Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 12-11-2012, 09:45 AM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs View Post
And where did I even imply that they had no flaws?
You didn't, but offering such a ridiculous excuse for Arab failure gives a hint as to how you think about these things.

I'm just curious: Is there any problems the Arabs have which are a result of their own flaws? Or is it 100% the result of misconduct by outsiders like Jews and Europeans?

Quote:
No; it just means they should be better off. Which they are.
So you feel without all that Israeli abuse (), the Palestinian Arabs would be at about the economic level of Syria, Jordan, and Egypt?

Quote:
And your idea that either everything is Israel's fault or nothing is their fault is a false dilemma and strawman.
Please show me where I expressed such an idea. Please quote me. Looks to me like you are the one who is strawmanning here.

Quote:
Then the West isn't very honorable.
Honorable enough that people are willing to invest substantial money here.
  #52  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:00 AM
sidecar_jon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq View Post
Er...no. The Palestinians aren't considered Arabs because of where they lived. They're considered Arabs because the speak Arabic.

The Israelis, by contrast don't speak Arabic, but speak Hebrew.

You might as well ask why the Turks and the Kurds aren't considered Arabs.
Ah i did wonder about that thanks for the info.
  #53  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:05 AM
Malthus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 18,184
The problem here is that Israel's Arab neighbours, who presumably do not suffer the impact of Israeli occupation, are still considerably poorer than Israel.

The World Bank uses the GNI rating, described as follows:

Quote:
GNI per capita (formerly GNP per capita) is the gross national income, converted to U.S. dollars using the World Bank Atlas method, divided by the midyear population. GNI is the sum of value added by all resident producers plus any product taxes (less subsidies) not included in the valuation of output plus net receipts of primary income (compensation of employees and property income) from abroad. GNI, calculated in national currency, is usually converted to U.S. dollars at official exchange rates for comparisons across economies, although an alternative rate is used when the official exchange rate is judged to diverge by an exceptionally large margin from the rate actually applied in international transactions. To smooth fluctuations in prices and exchange rates, a special Atlas method of conversion is used by the World Bank. This applies a conversion factor that averages the exchange rate for a given year and the two preceding years, adjusted for differences in rates of inflation between the country, and through 2000, the G-5 countries (France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States). From 2001, these countries include the Euro area, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
The GNI for Israel as of last measure was $28,930.

http://data.worldbank.org/country/israel

The GNI for Syria was $2,750.

The GNI for Egypt was $2,600.

The smaller countries in the region fare better: GNI for Jordan was $4,380.

By way of comparison, the GNI for Canada was $45,560; the GNI for Mexico was $9,240.

World bank doesn't have a cite for Palestine.
  #54  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:09 AM
sidecar_jon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazil84 View Post
I agree that it's counter-productive. The Palestinian Arabs remind me of some comic-book villain who spends all his time thinking about how he's going to "get" the hero.
In the "Heroic" view of history yes but in reality i'm sure most Palestinians and Israeli's just want a home food and some security.
  #55  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:10 AM
Mijin's Avatar
Mijin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazil84 View Post
The fact that you use the word "Palestine" demonstrates part of the problem, which is that the Palestinian Arabs are much more interested in the trappings of statehood (which they believe can be used to undermine Israel) than in doing the actual work of building and bettering themselves.
I would put it the other way round. I think certain "trappings of statehood" are a prerequisite to prosperity. Failed states don't become economic powerhouses.

And who wants to locate a business in the west bank, while you don't know if tomorrow someone else will claim the land, or put a checkpoint on the road your deliveries need to go on?
  #56  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:26 AM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mijin View Post
I would put it the other way round. I think certain "trappings of statehood" are a prerequisite to prosperity.
Can you give me a few positive and negative examples of this?

Quote:
Failed states don't become economic powerhouses.
And pretending that it's not a failed state helps how?

Quote:
And who wants to locate a business in the west bank, while you don't know if tomorrow someone else will claim the land,
I would say it depends on who is in charge. If the land is under Israeli control, you have access to Israeli courts. Note that Israeli courts regularly rule against the government and regularly rule in favor of Arab petitioners.
  #57  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:41 AM
BrokenBriton is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,708
It' kind of crazy concept, but most Arabs I've ever known don't think in terms of more wealth, greater productivity, bigger cars. Capitalism is often seen, in a bemused way, as a western disease. Plus an awful lot is Allah's will.
  #58  
Old 12-11-2012, 10:49 AM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malthus
The problem here is that Israel's Arab neighbours, who presumably do not suffer the impact of Israeli occupation, are still considerably poorer than Israel.
And that's the key right there. Unless the contention is that Israel stole ALL the best land in the region and has kept all the other countries around it down. I'd say that the primary reason that Israel is relatively rich and the rest of the region is relatively poor is that Israel has a democratic government, has rule of law and is business friendly and has cultivated extensive business and trade relationships outside of their country.
  #59  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:05 AM
Mosier is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vegas
Posts: 7,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazil84 View Post
Ahh, the sweet hum of the Liberal Excuse Machine. I'm curious: Is there any problems the Arabs have which are a result of their own flaws?
You're right! They are scum!
  #60  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:06 AM
Mijin's Avatar
Mijin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazil84 View Post
And pretending that it's not a failed state helps how?
I don't think that anyone should pretend to be anything.

You've said that the Arabs should not be seeking the trappings of statehood but should be bettering themselves first. I'm saying it's hard to better yourself while you're not even a country.

