# Do Europeans think Israeli moral leverage re the Holocaust is about played out? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 29, 2003, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195 "2003-06-29T18:45:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/161 "2003-07-03T11:43:07Z")
Um Hank. This was your claim, unrelated to any claim about any that “no one is ever …” > [@](#): > > Anti - semitism is an ugly word that gets thrown around alot by the pro - Israel people as a last resort. If you can’t win fairly just call them anti - semitic. You go on to say how knee jerk this reaction is. Yet you have one anectdote of one poster calling you such a name and not because he was losing an argument, but because the suggestion was so ludicrous that it hard to understand what could motivate it. You keep making that charge that these accusations occur all the time and your basis for it is Sam’s one charge at you? Boy even I know a few more than that, but again they were usually justified. That’s what you need to give up. It happens _rarely_. I only suspect it when there is a pattern of misrepresentation and distortions by a poster and usually with allusions to past negative stereotypes. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/162 "2003-07-03T15:01:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DSeid \* > \*\*Yet you have one anectdote of one poster calling you such a name and not because he was losing an argument, but because the suggestion was so ludicrous that it hard to understand what could motivate it. . \*\* Well…maybe directly and plainly stating that someone is antisemitic isn’t that common, implying it or hinting at it is exceedingly common. In this very thread, at least two posters implied that I had unamed ulterior thoughts and motives for the positions I defended, and I strongly suspect that these unamed ulterior thoughts were “I hate Jews”. And this kind of hints and comments at least are pretty common in Israel-related threads. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/163 "2003-07-03T15:08:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JonBodner \* > \*\*Broaden your scope from the SSDB. In the world at large, Saudi Arabia is considered to be perfectly fine, while Israel is the worst nation on the planet. > > (Yes, there’s a bit of hyperbole there, but not much.) \*\* That must be a joke. Pretty much everywhere, Saudi Arabia is despised and criticized in harsh words. Even amongst arab people, generally speaking, Saudi Arabia is held in contempt. I’m yet to have met a single arab telling me something positive about this country or about the Saudis as a people. But I listened to plenty of highly negative, and actually xenophobic comments about them. Sure, I didn’t conducted a pool in arab countries about this issue, but my anecdotal evidences all hint in the same direction. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/164 "2003-07-03T18:41:41Z")
OK…let’s come back to the job of responding to \*\* Jonbodner\*\* > [@](#): > > No problem. When you make a point that can be nailed down, then I won’t misrepresent it. I did so. It’s very simple and comes down to the following point I stated over and over again : Having some of your ancestors living in some place 2000 years ago don’t give you a legitimate claim to this area. It’s plain nonsentical and an impossible task to try to restore the situation as it was so long ago. The second point being : wanting dearly a homeland don’t give you the right to pick one and push away the people living there. Otherwise, the people who descend from amerindian bands and tribes would have an even more valid right to tell everybody else living in Canada and the US to get the fuck out of there ASAP, for instance. > [@](#): > > But you do think that the wrongs done to the Palestinians should be redressed. Yes. I think so. Because the wrongs done to them are decently recent, that these wrongs can still be documented to some extent, and that part of the victims are still around. Otherwise, any wrong done would never had to be redressed. You could just assault someone in the street, take his wallet and then state “what’s done is done…too bad for you.” Victims have a legitimate claim to ask for a redress of grievances, _and_ at some point there must be a limit to how long you can wait and expect your grievances to be adressed. And 2000 years fell way beyond this limit IMO. > [@](#): > > So, how do you plan to redress their complaints? You have said that Palestinians who left in 1948 should return, and you weren’t sure if their children should have the right of return, too. I don’t remember what I wrote exactly in this part. I was asking questions using the Palestinian example to illustrate why it’s difficult to define a clear cut line for a statute of limitation. > [@](#): > > And since you are insisting that I am putting words in your mouth when