Israel-Hamas Thread II

[expos4ever]

We see a line of reasoning often on this issue - the idea that if you are acting is self-defence, this gives one moral justification for whatever actions you take.

Clearly not the case.

Just because Israel is acting in self-defence does not, for that specific reason, justify whatever they choose to do, even if it is obviously "overkill".

This is obvious - we should not need to discuss this.

 

[ralliann]

We see a line of reasoning often on this issue - the idea that if you are acting is self-defence, this gives one moral justification for whatever actions you take.

Clearly not the case.

Just because Israel is acting in self-defence does not, for that specific reason, justify whatever they choose to do, even if it is obviously "overkill".

This is obvious - we should not need to discuss this.

It justifies what they "need" to do to stop this heinousness in the future. to protest their people and country.

 

[expos4ever]

It justifies what they "need" to do to stop this heinousness in the future. to protest their people and country.

You are moving the goalposts.

I never denied that Israel needs to do what they need to do. My point was a completely different one - please read the post carefully.

 

[JosephZ]

Israel has offered to work out a deal and it's been rejected every time by the Palestinians. They had their opportunities to be recognized by Israel and refused.

Until Israel agrees to give Palestinians a state based on 1967 boundaries and without Israeli settlements, they will continue to refuse any offers from Israel.

 

[Philip_B]

They themselves originally were occupiers. They are not NATIVE to that land. They got it by warfare, and now Israel also did. Because they attempted to wipe Israel off the map. Israel has been more than generous in giving them Gaza.

Please explain, and I would like some details and references.

 

[ralliann]

You are moving the goalposts.

Moving the goal post. I gave my point of view. We simply disagree on this issue.

I never denied that Israel needs to do what they need to do. My point was a completely different one - please read the post carefully.

They are doing what needs to be done. You would disagree.

Please explain, and I would like some details and references.

Look it up

 

[ralliann]

Until Israel agrees to give Palestinians a state based on 1967 boundaries and without Israeli settlements, they will continue to refuse any offers from Israel.

Absolutely not. You want Israel to have even less land for a buffer? To be even more vulnerable?. . But this just proves the issue is not about Palestinians having a state, They could have had that. They want the land....

 

[ralliann]

Please explain, and I would like some details and references.

You are asking me to prove Palestinians are not Jews? Or are not Philistines? Otherwise, certainly you are aware Rome ( modern definition "occupied" Israel ) destroyed their Temple and kicked them out of the land in 70 ad?

 

[expos4ever]

Moving the goal post. I gave my point of view. We simply disagree on this issue.

No! You are not engaging in proper debate form: you move the goalposts, you present strawman arguments and, frankly, you post falsehoods.

They are doing what needs to be done. You would disagree.

Ok, you just made a claim - that what Israel is doing needs to be done. Please defend your claim with some evidence. That is your obligation, if you are going to be a responsible debater.

Look it up

This is yet another illegitimate post - when someone challenges you to support your claims, it is incumbent on you, not the person who challenges you, to support your claim.

Telling someone to look it up is effectively asking other people to do your homework. And that is completely unacceptable.

 

[Pommer]

Absolutely not. You want Israel to have even less land for a buffer? To be even more vulnerable?. . But this just proves the issue is not about Palestinians having a state, They could have had that. They want the land....

Okay…what stops Israel from just simply wiping out every single Muslim Arab from the border (of Jordan) to the sea?

 

[ralliann]

Okay…what stops Israel from just simply wiping out every single Muslim Arab from the border (of Jordan) to the sea?

Why would that be a worry.
Israel had borders. They were not expansionist. The other nations round about had theirs as well.

 

[ralliann]

No! You are not engaging in proper debate form: you move the goalposts, you present strawman arguments and, frankly, you post falsehoods.

Ok, you just made a claim - that what Israel is doing needs to be done. Please defend your claim with some evidence. That is your obligation, if you are going to be a responsible debater.

This is yet another illegitimate post - when someone challenges you to support your claims, it is incumbent on you, not the person who challenges you, to support your claim.

Telling someone to look it up is effectively asking other people to do your homework. And that is completely unacceptable.