If I buy the deeds to some land, I want to know that no-one will dispute my ownership for decades at least. I don't want to be thinking WTF will happen next month.

Quote:
I would say it depends on who is in charge. If the land is under Israeli control, you have access to Israeli courts. Note that Israeli courts regularly rule against the government and regularly rule in favor of Arab petitioners.
Yeah, I'm sure that would be really reassuring to investors: a whole other country might interfere in your affairs, that has nothing to gain from your business succeeding. A country that builds settlements and checkpoints where they like.
But hey, you could always try to sue that country in their courts; some people have apparently won!

Last edited by Mijin; 12-11-2012 at 11:07 AM.
  #61  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:16 AM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by sidecar_jon View Post
In the "Heroic" view of history yes but in reality i'm sure most Palestinians and Israeli's just want a home food and some security.
I don't think that's true. There's a difference between "want" and "just want." Clearly the Arabs (generally speaking) want more than just a home food and some security. Otherwise they would not elect or support radicals who want to destroy Israel.

In any event, it is the desires of the Arab leadership which count (as far as leadership goes, anyway) and they are the ones who have channeled Arab energy and creativity into figuring out new ways to undermine Israel.

Last edited by brazil84; 12-11-2012 at 11:16 AM.
  #62  
Old 12-11-2012, 12:09 PM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mosier View Post
You're right! They are scum!
Lol, if "scum" = suffering for the most part as a result of their own (collective) flaws and shortcomings as opposed to the misconduct of outsiders, then yes.
  #63  
Old 12-11-2012, 02:11 PM
Learjeff is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 4,086
Not being able to travel freely and efficiently within Palestine is a big hindrance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by friedo View Post
In place of 4) I would put that Israel has an open economy and a relatively transparent government with the rule of law and basic property rights. Those are necessary ingredients for a society to create and maintain wealth. Palestine has been run by a succession of corrupt despots or infighting ideologues for its entire history. Nobody is going to invest in Palestine if they are not confident that the government will guarantee fairness and protection.
Exacerbating that, it's far more difficult to invest in Palestine than in Israel, thanks to both Israeli policies and the Palestine goverment (or lack of government, for much of the time, thanks largely to Israel).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth
It can’t be 2 or 3.
Regarding 2, personal cash infusions are far better for economic growth than government subsidies.

Israel clearly got the best of the land, but they also had a culture of improving the land through irrigation, which the Palestinians did not have. (I won't get into how irrigation eventually dooms the irrigated land, since that's still a long way off.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by md2000
partly it's a bootstrap effect
I'm confident that's a huge factor, as well as banking and property laws as you mentioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sidecar_jon
I have often wondered why if the Arab world loves the Palestinians why they don't indeed have the best army, air force and homes, food and agriculture in the world, after all the Arab nations seem to have plenty of cash to throw around. Also if the Palestinians are considered Arabs since they lived in the place now claimed as Israel, why re the Israeli's not Arabs too?
Perhaps it's best, for their interests, for the problem not to be solved. Please excuse my cynicism here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brazil84
Ahh, the sweet hum of the Liberal Excuse Machine
I made the same point and I'm hardly liberal. Poisoning the well is not good rhetoric.
Quote:
If Arabs were poor as a result of Israeli misconduct, then what one would expect to see is that Arabs in general suffer from less poverty if they have less contact with Israel
Much better
Quote:
Lol, if "scum" = suffering for the most part as a result of their own (collective) flaws and shortcomings as opposed to the misconduct of outsiders, then yes.
So you don't think that fleeing your home, leaving all your property behind and not being allowed back isn't a bit of a blow that's hard to recover from? You don't think that taking 8 hours to cross 200 miles due to checkpoints isn't a barrier to business development? You don't think that lack of statehood compounds difficulty for foreign investment?

I don't blame Palestine's problems on either side. There's quite enough blame to spread around on both sides, and probably to the US and the UN as well. And definitely to the rest of the Arab world, who convinced many of them to flee in the first place (abetted by Israelis who wanted them to flee as well).

Can you name any refugee camps that have developed thriving economies? A huge number of Palestinians are refugees whose land was taken from them (by the fault of themselves and others). They have no property and little means to get any, with imports and exports denied or slowed to the point of being uneconomic.

You accuse others of bias, but your points illuminate little but your own bias.

Last edited by Learjeff; 12-11-2012 at 02:13 PM.
  #64  
Old 12-11-2012, 02:19 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Learjeff
Not being able to travel freely and efficiently within Palestine is a big hindrance.
Sure. But you'd need to look at the root cause of that, and ask yourself the question...WHY aren't the Palestinians allowed free travel (not just in Israel either)?

Quote:
So you don't think that fleeing your home, leaving all your property behind and not being allowed back isn't a bit of a blow that's hard to recover from? You don't think that taking 8 hours to cross 200 miles due to checkpoints isn't a barrier to business development? You don't think that lack of statehood compounds difficulty for foreign investment?
Again, that's true. However, that's the consequences of losing a war that you (collectively) had a large stake in, as well as decades of suicide bombs, rocket attacks, terrorist attacks and various other unsavory activities. Not all Palestinians, of course, have actively done those things...but they are all painted with the same broad brush because they systematically have refused to reign in their nut jobs and whack-a-do loony types. This has caused every one of the problems you state here...and, ultimately, it's the reason they don't HAVE a state today. After all, they could have taken half a loaf back in '48, but CHOSE not too, and instead chose to try and fight for it. Sadly, for them, they lost...and more sadly, they simply have never accepted that they lost, especially 2 or 3 decades ago when it would have made their negotiation position much more strong. Today? They are fucked, basically.

