they'll let the Israelis bomb Iran.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/130251/Saudis-will-let-Israel-bomb-Iran-nuclear-site

INTELLIGENCE chief Sir John Scarlett has been told that Saudi Arabia is ready to allow Israel to bomb Iran’s new nuclear site.

The head of MI6 discussed the issue in London with Mossad chief Meir Dagan and Saudi officials after British intelligence officers helped to uncover the plant, in the side of a mountain near the ancient city of Qom.
The site is seen as a major threat by Tel Aviv and Riyadh. Details of the talks emerged after John Bolton, America’s former UN ambassador, told a meeting of intelligence analysts that “Riyadh certainly approves” of Israel’s use of Saudi airspace.

I know--the Daily Mail. But it's interesting anyway.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Thats the express , even worse.

[Rosa Provokateur]

If you wish to use the language of imperialism, be my guest. The philosophy of collateral damage, in practice, is only called "terrorism" when the warfare is asymmetric and the winning side feels the need to exert moral superiority so as to influence world opinion in its favor.



If it's impossible, what the fuck is the point of even talking about it?

The problem is that the moderates on both sides are still outnumbered by the militants. The violence needs to be consummated before anything can be done about it.

Only Israelis can affect what the Israeli state does, and as long as they perceive Palestinians as a larger threat than their own militants, they will support strategies that, in practice, fuel the militancy on the Palestinian side. Same goes for the Palestinians. The violence will only end when it is unbearable to the majority of the Israeli populace.

I use the language of what I think is true. Terrorism does exist, regardless of how you re-word it. What was 9/11 if not terrorism?

There is no point except that this is a discussion site and people like to discuss. The violence cant be brought to an end with more violence; one side uses more force, the other side will do the same, and it will go onward until they either both die or one decides it's pointless and stops fighting. There are alot of people in Israel that want peace but unfortunately alot of politicians in Israel are of the "old guard" type and cant see peace without a victory of one side over the other.

[Dimentio]

A war against Israel will, even if successful, mean a lot more of suffering and perhaps even genocide carried out against ethnic groups of the region. It would hardly strengthen progressive groups either. While etno-states are condemnable by their mere existence, I believe that Israel will eventually be forced to stop being an exclusively Jewish state.

[Rosa Provokateur]

I believe that Israel will eventually be forced to stop being an exclusively Jewish state.

As far as I know it's not. I've heard of Arabs and Africans moving there as well as Jews.

[synthesis]

What was 9/11 if not terrorism?An act of warfare. The attacks on the WTC were meant to cripple the U.S. economically. Civilian death was considered an afterthought.


I use the language of what I think is true.Perhaps it is just a coincidence, then, that it's the same language used to justify imperialism. Resistance has always been called terrorism - read this (http://www.marxists.de/theory/whatis/terror2.htm).


There are alot of people in Israel that want peace but unfortunately alot of politicians in Israel are of the "old guard" type and cant see peace without a victory of one side over the other.Then the former group needs to be mobilized.

[Rosa Provokateur]

An act of warfare. The attacks on the WTC were meant to cripple the U.S. economically. Civilian death was considered an afterthought.

Perhaps it is just a coincidence, then, that it's the same language used to justify imperialism. Resistance has always been called terrorism - read this (http://www.marxists.de/theory/whatis/terror2.htm).

Then the former group needs to be mobilized.

It didnt hurt the market and only killed innocent people; nothing is worth innocent deaths, any movement that feels killing civilians for a higher cause is justifiable has no legitimacy.

Possibly, it all depends on context. I use terrorism to mean politically motivated acts of violence against civilians or acts that intentionally put the lives of civilians in harms way.

Agreed.

[Il Medico]

Why does the OP keep asking such crap questions?

Idiot: Well I hear you're all commies.
Us: Yep.
Idiot: So I bet you'll support a capitalist going to war with another capitalist at the cost of thousands of workers' lives. Right?
Us: Yeah, umm no.
Idiot: BUT WHY??? THE OTHER CAPITALI$T AREN"T AMERKKKICAN$!!!!!!

[luchtoibre]

As far as I know it's not. I've heard of Arabs and Africans moving there as well as Jews.

whose told you that?

[Kwisatz Haderach]

There is no such thing as a war waged by state A to liberate people from the domination of state B.

There are only wars waged by state A to dominate people who were previously under the domination of state B.

[luchtoibre]

support an intifada.to bring both sides of the apartheid system their together....

[Phalanx]

These are the Palestinians we are talking about.... who aren't the Iranians...

The Palestinian's representative governments are declared false by Israel and fought wherever they are found...
You would be hard pressed to find a single Palestinian who prefers to be lead by Israel rather than the PLO or Hamas.

First off, Iran isn't an Arab country, and second off, I assume it's not the Palestinians who would be leading this "war of liberation". Looking at the history of the region, you'd see that any war that actually threatened Israel was lead by Egypt.


support an intifada.to bring both sides of the apartheid system their together....

Right, because many Israelis see Souhaila Andrawes as a liberator.