Look, I am not gonna play this game.
First of all this is not about a state, but land.
Second, who is it you expect me to prove (in detail) the Palestian people are not?
In Short who is it you believe they are? What is you basis to believe Israel is their specific homeland?
But at least we have gotten a more genuine reason for the dispute, it is first and foremost about the land, not a state.

 

[rjs330]

We see a line of reasoning often on this issue - the idea that if you are acting is self-defence, this gives one moral justification for whatever actions you take.

Clearly not the case.

Just because Israel is acting in self-defence does not, for that specific reason, justify whatever they choose to do, even if it is obviously "overkill".

This is obvious - we should not need to discuss this.

It's obviously not clear at all.. because what needs to be done is not just for the immediacy. That's short sighted. When it comes to self defense of a country means you may have to take quite a different tact than what an individual may be allowed to take. Protecting your people is a countries job. And when your people have been the victims of attack and death for 10 years and the perpetrator has promised never to stop doing so changes the dynamics drastically.

So there is moral.justification to protect your people. Should you do "whatever you want?" I don't think so. If you rounded up every child in Gaza and burned them alive at the stake, then that would be wrong to do so.

Israel does have rules of engagement. They are not killing it very Palestinian they lay eyes on. So I certainly hope you aren't making a claim that they are.

Moral.justification is quite different depending on the actions taken and the purpose for which they are taken.

 

[expos4ever]

Look, I am not gonna play this game.

What game? I am simply pointing out that you are evading your burden of responsibility when you ask someone else to look up evidence for a claim you made.

And if you make a claim, which you did when you claimed that Israel was doing what it needed to be done and no more, it is incumbent upon you to defend your statement.

But you have yet to do so.

First of all this is not about a state, but land.

Okay, but how is this relevant?

Second, who is it you expect me to prove (in detail) the Palestian people are not?

I find your wording unclear, but the point is you made a claim. And that claim was that Israel was doing only what it needed to do and no more. I challenge you to support that claim. In responsible debate, you are obligated to support your claims when challenged on them.

In Short who is it you believe they are? What is you basis to believe Israel is their specific homeland?
But at least we have gotten a more genuine reason for the dispute, it is first and foremost about the land, not a state.

I am not sure exactly what you are saying here, but I don't see how this is relevant to what you and I have been going back and forth over.

 

[expos4ever]

It's obviously not clear at all.. because what needs to be done is not just for the immediacy. That's short sighted. When it comes to self defense of a country means you may have to take quite a different tact than what an individual may be allowed to take. Protecting your people is a countries job. And when your people have been the victims of attack and death for 10 years and the perpetrator has promised never to stop doing so changes the dynamics drastically.

You appear to be arguing that Israel is not overdoing it in its response. Okay, that's an argument you can make.

But this has nothing to do with my post which was a post about a principle. I stated what should be obvious to any person: just because an entity or a person is engaged in self-defense does not, for that specific reason provide justification for any conceivable response they may undertake.

Again this is obvious. If person A attacks person B, person A does have a right to defend himself against person B. But that does not mean that it is morally acceptable for person A to kill all the members of person B's family. If, repeat if, person A has a solid argument to the effect that all the members of person B's family will ultimately try to kill person A then, and only then could there be any reasonable justification for person A trying to kill all the members of person B's family. And though I suspect you will try to argue this pattern is indeed at play in the current conflict, I am very skeptical you will be able to make the case.

 

[ralliann]

What game? I am simply pointing out that you are evading your burden of responsibility when you ask someone else to look up evidence for a claim you made.

That the land had been occupied by many before "Palestinians" came along. That was my claim
I have no burden to prove who they are not. Who are you claiming they are?

And if you make a claim, which you did when you claimed that Israel was doing what it needed to be done and no more, it is incumbent upon you to defend your statement.

No it is not my claim, any more than you made a claim.
You have an opinion I do as well. we disagree.

But you have yet to do so.