Quote:
I don't blame Palestine's problems on either side. There's quite enough blame to spread around on both sides, and probably to the US and the UN as well. And definitely to the rest of the Arab world, who convinced many of them to flee in the first place (abetted by Israelis who wanted them to flee as well).
There is blame on all sides, but it's not equal blame. The Palestinians, as a whole, get the lions share of the blame for this fucked up situation, especially the Palestinian leadership during the 70's and 80's...and the leadership during the 40's and 50's and 60's as well. Oh, and the leadership during the 90's and 00's too. And they aren't doing a cracking good job today either.
  #65  
Old 12-11-2012, 02:26 PM
sidecar_jon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazil84 View Post
I don't think that's true. There's a difference between "want" and "just want." Clearly the Arabs (generally speaking) want more than just a home food and some security. Otherwise they would not elect or support radicals who want to destroy Israel.

In any event, it is the desires of the Arab leadership which count (as far as leadership goes, anyway) and they are the ones who have channeled Arab energy and creativity into figuring out new ways to undermine Israel.
the west bleated for "democracy" and the untrustworthy locals voted the wrong way! Generally the world has a bad habit of electing people who seem to be counterproductive to their own well being. Maybe elections are won on an idea rather than any reality.
Isn't it all to convenient and over arching to say "Arab" anyway? Surely in reality the Arab word is very diverse and though sharing language (though not universal?) and an "imaginary friend" (though differing branches of them too!) as different as chalk and cheese.
  #66  
Old 12-11-2012, 03:36 PM
Learjeff is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 4,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
Sure. But you'd need to look at the root cause of that, and ask yourself the question...WHY aren't the Palestinians allowed free travel (not just in Israel either)?
Nolo contendere.

Quote:
There is blame on all sides, but it's not equal blame. The Palestinians, as a whole, get the lions share of the blame for this fucked up situation, especially the Palestinian leadership during the 70's and 80's...and the leadership during the 40's and 50's and 60's as well. Oh, and the leadership during the 90's and 00's too. And they aren't doing a cracking good job today either.
I think the Palestinians share a lot of that blame with Arab states, who manipulate them into remaining to be a festering wound.

A lovely situation all around, frankly.
  #67  
Old 12-11-2012, 03:43 PM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,522
I'd say Israel is more prosperous than it's neighbors because the Ashkenazi imported the first-world values developed over centuries in Europe and North America that make modern prosperity work.

As for the Palestinians and other Arabs of the region, I'd say the main source of their hostility is wounded pride. Islam promises that the Faithful have Allah's blessing over the infidel; Muslims are supposed to win, Christians and Jews are supposed to lose. In their view, the eclipse of Islamic countries by the West over the last century is an emasculating and infuriating injustice; and Israel is a modern-day Crusader state, created by British imperialism and sustained by American hegemony. The very existence of Israel, and the dominion of the West, is an "attack" on Islam by this theory.
  #68  
Old 12-11-2012, 06:24 PM
bizzwire is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: right behind....YOUR EAR!
Posts: 1,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs View Post
Add 6) constant attacks and harassment by Israel. People who spend their time under occupation, being bombed, being shot, being driven out of their homes, or in refugee camps don't build industrialized nations. I find it highly unlikely that the Israelis would allow them to build such a nation. The Israelis (or anyone else) wouldn't have done much if at all better under the same conditions.
I seem to recall Israel unilaterally pulling out of Gaza, leaving it to the Palestinians to run their own affairs. In no time at all, the Gazans had elected a Hamas-driven leadership and starting launching indiscriminate rocket attacks. Am I misremembering this?
  #69  
Old 12-11-2012, 06:33 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Learjeff
A lovely situation all around, frankly.
Oh yeah...total cluster fuck levels of 'lovely', and I can't see any way out of it for any of the players. I don't even see some sort of Irish solution in these peoples futures, at least not any time soon.

Quote:
I think the Palestinians share a lot of that blame with Arab states, who manipulate them into remaining to be a festering wound.
Definitely, though most of their neighbors gave up on this quest years ago, while the Palestinians fight on. Certainly Iran gets a big part of the blame as well. And I'm not letting the US, Europeans or the Israelis themselves off scott-free either...all have their own share of the shit sandwich, with the Israelis getting the larger piece.

But in the end, it's the Palestinians themselves who get the lions share...both of the blame, and of the shit. It's sad, but again I don't see any way out of this mess for them that they would agree too...just the gradual erosion of the territory they could have had, a gradual erosion of their identity, and a lot of pain, suffering and death in their future as it's been in their past.
  #70  
Old 12-11-2012, 06:46 PM
Mijin's Avatar
Mijin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
It's sad, but again I don't see any way out of this mess for them that they would agree too...just the gradual erosion of the territory they could have had...
Why is that, again?

Even if we accept that this is all about Palestinian aggression and Israel is just trying to defend itself, why should that provoke Israel into building more settlements in the west bank?
  #71  
Old 12-11-2012, 06:53 PM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Learjeff View Post
So you don't think that fleeing your home, leaving all your property behind and not being allowed back isn't a bit of a blow that's hard to recover from?
Not really. The world is full of people who are descendants of people who had to flee for various reasons. Except for the Arabs, those descendants generally dust themselves off and get on with their lives. As far as I know, Palestinian Arabs are the only people in the world whose "refugee" status is passed down from generation to generation.