[Red Icepick]

While I wouldn't support a UN coalition effort in any case, I think Israel should be overtaken by force and the Palestinians should be left to decide the fate of it. Perhaps it is fair that the Jews have a homeland of their own, but the Palestinians can make a call on that. It shouldn't be left to the Israelis just because they lived there in the Bible. Funny how Americans think this should be the case, but yet they'd never consider giving land back to Native Americans who have an obvious historical claim to their own land.

Let's say the Soviet Union had invaded, I would certainly support that. Although that surely would have started WW3, so this is all extremely hypothetical. If nothing else, Israel should be stripped of nuclear capability. If Iran is not allowed to have nukes, it's only fair that the balance of power shouldn't be tipped so far in the region.

[9]

While I wouldn't support a UN coalition effort in any case, I think Israel should be overtaken by force and the Palestinians should be left to decide the fate of it. Perhaps it is fair that the Jews have a homeland of their own, but the Palestinians can make a call on that. It shouldn't be left to the Israelis just because they lived there in the Bible. Funny how Americans think this should be the case, but yet they'd never consider giving land back to Native Americans who have an obvious historical claim to their own land.
The capitalist class/ruling elite does not think the Jews should have a homeland in Palestine because "they" (not the modern Jews, but that's another subject entirely) lived there in Biblical times. Rather, it is in the interests of the capitalist class to support the State of Israel because, being largely dependent on US military aid (among other varieties of aid), the State of Israel serves as a catalyst for imperialist hegemony over the region (note the geographical significance of the State of Israel - quite literally being the link between the Middle East/Asia and Africa). Conversely, it is quite clear that "giving" the stolen continent of North America back to the Native Americans would go absurdly against the interests of the capitalist class which is precisely why the obvious historical claim to the land by the Native Americans would never even be considered. It is all a matter of class interests.


Let's say the Soviet Union had invaded, I would certainly support that. Although that surely would have started WW3, so this is all extremely hypothetical. If nothing else, Israel should be stripped of nuclear capability. If Iran is not allowed to have nukes, it's only fair that the balance of power shouldn't be tipped so far in the region.If nothing else, the Palestinians should overthrow the State of Israel and take back their land. Nothing less.
Also, is your "hypothetical" referring to the same Soviet Union that officially recognized the State of Israel immediately upon the declaration of the Zionist government in 1948? How odd.

[9]

Why does the OP keep asking such crap questions?

Idiot: Well I hear you're all commies.
Us: Yep.
Idiot: So I bet you'll support a capitalist going to war with another capitalist at the cost of thousands of workers' lives. Right?
Us: Yeah, umm no.
Idiot: BUT WHY??? THE OTHER CAPITALI$T AREN"T AMERKKKICAN$!!!!!!

Let's offer a realistic scenario please. I prefer this one:

Idiot: Well I hear you're all commies.
You: That's what I like to call myself
Idiot: So I bet you'll support a capitalist going to war with another capitalist at the cost of thousands of workers' lives. Right?
You: Of course not, we are liberal pacifists who believe in the necessity of the Palestinian people to absolutely never fight their occupiers, but instead, to practice pacifism in their walled off scraps of open air prison until they cease to exist as a people.
Idiot: Oh, that sounds trendy, can I join?
You: Of course! We're all idiots here!

[Spawn of Stalin]

Stalin originally supported the creation of Israel, this much is true, but it's also true that he later began to oppose Israel just like any sane progressive would. If Stalin could see the situation in Israel today he would be physically sick and I like to believe that he would take whatever definitive action necessary to destroy the oppressors.

[9]

^Well, he did kill some Jews, so I guess that's a start. Oh wait... no... no, it's not.
With regard to your other points:
http://blog.enterpriseitplanet.com/green/blog/blogpost_img/picard_facepalm.jpg

[Red Icepick]

The capitalist class/ruling elite does not think the Jews should have a homeland in Palestine because "they" (not the modern Jews, but that's another subject entirely) lived there in Biblical times. Rather, it is in the interests of the capitalist class to support the State of Israel because, being largely dependent on US military aid (among other varieties of aid), the State of Israel serves as a catalyst for imperialist hegemony over the region (note the geographical significance of the State of Israel - quite literally being the link between the Middle East/Asia and Africa).

Disagreed. It's the Christian Right that believes in this Biblical destiny with Israel. These people literally consider the Israelis to be the "Chosen People," and they think supporting Israel gives the USA God's blessing.

The US actually is set back in its foreign policy by helping Israel. The designs it has for the Muslim world are seriously crippled by this, and they go to great pains to work around the issue. If the US wasn't a Zionist power, it wouldn't face all the trouble it does in the region. Israel actually gives nothing back except for whatever bribes AIPAC uses to keep convincing congress.



If nothing else, the Palestinians should overthrow the State of Israel and take back their land. Nothing less.
Also, is your "hypothetical" referring to the same Soviet Union that officially recognized the State of Israel immediately upon the declaration of the Zionist government in 1948? How odd.