What? to do what you won't do? You made claims, I am asking you just what it is that you demand I answer you to prove you are wrong
Let's start with the fact that the land of Israel has been "occupied" many times in history.
Here is the claim.........
No one who occupied the land in the past made claim to "distinct" nativity as a result.
Here is the question
What makes "Palestinians" claim distinct from any other occupation in the land?
This is fundamental because
This is all about the land and the Palestinian's right to it,
It is not about being made a state without all "their" land.
Other than that good day

 

[ralliann]

Moving the goal posts. You appear to be arguing that Israel is not overdoing it in its response. Okay, that's an argument you can make.

Okay.

But this has nothing to do with my post which was a post about a principle. I stated what should be obvious to any person: just because an entity or a person is engaged in self-defense does not, for that specific reason provide justification for any conceivable response they may undertake.

It is not Israel's fault that Hamas uses human sheilds.

Again this is obvious. If person A attacks person B, person A does have a right to defend himself against person B. But that does not mean that it is morally acceptable for person A to kill all the members of person B's family.

We have been through this. If he is using his family as a sheild, so that he can kill your family. Who are you first responsible to? Who is he responsible to? And remember it is not just his family, he has yours also as hostages.

If, repeat if, person A has a solid argument to the effect that all the members of person B's family will ultimately try to kill person A then, and only then could there be any reasonable justification for person A trying to kill all the members of person B's family. And though I suspect you will try to argue this pattern is indeed at play in the current conflict, I am very skeptical you will be able to make the case.

I don't nave to make the argument. Hamas leadership made a video threatening to do it.

 

[rjs330]

Until Israel agrees to give Palestinians a state based on 1967 boundaries and without Israeli settlements, they will continue to refuse any offers from Israel.

Like I've said they have refused any offer. Israel has given back land they have lawfully seized.

They also offered all of Gaza and 94% of everything else and Easy Jerusalem as thy capital. Arafat said no to everything and launched a bloody attack.

In 2008 Israel offered even more. And they still said no. Sorry, there is no excuse for Palestine at this point. They've said no at every turn. They could have had a recognized state by now and had one for some time. Its no one's fault but theirs.

 

[rjs330]

Okay…what stops Israel from just simply wiping out every single Muslim Arab from the border (of Jordan) to the sea?

Good question. What does? If the Arabs were in that position they would have. Why haven't the Israeli's?

 

[Philip_B]

Moving the goal post. I gave my point of view. We simply disagree on this issue.

They are doing what needs to be done. You would disagree.

Look it up

The genetic profile of Palestinians has, for the first time, been studied by using human leukocyte antigen (HLA) gene variability and haplotypes. The comparison with other Mediterranean populations by using neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses reveal that Palestinians are genetically very close to Jews and other Middle East populations, including Turks (Anatolians), Lebanese, Egyptians, Armenians, and Iranians. Archaeologic and genetic data support that both Jews and Palestinians came from the ancient Canaanites, who extensively mixed with Egyptians, Mesopotamian, and Anatolian peoples in ancient times. Thus, Palestinian-Jewish rivalry is based in cultural and religious, but not in genetic, differences. The relatively close relatedness of both Jews and Palestinians to western Mediterranean populations reflects the continuous circum-Mediterranean cultural and gene flow that have occurred in prehistoric and historic times. This flow overtly contradicts the demic diffusion model of western Mediterranean populations substitution by agriculturalists coming from the Middle East in the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11543891/#:~:text=Archaeologic and genetic data support,Anatolian peoples in ancient times.

Palestinians (Arabic: الفلسطينيون, al-Filasṭīniyyūn; Hebrew: פָלַסְטִינִים, Fālasṭīnīm) or Palestinian people (الشعب الفلسطيني, ash-sha‘b al-Filasṭīnī), also referred to as Palestinian Arabs (العرب الفلسطينيون, al-ʿArab al-Filasṭīniyyūn), are an ethnonational group descending from peoples who have inhabited the region of Palestine over the millennia, and who are today culturally and linguistically Arab

They themselves originally were occupiers. They are not NATIVE to that land. They got it by warfare, and now Israel also did. Because they attempted to wipe Israel off the map. Israel has been more than generous in giving them Gaza.

Having looked it up, as you suggested, I am of the view that you were in error when you made this claim at #2386