Quote:
You don't think that taking 8 hours to cross 200 miles due to checkpoints isn't a barrier to business development?
No, not really. But at any rate, the Arabs have nobody to blame but themselves for any checkpoints.

Quote:
You don't think that lack of statehood compounds difficulty for foreign investment?
Again, not really. Besides which, the Arabs have nobody to blame for themselves for their lack of statehood. They were offered a Palestinian State 4 times and each time they rejected it.

Quote:
Can you name any refugee camps that have developed thriving economies?
No. Can you name any "refugee camps" where refugee status has been passed down from generation to generation for 50 years? (Except of course for the Palestinian Arabs)

Can you explain why the descendants of Arabs who fled Gaza in 1967 (and live in refugee camps in Jordan) are not being returned to Gaza?

Quote:
You accuse others of bias, but your points illuminate little but your own bias.
If you think I am biased (and you are not), then you should be willing to apply your principles universally. Agreed?

You should be able to give me examples of your points which concern other groups. Agreed?
  #72  
Old 12-11-2012, 07:09 PM
Inbred Mm domesticus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzwire View Post
I seem to recall Israel unilaterally pulling out of Gaza, leaving it to the Palestinians to run their own affairs. In no time at all, the Gazans had elected a Hamas-driven leadership and starting launching indiscriminate rocket attacks. Am I misremembering this?
My remembrance is that in no time at all, the Palestinians elected a Hamas majority legislative body, then Western powers attempted to punish the Palestinians for engaging in democracy by imposing sanctions. After a civil war among the Palestinians, Fatah controlled the West Bank and Hamas the Gaza strip. The sanctions were then replaced with the blockade of Gaza. The number of rocket attacks showed a sharp increase since then. Perhaps my recollection is wrong, but I think your memory might be missing some steps.
  #73  
Old 12-11-2012, 07:21 PM
FinnAgain is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Howth Castle & Environs
Posts: 16,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inbred Mm domesticus View Post
Western powers attempted to punish the Palestinians for engaging in democracy
Could you not find a less accurate, more emotionally loaded way to describe it? Something about stomping kittens, perhaps?

Last edited by FinnAgain; 12-11-2012 at 07:22 PM.
  #74  
Old 12-11-2012, 07:35 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mijin View Post
Why is that, again?

Even if we accept that this is all about Palestinian aggression and Israel is just trying to defend itself, why should that provoke Israel into building more settlements in the west bank?
Why shouldn't they? They have had that territory under their control for decades now...and they were gaining exactly dick by not settling the territory. So, you tell me...what's in it for Israel to not settle that territory with their own, non-rocket firing and non-bomb strapping citizens?
  #75  
Old 12-11-2012, 07:41 PM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mijin View Post
I don't think that anyone should pretend to be anything.[
You've said that the Arabs should not be seeking the trappings of statehood but should be bettering themselves first.
Actually that's not quite what I said. What I said was that the Palestinian Arabs are much more interested in the trappings of statehood (which they believe can be used to undermine Israel) than in doing the actual work of building and bettering themselves.

Quote:
I'm saying it's hard to better yourself while you're not even a country.
Well what is it about "being a country" which makes it easier to better oneself?

And are you claiming that this is the purpose for which the Palestinian Arabs seek the trappings of statehood?

Quote:
If I buy the deeds to some land, I want to know that no-one will dispute my ownership for decades at least. I don't want to be thinking WTF will happen next month.
I'm not sure what your point is here, but if the Palestinian Arabs are truly concerned about disputes over ownership, then they should have simply accepted Israel's most recent statehood offer.

Quote:
Yeah, I'm sure that would be really reassuring to investors: a whole other country might interfere in your affairs,
More reassuring than the alternative.

Anyway, are you saying that the Palestinian Arabs have a "failed state"?
  #76  
Old 12-11-2012, 07:51 PM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by sidecar_jon View Post
the west bleated for "democracy" and the untrustworthy locals voted the wrong way!
I'm not sure what your point is here. Arabs have been voting in Israeli elections for many years now. Many times they have elected representatives who are extremely anti-Israel.

And it's not just elected officials. Competing factions in Arab non-democracies routinely accuse each other of being Zionists. The general consensus in the Arab world is extremely anti-Israel.

Quote:
Isn't it all to convenient and over arching to say "Arab" anyway?
Surely in reality the Arab word is very diverse
Well they are quite non-diverse in their hatred for Israel.
  #77  
Old 12-11-2012, 08:37 PM
bizzwire is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: right behind....YOUR EAR!
Posts: 1,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inbred Mm domesticus View Post
My remembrance is that in no time at all, the Palestinians elected a Hamas majority legislative body, then Western powers attempted to punish the Palestinians for engaging in democracy by imposing sanctions. After a civil war among the Palestinians, Fatah controlled the West Bank and Hamas the Gaza strip. The sanctions were then replaced with the blockade of Gaza. The number of rocket attacks showed a sharp increase since then. Perhaps my recollection is wrong, but I think your memory might be missing some steps.
I remember the steps; you just have them out of order.