The Palestinians are not strong enough. They would need serious aid to even come close to being an equal power. Israel now has five Dolphin-class German submarines capable of launching nukes, for instance.

Stalin was completely for a Jewish homeland in 1948. Even before that, he created a Birobidzhan as a Jewish homeland in the USSR. Later, he came to seriously distrust Zionism, and the Soviet Union as a whole later recognized Zionism as an evil. So there's nothing 'odd' about it.

Personally, I have nothing against the original concept of Zionism. It began as a noble and worthy aim. The modern concept is despicable, however.

[un_person]

I do not support a war. I do support a total boycott by the U.S. of Israel. Without U.S. military equipment the occupation would crumble pretty quickly. I believe Israel has a right to exist, just not at the expense of the Palestinians.

[Spawn of Stalin]

^Well, he did kill some Jews, so I guess that's a start. Oh wait... no... no, it's not.
You can oppose Stalin or me out of principle all you like, the facts are there, Stalin did come out against Israel when he eventually saw sense on the issue, so I don't know what your point is.

[Red Icepick]

You can oppose Stalin or me out of principle all you like, the facts are there, Stalin did come out against Israel when he eventually saw sense on the issue, so I don't know what your point is.

Yeah, you'd have to seriously take things out of context to think otherwise. I certainly agree with you, if Stalin could see Israel now, he would be in full opposition and would liberate the Palestinians at first chance.

Certainly the Soviet Union recognized Israel in 1948, but to think that implies solidarity is ridiculous. One has to take into context that it was basically an affront to Britain at the time. Jewish settlers launched an effective terror campaign in Palestine against the forces of the crumbling British Empire, so why wouldn't that be supported? It was a completely different story after Israel began their ethnic cleansing campaign against the Palestinians. That really kicked off after Israel firmly sided with the west and rebuked Soviet influence. Ever since then, Israel was a declared enemy of the Soviet Union, and it's pretty obvious to see where loyalties were in later conflicts when you look at the weapons and equipment used by the Israelis and Arabs.

In the end, there is only one logical conclusion: any real revolutionary is an anti-Zionist. It couldn't be more obvious.

[9]

Disagreed. It's the Christian Right that believes in this Biblical destiny with Israel. These people literally consider the Israelis to be the "Chosen People," and they think supporting Israel gives the USA God's blessing.

The US actually is set back in its foreign policy by helping Israel. The designs it has for the Muslim world are seriously crippled by this, and they go to great pains to work around the issue. If the US wasn't a Zionist power, it wouldn't face all the trouble it does in the region. Israel actually gives nothing back except for whatever bribes AIPAC uses to keep convincing congress.


:lol: Ohh, so you're one of those "j00z control the US" living breathing tools.
You're right, though. Having virtual control over a region which is essentially the dividing line between the Middle East/Asia and Africa has no strategic advantage to the US. Three of the most valuable locations in terms of geography and resources, but feh! Imperialism isn't interested in such things.

[narcomprom]

Stalin originally supported the creation of Israel, this much is true, but it's also true that he later began to oppose Israel just like any sane progressive would. If Stalin could see the situation in Israel today he would be physically sick and I like to believe that he would take whatever definitive action necessary to destroy the oppressors.
stalin opposed israel because israel sided with western powers. before it did cominform hoped the progressives there would outweight the nationalist camp.

[MrSoul]

i personally would never support this. as much as i hate the UN, the creation of Israel was legal under international law. the jews accepted the 1948 borders, but were invaded by a coalition of poorly organized arabs. the arabs lost the war and lost some of their land, this happens in war. additionally, people who accuse Israel of "war crimes" are stupid, things like that happen in every armed conflict, it just so happens that many are anti-semitic and blow things out of proportion. as has been proven in the past, arabs cannot win wars with Israel, perhaps that is why peace is now had with Jordan and
Egypt, they realize their futilities. people who claim that is Palestinian land are not looking into history enough. it has changed hands dozens of times and was, before anything else, jewish and should stay that way. jews have been persecuted for thousands of years and they finally get their own state and everyone wants to take it away. leave them be, cause they're going to win a war anyway.

[MrSoul]

there are already UN forces on the border with both Syria and Lebanon,

[Bud Struggle]

people who claim that is Palestinian land are not looking into history enough. it has changed hands dozens of times and was, before anything else, jewish and should stay that way. jews have been persecuted for thousands of years and they finally get their own state and everyone wants to take it away. leave them be, cause they're going to win a war anyway.

Good point. Either to be for the Israelis or the Palestinians in their land dispute if to "fetishize" a piece of property that's been traded back and forth by empires and dominions for thousands of years.

We at this time are just another footnote to that history. We are far from being the end of the story.

[MrSoul]

Good point. Either to be for the Israelis or the Palestinians in their land dispute if to "fetishize" a piece of property that's been traded back and forth by empires and dominions for thousands of years.

We at this time are just another footnote to that history. We are far from being the end of the story.

i wholly agree. it should be noted that there are 55 islamic states that exist, and currently only 1 jewish. the palestinians have many arabic neighbors that should be willing to take them in but refuse to. blame could be put on jordan, egypt, syria, and lebanon for not helping out their comrades.