Anyway, my initial point was in response to the claim that attacks on Israel were only natural, given their occupation. In this instance, when the occupation was lifted, the attacks continued.
  #78  
Old 12-11-2012, 08:46 PM
Inbred Mm domesticus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzwire View Post
I remember the steps; you just have them out of order.
Could you take the steps I listed and place them in the correct order then?
  #79  
Old 12-11-2012, 11:51 PM
chappachula is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inbred Mm domesticus View Post
..Western powers attempted to punish the Palestinians for engaging in democracy by imposing sanctions.. The number of rocket attacks showed a sharp increase since then.
Oh, so it's okay for there to be rocket attacks, it's just the "sharp increase" that bothers you?

That's the whole root of the problem--after engaging in democracy, the Gazans proudly chose terrorism, not nation-building.

When the Israelis walked out of Gaza, they left behind fully functioning, profitable businesses. Especially the agricultural greenhouses with computerized irrigation systems and valuable contracts with customers in Europe. The Palestinians could have chosen to manage those greenhouses (which no longer exist). Instead, they chose to launch rockets into the schoolyards and apartment buildings of Israel.

But that's okay with you, apparently... as long as the increase in the number of attacks is gradual, and not too sharp.
  #80  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:02 AM
Inbred Mm domesticus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by chappachula View Post
Oh, so it's okay for there to be rocket attacks, it's just the "sharp increase" that bothers you?

That's the whole root of the problem--after engaging in democracy, the Gazans proudly chose terrorism, not nation-building.

When the Israelis walked out of Gaza, they left behind fully functioning, profitable businesses. Especially the agricultural greenhouses with computerized irrigation systems and valuable contracts with customers in Europe. The Palestinians could have chosen to manage those greenhouses (which no longer exist). Instead, they chose to launch rockets into the schoolyards and apartment buildings of Israel.

But that's okay with you, apparently... as long as the increase in the number of attacks is gradual, and not too sharp.
I was listing a series of events in the order in which I thought they occurred. I did so because I think relating the sanctions and eventual blockade directly to rocket attacks is inaccurate and a distortion caused by the sheer number of events that occurred after 2006 and the simultaneous attempts to organize those events in the minds of people who differ in their sympathies for the parties in this conflict. If you think I am saying anything more beyond that then it is a figment of your imagination.
  #81  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:07 AM
bizzwire is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: right behind....YOUR EAR!
Posts: 1,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inbred Mm domesticus View Post
Could you take the steps I listed and place them in the correct order then?
1.Israel withdraws/rockets
2.Hamas elected/rockets
3.'Civil war'/rockets
4.Sanctions/rockets
5.Blockade/rockets
  #82  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:14 AM
bizzwire is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: right behind....YOUR EAR!
Posts: 1,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inbred Mm domesticus View Post
I was listing a series of events in the order in which I thought they occurred. I did so because I think relating the sanctions and eventual blockade directly to rocket attacks is inaccurate and a distortion caused by the sheer number of events that occurred after 2006 and the simultaneous attempts to organize those events in the minds of people who differ in their sympathies for the parties in this conflict. If you think I am saying anything more beyond that then it is a figment of your imagination.
Quibble all you want about the specific timing. Split hairs to your heart's content, but it doesn't alter the fact that the attacks continued when the occupation ended, which was the point.

Why do you steadfastly ignore or gloss over the Palestinian's actions, ot hold them responsible for their actions?
  #83  
Old 12-12-2012, 01:36 AM
Inbred Mm domesticus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzwire View Post
Quibble all you want about the specific timing. Split hairs to your heart's content, but it doesn't alter the fact that the attacks continued when the occupation ended, which was the point.

Why do you steadfastly ignore or gloss over the Palestinian's actions, ot hold them responsible for their actions?
I'm not ignoring or glossing over anything, but I do prefer to focus on the ineffectual, brutal, and unjust nature of collective punishment whether its blockading Gaza or influencing the outcome of Palestinian elections.

Given my interests, I felt that the post you made, regardless of what you are responding to, could also be characterized as glossing over some relevant Israeli/American/Canadian etc. actions.

I also think the willingness to impose sanctions, to impose blockades, arm one group against another, and withhold taxes are clear evidence of continued occupation. I feel there is no reason to differentiate, unless to hair-split, just because one aspect of the occupation has been lifted while the rest of it remains in place.
  #84  
Old 12-12-2012, 03:35 AM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by chappachula View Post

When the Israelis walked out of Gaza, they left behind fully functioning, profitable businesses. Especially the agricultural greenhouses with computerized irrigation systems and valuable contracts with customers in Europe. The Palestinians could have chosen to manage those greenhouses (which no longer exist). Instead, they chose to launch rockets into the schoolyards and apartment buildings of Israel.
Yes, the greenhouses are a good illustration of the Arabs' basic attitude problem.

Here is a picture of the greenhouses, before the Israeli withdrawal.

Apparently wealthy westerners bought the greenhouses and gave them to the Palestinian authority in the weeks leading up to the Gaza withdrawal.

Here is a picture from after the Israeli withdrawal. Apparently the Arabs burned and looted the greenhouses.

Later, the Arabs (apparently) started using the greenhouses as a point of entry for smuggling tunnels: picture

A picture is worth a thousand words. And that folks, is 3000 words showing why Israel is rich and the Arabs are poor. But it must be Israel's fault somehow, right?
  #85  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:15 AM
Mijin's Avatar
Mijin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
Why shouldn't they? They have had that territory under their control for decades now...and they were gaining exactly dick by not settling the territory. So, you tell me...what's in it for Israel to not settle that territory with their own, non-rocket firing and non-bomb strapping citizens?
In this thread and others you've implied that Israel has the moral high ground and it is palestinian aggression that is the main, or even sole cause of all the problems.

But seizing land is an aggressive action, no question. Nothing is provoking Israel into having to do that.
  #86  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:33 AM
Mijin's Avatar
Mijin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazil84 View Post
Well what is it about "being a country" which makes it easier to better oneself?
I don't know why you're insisting on playing dumb on this point.
Yes, being a country, with clear laws, rights, public services including a police force and utilities, able to make international agreements etc, is basically fundamental to modern day prosperity.

Quote:
And are you claiming that this is the purpose for which the Palestinian Arabs seek the trappings of statehood?
I don't claim to be able to read the minds of Palestinians, unlike the people in this thread who are certain they are doing this just to undermine Israel.
I'm responding to the OP. Israelis have a country, the palestinians don't.

Quote:
I'm not sure what your point is here, but if the Palestinian Arabs are truly concerned about disputes over ownership, then they should have simply accepted Israel's most recent statehood offer.
Are you claiming there has been an offer on the table within the last 40 years?

Quote:
More reassuring than the alternative.
I assume by this you're implying it's more reassuring that doing deals with the current palestinian authorities. But of course the present day situation is that our budding entrepreneur must do that anyway, plus have the insecurity of having land seized, checkpoints built nearby etc.

So no, it's not more reassuring.

Quote:
Anyway, are you saying that the Palestinian Arabs have a "failed state"?
There's considerable debate over what constitutes a failed state and whether the palestinian territories count. Probably best we don't go there. No part of my point relies on me labeling that region.
  #87  
Old 12-12-2012, 05:14 AM
chappachula is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mijin View Post
Yes, being a country, with clear laws, rights, public services including a police force and utilities, able to make international agreements etc, is basically fundamental to modern day prosperity
ummm......it may be difficult, but this is exactly what the Israelis did for 40 years before they had a state, and what the Palestinians are refusing to do now. It's called nation building.

Let me repeat myself from my previous post upthread: "Before Israel became a state in 1948, it was conquered and occupied.
But despite the difficulties, the Jewish population living in Palestine focused its energy on the positive aspects of nation building. The Palestinians focus all their energy on the negatives.

During the 40 years before becoming an independent nation, the Israelis built universities, hospitals, banks, electric power stations, the uniquely successful agricultural communes called "kibbutz", and established political parties which took responsibility for their actions and were untainted by corruption."

So it can be done....the only question is why the Palestinians don't want to do it.
Quote:
In this thread you've implied that Israel has the moral high ground and it is palestinian aggression that is the main, or even sole cause of all the problems
I'm not just implying it, I'm proving it. The facts of history show that before it gained independence, Israel built all the positive institutions for a budding nation. The Palestinians have chosen not to.
Look again at the example of the agricultural greenhouses in Gaza.

Result: Israel prospers, Palestine stagnates.




(And don't complain to me about the checkpoints....if the Palestinians want free passage with no checkpoints, all they have to do is stop bombing Israeli busses, schools and restaurants. It's completely within their own control. )

Last edited by chappachula; 12-12-2012 at 05:16 AM.
  #88  
Old 12-12-2012, 06:26 AM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mijin View Post
I don't know why you're insisting on playing dumb on this point.
I'm not playing dumb at all. I'm simply scrutinizing your claims. Then we will see who is playing dumb.

Quote:
Yes, being a country, with clear laws, rights, public services including a police force and utilities,
These things hardly qualify as the trappings of statehood. Note that UN recognition; membership in UNESCO; having foreign amabssadors and embassies; etc. are not necessary to create these things.

Quote:
o make international agreements etc,
Can you give me an example of an international agreement the Palestinian Arabs are unable to make which is a bar to them prospering?

Quote:
I don't claim to be able to read the minds of Palestinians, unlike the people in this thread who are certain they are doing this just to undermine Israel.
Well what exactly do you mean by mind reading? If I look at a person's words and actions and come to a reasonable conclusion about his intent, does that count as mind reading?

And are you denying that it's possible to come to reasonable conclusions about peoples' intentions by looking at their words and actions?

Last year, a senior Fatah member stated the following:

Quote:
The agreement is based on the borders of June 4. While the agreement is on the borders of June 4, the President [Mahmoud Abbas] understands, we understand, and everyone knows that it is impossible to realize the inspiring idea, or the great goal in one stroke. If Israel withdraws from Jerusalem, if Israel uproots the settlements, 650,000 settlers, if Israel removes the (security) fence - what will be with Israel? Israel will come to an end. If I say that I want to remove it from existence, this will be great, great, [but] it is hard. This is not a [stated] policy. You can't say it to the world. You can say it to yourself."
Do you think that I'm a "mind reader" since I can make a pretty good guess about this individuals intentions?

A simple yes or no will do.

Quote:
Are you claiming there has been an offer on the table within the last 40 years?
No I am not. So what? And for what it's worth the Palestinian Arabs could easily announce that they wish to accept the most recent offer of statehood (from 2008) and Israel would almost certainly honor it.

Quote:
But of course the present day situation is that our budding entrepreneur must do that anyway, plus have the insecurity of having land seized,
There's a lot more insecurity under Arab rule, statehood or not. Besides which, Israel is in the West Bank solely as a result of Arab misconduct.

Quote:
There's considerable debate over what constitutes a failed state and whether the palestinian territories count. Probably best we don't go there. No part of my point relies on me labeling that region.
So you are retracting this argument?