[MrSoul]

As far as I know it's not. I've heard of Arabs and Africans moving there as well as Jews.

there are arab minorities in israel comprising of muslims, christians, and even druzi. totalling something like 1.5 million of the 7.5 million person population

[Bud Struggle]

i wholly agree. it should be noted that there are 55 islamic states that exist, and currently only 1 jewish. the palestinians have many arabic neighbors that should be willing to take them in but refuse to. blame could be put on jordan, egypt, syria, and lebanon for not helping out their comrades.

Agreeing with me is NEVER a good career move. :(

[MrSoul]

additionally, the muslim arabs in Israel get better treatment than they would in other arabic states. for example, Israel (very much under the table) offers abortions to arabs from places such as Syria, where they would not be able to get one. they also do not pay taxes and are given the right to vote. although exempt from mandatory military service, both Bedouins and Druze serve and some muslim arabs choose to.

[Spawn of Stalin]

Maybe if the Israeli government stopped suppressing the Palestinians they would deserve it, I don't care how many Islamic states there are, I don't care how oppressed the Jews have been in the past, you treat people like that and you're asking for a kicking. Most people would be willing to leave them be, if they were willing to let the Palestinians be, the PA asks nothing more than the rights to the land that they currently have, that's nowhere near what they had a few decades ago, I don't think it would be unreasonable for them to just let them have it and leave them the fuck alone. It may well be true that the Jews deserve their own state, but you know, they kinda blew it if you ask me.

[MrSoul]

Maybe if the Israeli government stopped suppressing the Palestinians they would deserve it, I don't care how many Islamic states there are, I don't care how oppressed the Jews have been in the past, you treat people like that and you're asking for a kicking. Most people would be willing to leave them be, if they were willing to let the Palestinians be, the PA asks nothing more than the rights to the land that they currently have, that's nowhere near what they had a few decades ago, I don't think it would be unreasonable for them to just let them have it and leave them the fuck alone. It may well be true that the Jews deserve their own state, but you know, they kinda blew it if you ask me.

i agree with you that the palestinians do deserve to be treated well and should not all be labeled "jihadist" or "terrorist" or any of those stupid words. they should also be entitled to their own state. i also agree that the PA should have control over their areas. however it should be noted, when Israel pulled out of Gaza they immediately began firing rockets into Israeli cities. some measures should be put into place to ensure the security and safety of both israeli's and palestinians. this is such a difficult issue with so many sides i find it hard to express in words.

[Phalanx]

Stalin originally supported the creation of Israel, this much is true, but it's also true that he later began to oppose Israel just like any sane progressive would. If Stalin could see the situation in Israel today he would be physically sick and I like to believe that he would take whatever definitive action necessary to destroy the oppressors.

Right, because Josef Stalin was just a moral guiding light in the world when he ruled.

[Red Icepick]

:lol: Ohh, so you're one of those "j00z control the US" living breathing tools.
You're right, though. Having virtual control over a region which is essentially the dividing line between the Middle East/Asia and Africa has no strategic advantage to the US. Three of the most valuable locations in terms of geography and resources, but feh! Imperialism isn't interested in such things.

Please re-read my statement, moron. Nothing I said implies what you've got out of it, and everything I said was true. The US is not the beneficiary of the US/Israel relationship. You're only giving me abstracts. How does Israel help the US in the region? It doesn't. All it does is give the Arab world reason to fight the USA for supporting the oppressors of the Palestinians. How does Israel help US imperialism gain resources? I didn't say the 'j00z' control the US. I said the Christian Right and the AIPAC lobby ensure US support. There's no conspiracy about it. Anyone with common sense can see that. Let me guess, now you're going to call me 'anti-Semitic' because I don't support Israel's ethnic cleansing campaign against Palestinians?

[Red Icepick]

Right, because Josef Stalin was just a moral guiding light in the world when he ruled.

He was. Stalin showed moral clarity, particularly in foreign policy, when he was leading. The Western powers were evil, avaricious, and corrupt every step of the way, while Comrade Stalin was generous and righteous. This is despite the smear campain by the west and the revisionists.

[Red Icepick]

i wholly agree. it should be noted that there are 55 islamic states that exist, and currently only 1 jewish. the palestinians have many arabic neighbors that should be willing to take them in but refuse to. blame could be put on jordan, egypt, syria, and lebanon for not helping out their comrades.

So that means they should give up land? How does that make sense? I guess South African apartheid could be considered fair because there were enough African states, and the other African states should have taken those people in? Have you ever thought that the Palestinians might not want to lose their land? Also, most of those countries have taken in many thousands of refugees, but how much can they do? The blame should obviously be on Israel for making them homeless in the first place!