Quote:
I think certain "trappings of statehood" are a prerequisite to prosperity. Failed states don't become economic powerhouses.
  #89  
Old 12-12-2012, 06:32 AM
bizzwire is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: right behind....YOUR EAR!
Posts: 1,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inbred Mm domesticus View Post
I'm not ignoring or glossing over anything, but I do prefer to focus on the ineffectual, brutal, and unjust nature of collective punishment whether its blockading Gaza or influencing the outcome of Palestinian elections.

Given my interests, I felt that the post you made, regardless of what you are responding to, could also be characterized as glossing over some relevant Israeli/American/Canadian etc. actions.
Ahh...I get it. You want to focus on Israeli perfidy while I want to point out the proximate causes of Israeli actions.

I guess we're done here, then.
  #90  
Old 12-12-2012, 06:56 AM
Molesworth 2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs View Post
Add 6) constant attacks and harassment by Israel. People who spend their time under occupation, being bombed, being shot, being driven out of their homes, or in refugee camps don't build industrialized nations. I find it highly unlikely that the Israelis would allow them to build such a nation. The Israelis (or anyone else) wouldn't have done much if at all better under the same conditions.
Pretty much this.

Look at the 2006 Lebanon War. The Israelis didn't just attack Lebanese targets of military significance. They destroyed as much of the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon as they could when they had a short window of opportunity to do so. IIRC, they were even taking out things like lighthouses.

If you're an enemy of Israel you don't spend that money on a second school or hospital. No, you spend that money on re-building the first school or hospital that no longer exists.
  #91  
Old 12-12-2012, 07:01 AM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molesworth 2 View Post
\. The Israelis didn't just attack Lebanese targets of military significance. They destroyed as much of the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon as they could when they had a short window of opportunity to do so.
I'm extremely skeptical of this claim. Please show me proof. Also, please show me two instances where the Israelis militarily targeted a school or hospital which was not also being used for military purposes.

Also, are you saying that Lebanon is poor and that it is poor because of Israeli aggression?
  #92  
Old 12-12-2012, 07:15 AM
Mijin's Avatar
Mijin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by chappachula View Post
ummm......it may be difficult, but this is exactly what the Israelis did for 40 years before they had a state, and what the Palestinians are refusing to do now. It's called nation building.
Did they have any issues with a more powerful neighbour arbitrarily building settlements and checkpoints such that it would be impossible to define a border?

Quote:
I'm not just implying it, I'm proving it.
Essentially saying "Sure, we do aggressive and unnecessary things too. But they started it!" is not the moral high ground. Even ignoring that the other side says the same thing.
  #93  
Old 12-12-2012, 07:37 AM
chappachula is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mijin View Post
Did they have any issues with a more powerful neighbour arbitrarily building settlements and checkpoints such that it would be impossible to define a border?
No, they had much,much worse problems. Like getting killed by the local Arabs, who attacked the Israelis whenever they felt like it--while the ruling occupying power (Turks and then the British)prohibited the Israelis from owning weapons to defend themselves. (I have a relative who was a construction worker in Israel in 1933--and had to crawl and hide inside the drum of a concrete mixer truck to save his life, while Arab gangs murdered all his co-workers...and the British policemen nearby sat and did nothing .)
This was not an isolated incident.

And it was certainly impossible for the early Israelis to establish any of the borders of the new nation they were trying to build.

Yet, despite all this...they went ahead with the nation building, and prospered. Unlike the Palestinans.

Last edited by chappachula; 12-12-2012 at 07:40 AM.
  #94  
Old 12-12-2012, 07:56 AM
brazil84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by chappachula View Post
And it was certainly impossible for the early Israelis to establish any of the borders of the new nation they were trying to build.
It's worth noting that the early Zionists purchased and owned a lot of land well outside the borders of what is now Israel.

To this day, the Jewish National Fund owns (at least nominally) over 10,000 acres of land well inside of Syria.

Also, a large percentage of Israeli Jews are descendants of Jews who left all of their property behind and fled the Arab world in the late 40s.

So if Israel wanted to crank up the excuse machine, it would have plenty of fuel. To Israel's credit, it has kept such activities to a minimum.
  #95  
Old 12-12-2012, 08:47 AM
Inbred Mm domesticus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizzwire View Post
Ahh...I get it. You want to focus on Israeli perfidy while I want to point out the proximate causes of Israeli actions.

I guess we're done here, then.
Given your interest in proximate causes, I am surprised you came up with the relationship between rocket attacks and the election of Hamas. The rocket attacks preceded Israel's withdrawal, and followed Israel's withdrawal. The rocket attacks preceded Hamas' victory and followed Hamas' victory. Other than in some people's words, you can see almost no relationship between rocket fire and political variables, except that after the blockade, the rocket fire sharply increased and negotiated ceasefires cause the rocket attacks to decrease. See? I'm interested in proximate causes too, not simply "Israeli perfidy".
  #96  
Old 12-12-2012, 08:58 AM
Malthus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 18,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molesworth 2 View Post
Pretty much this.

Look at the 2006 Lebanon War. The Israelis didn't just attack Lebanese targets of military significance. They destroyed as much of the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon as they could when they had a short window of opportunity to do so. IIRC, they were even taking out things like lighthouses.

If you're an enemy of Israel you don't spend that money on a second school or hospital. No, you spend that money on re-building the first school or hospital that no longer exists.
I recommend looking at the financial figures I posted above. The fact is that despite Israeli actions (never mind thirty-odd years of civil war) as a country, Lebanon - and Jordan - the two countries *most* affected by Israeli emnity - are both doing much, much better financially than either Egypt or Syria - and I doubt any reasonable case can be made that Israel has looted *those* two countries.