[MrSoul]

He was. Stalin showed moral clarity, particularly in foreign policy, when he was leading. The Western powers were evil, avaricious, and corrupt every step of the way, while Comrade Stalin was generous and righteous. This is despite the smear campain by the west and the revisionists.

say what you will about his alleged human rights abuse, no one can take away the fact that Stalin was an excellent leader, and if not for those skills WW2 and the defeat of nazism may have had a different outcome

[Random Precision]

i personally would never support this. as much as i hate the UN, the creation of Israel was legal under international law. the jews accepted the 1948 borders,

If you "hate" the UN, then why do you recognize its right to give over half of a country to a minority immigrant population?


but were invaded by a coalition of poorly organized arabs. the arabs lost the war and lost some of their land, this happens in war.

This particular part of the Zionist myth has been put paid to more than twenty years ago by the Israeli "new historians". Israel was invaded by two Arab countries: Egypt and Lebanon. Syria's army went a few miles across the border and then retreated, while those of Jordan and Iraq stayed within their borders. Furthermore what drove the Palestinians out of their homes was not that invasion, but Zionist atrocities and propaganda.


additionally, people who accuse Israel of "war crimes" are stupid, things like that happen in every armed conflict, it just so happens that many are anti-semitic and blow things out of proportion.

True. Massacres have happened as a result of every colonial project.



as has been proven in the past, arabs cannot win wars with Israel, perhaps that is why peace is now had with Jordan and
Egypt, they realize their futilities.

Blah.


people who claim that is Palestinian land are not looking into history enough. it has changed hands dozens of times and was, before anything else, jewish and should stay that way. jews have been persecuted for thousands of years and they finally get their own state and everyone wants to take it away. leave them be, cause they're going to win a war anyway.

"Before anything else", the land was Canaanite. Do you want to go find some Canaanites and give the land back to them?

[Red Icepick]

say what you will about his alleged human rights abuse, no one can take away the fact that Stalin was an excellent leader, and if not for those skills WW2 and the defeat of nazism may have had a different outcome

Exactly. Stalin mobilized the people of the Soviet Union like no one else could. Who else could have held the onslaught of the Fascists? Stalin was a man of radical action. Also, in addition to being the chief cause of Allied victory, Stalin fought an honorable war that the western liberal democracies did not. The Red Army faced their opponents in battle and won. Stalin didn't order a cowardly long-range bombing campaign against German civilians like Churchill and Roosevelt. Yet the West criticized Stalin for abuses of human rights! What could be more despicable than bombing the houses of working class districts or firebombing defenseless refugees like Dresden? Everything the Red Army did was in context to defeating the enemy's military forces, and even though if anyone had reason to hate and seek revenge against the German people, it was the people of the Soviet Union who had suffered so much.

Anyways, this is well off topic.

[Phalanx]

He was. Stalin showed moral clarity, particularly in foreign policy, when he was leading. The Western powers were evil, avaricious, and corrupt every step of the way, while Comrade Stalin was generous and righteous. This is despite the smear campain by the west and the revisionists.

Well, I've officially given up hope of any serious discussion with you.

[Red Icepick]

Well, I've officially given up hope of any serious discussion with you.

That's funny because I never wanted to have one with you. Now stand aside, dwarf of reaction.

[narcomprom]

say what you will about his alleged human rights abuse,
it is, sometimes, difficult to tell a troll from a genuinely misguided person. stalin wasn't exactly touchy about human rights. there is an opinion that the repressions were a tradeoff for stability but noone claims they weren't threre.

[Comrade Anarchist]

Yes and no. Yes because it is the only way to stop end the israeli occupation, but no because there is too much religion involved so if you overthrew the jewish government and created a muslim government the jews there would get a raw deal.

[Misanthrope]

Hypothetically, yes. Realistically, no. A war against Israel would end up being a war against Israel and America. There is no army currently that can defeat such a powerhouse, war would just worsen the Palestinian's situation.

[9]

Yes and no. Yes because it is the only way to stop end the israeli occupation, but no because there is too much religion involved so if you overthrew the jewish government and created a muslim government the jews there would get a raw deal.

Are you for real?
Well, let's look at it. The Palestinians are being walled off, locked up, driven off of their land, and slaughtered en masse. But you want to retain this dynamic to avoid giving "'the Jews' (...) a raw deal"? So, having a racist government occupy the Palestinians' land and destroy them is, I suppose, less of a raw deal than 'allowing" the native people to govern their own land at the potential expense of the occupiers?
Where do you come up with this? We need to get past this notion left over from WWII of "all Jews as victims, no matter what". The Zionists are not the victims; they are the oppressors.

[Nwoye]

Exactly. Stalin mobilized the people of the Soviet Union like no one else could. Who else could have held the onslaught of the Fascists? Stalin was a man of radical action. Also, in addition to being the chief cause of Allied victory, Stalin fought an honorable war that the western liberal democracies did not. The Red Army faced their opponents in battle and won. Stalin didn't order a cowardly long-range bombing campaign against German civilians like Churchill and Roosevelt. Yet the West criticized Stalin for abuses of human rights! What could be more despicable than bombing the houses of working class districts or firebombing defenseless refugees like Dresden? Everything the Red Army did was in context to defeating the enemy's military forces, and even though if anyone had reason to hate and seek revenge against the German people, it was the people of the Soviet Union who had suffered so much.
he did all of that himself? wow he must have been superhuman or something.

as for the OP, workers have no country.

[9]

as for the OP, workers have no country.

I'm not trying to legitimize the absurd completely unrealistic "what if" scenario that is this thread, but wow.... I can't stand this response; it is the biggest cop out. It is a way of denying the legitimacy of the struggle of an oppressed people by suggesting that the "workers" on both sides of the "conflict" (read: occupation) are in equal positions; they aren't. The "workers" on one side of the "conflict" benefit from the subjugation of the workers on the other side, and from the expropriation of their land. There is a fundamental conflict between the immediate interests of the "workers" (read: labor aristocracy) on one side and the immediate interests of the workers on the other side, wherein the former benefit at the detriment of the latter. An imperialist colonial settler-state cannot be painted with such a broad brush of a slogan as "workers have no country"...at least, not when the term "worker" is extended to include the Israeli labor aristocracy. Though one might be correct in asserting that the Palestinian workers have no country; they instead have little scraps of land surrounded by walls and checkpoints....

[Nwoye]

I'm not trying to legitimize the absurd completely unrealistic "what if" scenario that is this thread, but wow.... I can't stand this response; it is the biggest cop out. It is a way of denying the legitimacy of the struggle of an oppressed people by suggesting that the "workers" on both sides of the "conflict" (read: occupation) are in equal positions; they aren't. The "workers" on one side of the "conflict" benefit from the subjugation of the workers on the other side, and from the expropriation of their land. There is a fundamental conflict between the immediate interests of the "workers" (read: labor aristocracy) on one side and the immediate interests of the workers on the other side, wherein the former benefit at the detriment of the latter. An imperialist colonial settler-state cannot be painted with such a broad brush of a slogan as "workers have no country"...at least, not when the term "worker" is extended to include the Israeli labor aristocracy. Though one might be correct in asserting that the Palestinian workers have no country; they instead have little scraps of land surrounded by walls and checkpoints....
it's not that i'm denying the status of Palestinian proletarians, it's just that i recognize that their emancipation is tied up in the existence of global capitalism. Suppose we had an end to this conflict tomorrow - would there be any qualitative increase in the lives of Palestinian workers? Their existence as oppressed proletarians excluded from political and economic autonomy would remain, and their status as wage-laborers feeding a parasitic global upper class would remain. Whether they are subjected to such circumstances as citizens of state X or state Y is irrelevant. Rosa put it best: "The national separateness of a certain territory in a modern state is not by itself a sufficient basis for autonomy."

[Rosa Provokateur]

if Stalin could see Israel now, he would be in full opposition and would liberate the Palestinians at first chance.



http://www.samizdata.net/blog/~pdeh/epicFAIL.jpg

[Rosa Provokateur]

say what you will about his alleged human rights abuse, no one can take away the fact that Stalin was an excellent leader, and if not for those skills WW2 and the defeat of nazism may have had a different outcome

It doesnt take much skill to tell your guys to run onto the battlefield or else your commissars will shoot them.

[luchtoibre]

support an intifada.to bring both sides of the apartheid system their together....


Right, because many Israelis see Souhaila Andrawes as a liberator.

what has souhalia andrawes or leila khaled got to do with it????
if they don't see them as liberators,then its their problem...

[Seek and Destroy]

this is one of the few wars i think i'd actually support.

[Lodestar]

There are wars, and there are unjust wars. Wars that move history forward, that aid in the progress and evolution of our species, and eliminate alienation, oppression, and exploitation, are wars that we must favor. Wars between imperialists or reactionary ideologies must be opposed.

That being noted, the "masses" of Israel-Palestine consists of both Jews and Arabs. A war to "eliminate Israel" and "restore Palestine" will inevitably be subject to reactionary propaganda, and the ruling classes among both Zionists and Islamists/Hamas will be able to turn the conflict into little more than ethnic slaughter for both sides.

That would be disastrous and undesirable. The villains of the Israel-Palestine situation are neither "the Jews" nor "the Arabs" nor exclusively the "zionists" or "Islamic extremists."

It is the ruling classes, and the imperialists who have manipulated the situation such that Israel is a sort of neo-colonial forward-base of sorts for Western ambitions in the Near East. The solution is for the Jewish/Arab barrier to be ignored and forgotten, and for the Israeli and Palestinian masses to rise up, arm-in-arm, to overthrow their respective bourgeois rulers and establish a secular, socialist state which makes no distinction between Jew and Arab.

[Lodestar]

It doesnt take much skill to tell your guys to run onto the battlefield or else your commissars will shoot them.

In the defense of the socialist motherland against the ravages of genocidal Nazis who would put the proverbial knife to the throat of the whole Slavic race in their quest for a racially homogeneous nightmarish global dystopia, some unfortunate choices were made out of desperation and terror. You're not goose-stepping your way into a concentration camp today thanks to the sacrifices of the Red Army. Be grateful.