In short, Israeli actions cannot explain Arab nations' relative wealth or poverty. Israeli actions could no doubt do some harm, but its neighbouring countries do either well or poorly based on their own internal dynamics.

If your theory were true, Lebanon would be relatively poor and Egypt and Syria would be relatively rich. But the reverse is the case.
  #97  
Old 12-12-2012, 09:44 AM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mijin View Post
In this thread and others you've implied that Israel has the moral high ground and it is palestinian aggression that is the main, or even sole cause of all the problems.

But seizing land is an aggressive action, no question. Nothing is provoking Israel into having to do that.
Well, I never said that Palestinian aggression was the SOLE cause, but it's certainly the main one. As to moral high ground, it's kind of hard to say that the guys launching periodic and random rocket attacks against the civilians in another country, thus provoking a military response that the folks doing those attacks KNOW will kill or harm a non-zero number of THEIR OWN CITIZENS has such a moral position. The Israelis get it by default, unfortunately.

As to seizing land, do you understand that this territory in question (in the West Bank) was seized by Israel in the Six-Day war all the way back in 1967? Hell, most of the freaking posters on this board weren't even BORN when this happened. Again, I'm asking you (since you chose not to answer the actual question but instead tried to play the Emotion Card Without Context)...why SHOULDN'T Israel settle their own citizens into that land at this point? What were they getting by not pushing through settlements in that region? What was the benefit they were gaining by curtailing those settlements? Can you list any?
  #98  
Old 12-12-2012, 10:13 AM
Mijin's Avatar
Mijin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
As to moral high ground, it's kind of hard to say that the guys launching periodic and random rocket attacks against the civilians in another country, thus provoking a military response that the folks doing those attacks KNOW will kill or harm a non-zero number of THEIR OWN CITIZENS has such a moral position. The Israelis get it by default, unfortunately.
No, they don't, because not everyone agrees with that description; others see Israel as the aggressor.

"It's kind of hard to say that the guys launching periodic military strikes on your territory, that kill dozens or hundreds of civilians, thus provoking the only retaliation the Palestinians have available to them, lobbing rockets over (which kill tiny numbers by comparison), has such a moral position".

Just so we're clear BTW, I take no side in this conflict. I'm just aware that both sides claim the other is the aggressor. And really, I don't care who is correct on that point. Conflicts like this end when both sides don't care any more who started it, they just want it to be over.

Quote:
As to seizing land, do you understand that this territory in question (in the West Bank) was seized by Israel in the Six-Day war all the way back in 1967? Hell, most of the freaking posters on this board weren't even BORN when this happened. Again, I'm asking you (since you chose not to answer the actual question but instead tried to play the Emotion Card Without Context)...why SHOULDN'T Israel settle their own citizens into that land at this point? What were they getting by not pushing through settlements in that region? What was the benefit they were gaining by curtailing those settlements? Can you list any?
Morals are the reason you don't just seize land because you can.

And before you start the record "But the arabs...", you can't justify an immoral action in that way.

Last edited by Mijin; 12-12-2012 at 10:14 AM.
  #99  
Old 12-12-2012, 10:16 AM
bizzwire is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: right behind....YOUR EAR!
Posts: 1,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inbred Mm domesticus View Post
Given your interest in proximate causes, I am surprised you came up with the relationship between rocket attacks and the election of Hamas. The rocket attacks preceded Israel's withdrawal, and followed Israel's withdrawal. The rocket attacks preceded Hamas' victory and followed Hamas' victory. Other than in some people's words, you can see almost no relationship between rocket fire and political variables, except that after the blockade, the rocket fire sharply increased and negotiated ceasefires cause the rocket attacks to decrease. See? I'm interested in proximate causes too, not simply "Israeli perfidy".
For the third time, my point was that even when no longer occupied, the attacks continued. I raised this to counter the argument that the Palestinians were justified in these attacks because they were being occupied. Those are really the only timepoints that matter. Your comment that "you can see almost no relationship between rocket fire and political variables" bolsters my point.
  #100  
Old 12-12-2012, 10:20 AM
Malthus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 18,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
As to seizing land, do you understand that this territory in question (in the West Bank) was seized by Israel in the Six-Day war all the way back in 1967? Hell, most of the freaking posters on this board weren't even BORN when this happened. Again, I'm asking you (since you chose not to answer the actual question but instead tried to play the Emotion Card Without Context)...why SHOULDN'T Israel settle their own citizens into that land at this point? What were they getting by not pushing through settlements in that region? What was the benefit they were gaining by curtailing those settlements? Can you list any?
The land was siezed it is true, but from Jordan - which has since disclaimed any responsibility for it. The issue then becomes the rights of self-determination of the people who are presently living on that land.

The Israeli position all along has always been that it would, in effect, recognize those rights as part of a comprehensive peace process - subject to Jerusalem being the Israeli capital and certain territorial adjustments to make Israel more strategically safe. Israel did not want a repeat of the pre-1967 situation in which Jerusalem was divided by what amounted to a militarized frontier - nor would a return to that make sense.

The Israeli temptation, however, is to slice off bits of land above and beyond what is needed for these purposes - and the longer the peace deal seemed elusive, the greater the temptation. This is directly against Israeli self-interest because it makes the primary goal - a comprehensive peace - more difficult for them to achieve.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017