[Raisa]

"Do you support a war against Israel to liberate Palestinians?"


Israel is just the same thing as any other extension of the Imperialist Nations reach into the wrest of the world....its just another McState...supported by capitalist colonist nations, this isnt like people are supporting a "Holy War" cause by now everyone knows Israel and Palestine is not a holy war...its colonized people demanding their rights.

i dont see nothing wrong with supporting that.

People are a hypocrite not to. The "revolution" is not happening next week, untill then i think the Palestininans can use some human rights and clean drinking water. So word, emancipation for Falasteen...they been there forever. Entertaining the other side is like being complicit with Zionism cause the only reason you can justify moving some real people over in their own country......is cause you support Zionism.

[Rosa Provokateur]

In the defense of the socialist motherland against the ravages of genocidal Nazis who would put the proverbial knife to the throat of the whole Slavic race in their quest for a racially homogeneous nightmarish global dystopia, some unfortunate choices were made out of desperation and terror. You're not goose-stepping your way into a concentration camp today thanks to the sacrifices of the Red Army. Be grateful.

Unfurtunate choices? Going to see Terminator: Salvation was an unfortunate choice, sending poorly equipped troops to fight and shooting anybody that tries to retreat (which is what you do when un-capable of effectively fighting a better armed/trained enemy) is stupid, insane, illogical. I can't even pick a word.

The Red Army delivered sacrifices more than it made them.

Fuck greatfull, I'm realistic.

[9]

There are wars, and there are unjust wars. Wars that move history forward, that aid in the progress and evolution of our species, and eliminate alienation, oppression, and exploitation, are wars that we must favor. Wars between imperialists or reactionary ideologies must be opposed.

That being noted, the "masses" of Israel-Palestine consists of both Jews and Arabs. A war to "eliminate Israel" and "restore Palestine" will inevitably be subject to reactionary propaganda, and the ruling classes among both Zionists and Islamists/Hamas will be able to turn the conflict into little more than ethnic slaughter for both sides.

That would be disastrous and undesirable. The villains of the Israel-Palestine situation are neither "the Jews" nor "the Arabs" nor exclusively the "zionists" or "Islamic extremists."

It is the ruling classes, and the imperialists who have manipulated the situation such that Israel is a sort of neo-colonial forward-base of sorts for Western ambitions in the Near East. The solution is for the Jewish/Arab barrier to be ignored and forgotten, and for the Israeli and Palestinian masses to rise up, arm-in-arm, to overthrow their respective bourgeois rulers and establish a secular, socialist state which makes no distinction between Jew and Arab.

This is a bit idealist, in my view. Do you really expect a significant number of the Israeli labor aristocracy to relinquish the privilege that comes from the exploitation of the Palestinians? I would be thrilled if they did, but it is unlikely. As I noted before, this is not merely a case of "workers unite!". Its a case of the Israeli Jewish workers benefiting from the exploitation of the Palestinians and from the expropriation of their land. It is that reason why the barrier between "Jewish" (Israeli) and "Arab" (Palestinian) cannot really be ignored; it is the barrier between exploiter and exploited. And I don't think anyone is served by glossing over this issue and making pretend that both sides are the same.

[luchtoibre]

This is a bit idealist, in my view. Do you really expect a significant number of the Israeli labor aristocracy to relinquish the privilege that comes from the exploitation of the Palestinians? I would be thrilled if they did, but it is unlikely. As I noted before, this is not merely a case of "workers unite!". Its a case of the Israeli Jewish workers benefiting from the exploitation of the Palestinians and from the expropriation of their land. It is that reason why the barrier between "Jewish" (Israeli) and "Arab" (Palestinian) cannot really be ignored; it is the barrier between exploiter and exploited. And I don't think anyone is served by glossing over this issue and making pretend that both sides are the same.

How many times must we explain the basis of the palestine situation.more so on a leftist site!

[Red Icepick]

Unfurtunate choices? Going to see Terminator: Salvation was an unfortunate choice, sending poorly equipped troops to fight and shooting anybody that tries to retreat (which is what you do when un-capable of effectively fighting a better armed/trained enemy) is stupid, insane, illogical. I can't even pick a word.

The Red Army delivered sacrifices more than it made them.

Fuck greatfull, I'm realistic.

Pure insanity. What should the Red Army have done? Laid down their weapons and lick the bootheels of the conquerors? Throw away everything they've accomplished and leave themselves at the mercy of Fascist annihilators who wanted to supplant their lands after destroying their people? It'd be better to be buried in the rubble.

Just because your enemy is better armed and trained doesn't mean he shouldn't be fought. And to say the Red Army was "un-capable of effectively fighting" them? What do you call the defense of Moscow, Stalingrad, the Kursk salient, the siege of Leningrad, Operation: Bagration, Budapest, or the battle of Berlin? Or ask Japan's vaunted Kwantung Army? The Red Army suffered a staggering surprise blow, but it came back stronger and more powerful than ever.

[Lodestar]

This is a bit idealist, in my view. Do you really expect a significant number of the Israeli labor aristocracy to relinquish the privilege that comes from the exploitation of the Palestinians? I would be thrilled if they did, but it is unlikely. As I noted before, this is not merely a case of "workers unite!". Its a case of the Israeli Jewish workers benefiting from the exploitation of the Palestinians and from the expropriation of their land. It is that reason why the barrier between "Jewish" (Israeli) and "Arab" (Palestinian) cannot really be ignored; it is the barrier between exploiter and exploited. And I don't think anyone is served by glossing over this issue and making pretend that both sides are the same.


Well, yes...it's idealistic. Highly so. Pragmatically, I have no actual solution. I merely suggested the ideal situation; the best possible outcome. There's no reason to believe what I suggested was realistic; just desirable.

To be honest, being Jewish, and having relatives and friends in Israel, I really don't know how to view the situation. The treatment of Palestinians is deplorable; but the things shown on Palestinian television that depicts all Jewish civilians as worthy of death scare the living hell out of me.

[luchtoibre]

Well, yes...it's idealistic. Highly so. Pragmatically, I have no actual solution. I merely suggested the ideal situation; the best possible outcome. There's no reason to believe what I suggested was realistic; just desirable.
...and friends in Israel, I really don't know how to view the situation. The treatment of Palestinians is deplorable; but the things shown on Palestinian television that depicts all Jewish civilians as worthy of death scare the living hell out of me.what palestine tv have you watched?the scariest thing for palestinians is zionism.when their people are being killed,due to zionism.and what its done to palestinians then you tend see what israel-zionism is.

[Rosa Provokateur]

Pure insanity. What should the Red Army have done? Laid down their weapons and lick the bootheels of the conquerors? Throw away everything they've accomplished and leave themselves at the mercy of Fascist annihilators who wanted to supplant their lands after destroying their people? It'd be better to be buried in the rubble.

Just because your enemy is better armed and trained doesn't mean he shouldn't be fought. And to say the Red Army was "un-capable of effectively fighting" them? What do you call the defense of Moscow, Stalingrad, the Kursk salient, the siege of Leningrad, Operation: Bagration, Budapest, or the battle of Berlin? Or ask Japan's vaunted Kwantung Army? The Red Army suffered a staggering surprise blow, but it came back stronger and more powerful than ever.

I'm not saying they shouldn't have fought; I'm a pacifist and personally wouldn't have but I won't criticize them for doing so. My problem is with shooting people who turned back. Retreat can be extremely useful (Mao proved this with the Long March, I'm not a Maoist or Mao supporter by the way) and provides oppurtunity to regroup, etc.

By shooting his own troops and wasting resources on pointless battles such as Stalingrad, more Russians died than would have had Stalin allowed his generals to do their job without interference.

As for Berlin, the Germans were already at breaking point and the only reason Russia got there first was because the U.S. thought it would give them good leverage with Stalin after the war if he was allowed the privilege of conquering the Nazi capitol.

Stalin and Hitler were the same kind of monters only using different ideologies and for different reasons. Yes, Russia fought off a fascist dictatorship but only to remain with Stalin's dictatorship back at home.

[Red Icepick]

I'm not saying they shouldn't have fought; I'm a pacifist and personally wouldn't have but I won't criticize them for doing so. My problem is with shooting people who turned back. Retreat can be extremely useful (Mao proved this with the Long March, I'm not a Maoist or Mao supporter by the way) and provides oppurtunity to regroup, etc.

By shooting his own troops and wasting resources on pointless battles such as Stalingrad, more Russians died than would have had Stalin allowed his generals to do their job without interference.

As for Berlin, the Germans were already at breaking point and the only reason Russia got there first was because the U.S. thought it would give them good leverage with Stalin after the war if he was allowed the privilege of conquering the Nazi capitol.

Stalin and Hitler were the same kind of monters only using different ideologies and for different reasons. Yes, Russia fought off a fascist dictatorship but only to remain with Stalin's dictatorship back at home.

Anyone who won't fight for the revolution is a coward. How far are you going to retreat? Stalin was right to declare "Not One Step Back." Mao's Long March is not comparable, as he was able to sit back and watch the KMT and Japanese kill eachother. Barbarossa was directed strictly at the Soviet Union, and it wouldn't have been smart to wait for the British to arrive.

Anyone who calls Stalingrad a "pointless battle" and a "waste of resources" is a complete moron. That was the turning point of WWII. It completely encircled and annihilated the 6th Army, the most powerful command in the Wehrmacht. More than that, the overall operation also blunted the Germans' swing south to seize the oil fields of the Caucasus, and operation that Hitler considered his last hope to decisively win the war.

Then you suggest that the western Allies could have taken Berlin? They never encountered anything like that kind of resistance in Europe. The only combat the western Allies got into that was comparable to the Eastern Front was the Marine Corps island hopping campaign in the Pacific. The Germans were already in full retreat by the time the liberal democracies showed up. While they were fighting in Normandy, the Soviet Army was carrying out Bagration, a much larger and more successful operation that destroyed the German Army Group Center.