I say that you are in favor of returning the Palestinians to Israel proper, I’m glad that we agree that the Palestinians shouldn’t be allowed to return. I didn’t say that, either. I criticized you for responding to a comment I had never made. I plainly not adressed the question. I’ve been talking about the legitimacy of the creation of Israel at the first place, and not about what should be done in my opinion in the current situation, nor from a theorical moral point of view, nor from a practical point of view. > [@](#): > > Why? See above. Because it’s just impossible to redress all the wrong done by everybody to everybody along all the course of history. And even more so because it would be impossible to know who should indemnize who for what. To pick a totally random example, should Iranian citizens be indemnized because hordes of turkish people razed persian cities 1000 years ago? and who should indemnize them? The descendants of the turks who eventually settled in Turkey? The iranians who, by genetic testing, would be proven descendants of turkish people? The country in central asia where the turks were originating from? How would be estimated the indemnization? The value of the goods desctructed/pillaged 1000 years ago? With an interest rate? Should turkish people leave turkey? What part off them? Who should be allowed to claim the land and settle in turkey? The Greeks? The Italians? It’s just non sentical. The claim the Jews have on Israel area is merely a tradition based solely on religion. Is it based on actual ancestry? Look at a whole blond, blue-eyed family of Ashkenazi Jews. How much of their actual, biological ancestors are likely to have been actually living in the middle-east at any point in the past? Nevertheless, due solely to their cultural traditions, and nothing else, they state they have a claim on this land. If you actually include history in the mix, you would have to move around essentially all the population in the world. What the fuck are these Irish people doing in Ireland? Why don’t they come back to central Europe where their celt ancestors came from? How do the Israelis intend to find and indemnize the descendants of the people who were living there before the Hebrews took over? Can Irakis claim that the historically documented rule of the Babylonians over a large part of the middle-east allow them to legitimately claim large track of the neighboring countries? Would their claim on Palestine be legitimate? They invaded it, like the Hebrews did. If not, why? Same question for the Macedonians, for instance? The Hebrews weren’t the first people conquering and living in this area, and they weren’t the last, either. So, why would their arbitrary claim would be anymore valid than the equally old claim of anybody descending from all these people? And from whom do you believe the “arabs” are descending from, exactly? They popped up out of nowhere and suddenly appeared in the middle-east? > [@](#): > > And this is shameful moral equivilence. It’s like saying that NOT beliving in God gives you equal right to work on the sabbath and to murder. Your anti-religion bias is rank bigotry. I didn’t state that there was an equivalency between holding religious beliefs and commiting crimes. I stated that religious beliefs isn’t a valid excuse for crimes commited in the name of one’s religion. Whatever could be the crime. And there’s a significant difference between occupying a foreign land and just working on sabbath. The latter doesn’t harm anybody, the former does. > [@](#): > > So you believe that Israelis have a right to live in Israel and Palestinians do not have a right to be resettled back in Israel. I’ve got to tell you, I don’t see where we disagree. Well, there’s the bit where you think poorly of religion, I guess. Maybe after a few more postings, you’ll be telling me that you’re now a Born-Again Christian. The way you’re presenting things make it appears as if I had changed my mind during the debate. That’s dishonnest. I wrote the part about Israli-born citizens having the right to live in Israel in my very first post in this thread. Before you began to attack my position. > [@](#): > > I said what I said, because it accurately reflected what the original Jewish pioneers who returned to Israel thought. They weren’t looking for a state (they started returning 10-20 years before Herzl founded Zionism). Then fine. If they merely wanted to go to some place they felt was home and the people already living there allowed them in, I’ve no issue with that. Like with the dutch coming to live in the US after having been allowed in and gotten a green card. What I have an issue with is the massive move of people from faraway countries settling there with the blessings of a colonial power ruling the area despite the opposition of the locals. If you don’t want to call this colonialism, then fine, find another word. But “immigration” certainly doesn’t describe correctly the process. > [@](#): > > They did have a say in it. They fought a war over it. They lost. So, now, we’re coming to the heart of the issue. The only to have a say in the issue was for them to take arms and fight the zionists. We fully agree on this one. And we’re talking about “might makes right” once again. You won the war? Your claim is legitimate. You lost it? Too bad for you. And same would apply to the Jews. They had a say in the situation in Israel. The fought against the Romans. They lost. From then on, they didn’t have any legitimate claim on this land, either, following this logic. > [@](#): > > You seem to think that the Western Powers dispatched armies or something to make the state of Israel. They didn’t. I never said nor wrote that. I just said that the Palestinians didn’t have any say in the matter. It was settled by foreign powers, which stated : “from now on, there will be a recognized Jewish state there”. > [@](#): > > The various Jewish terrorist groups (and yes, I will say they were terrorists, as they certainly were, and I don’t think that what they did was right) pissed off the Brittish so much, they were siding with the Arabs by the end of the Mandate. No one gave the Jews anything to defend Israel. Jews around the world raised money and bought crappy Axis weapons and sent them to Israel (irony of ironies, really). The UN declared the State of Israel, and then said, “good luck!” while the Arab armies invaded. Whether or not they received any outside help is irrelevant. The issue is : “were their justifications to create a jewish state legitimate or not?”. > [@](#): > > As for your statment that how strongly you want something being irrelevent is false. No one in their right minds thought the Jews would win in 1948 (or in 1967; IIRC, in June 1967, de Gaulle had a speech prepared to lament the destruction of Israel). But the fact is, they wanted it more. 10% of the Jewish population died in war of independence, but they were fighting for their home, and they won. I’ve no clue who was thinking what about the outcome of the 1948 war. And yes…it’s still irrelevant. Whatever De Gaulle thought about the military odds has no bearing on the legitimacy of the zionists’ position. As for the Jews fighting for their home, the Arabs were fighting for their home too. Absolutely no difference, here. The only difference being of course that they lost. If you consider this as an argument rather than an irrelevant history course, then this argument would be once again “might makes right”. > [@](#): > > Perhaps. I just take what the Palestinians say at face value. They say they want to kill all the Jews. Yes. And i’m going to take at face value what the “Israelis” say, too. For instance, in the website \*\* december \*\* procided a link to at the beginning of this thread. The comments about squeashing the arabs like cockroaches, for instance. > [@](#): > > They say they want to stop the “Judiazation” of a city that has had a majority Jewish population for centuries, and which is at the center of the Jewish religion. So, if that makes me psychic, then I’m a psychic. Are you actually contending that Jerusalem hasn’t been “Judaized”, as a policy? Though that also would be another debate… > [@](#): > > Oh it’s easy to remember the treatment of Jews under Jordan’s rule of Jerusalem; Jordan threw them all out. They destroyed the cemetery on the Mount of Olives that dated back to Roman times, using the tombstones to pave the streets. They blew up centries-old synagogues. They used the area around the Western Wall as a garbage dump. And as I wrote in the part of the post you’re responding to, the future actions of the jordanians, which were a consequence of the creation of the state of Israel can’t be used as a justification for having created Israel. Or else, you could say for instance : “Japan had the right to attack Pearl harbor since the americans dropped a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima”. that’s precisely why i stated that post-hoc justification of the creation of Israel based on the future events caused by this creation just can’t fly. > [@](#): > > And there is zero reason to believe that things would be any different under Palestinian rule. [:quote] > > I admit that, would I be currently an Israeli citizen, i wouldn’t want to come to be placed under Palestinian soveriegnty. But it still has no bearing on the legitimacy of the creation of Israel at the first place. > > > [@](#): > > > > During the 1930’s, there was awful warfare in the streets of Jerusalem. There was certainly an Arab attempt (led by Arafat’s uncle, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who was a buddy of Hitler’s) to drive the Jews out of Jerusalem. So your history isn’t so good. > > That I didn’t know (apart the “buddy of Hitler” part…though this would need to be presented in a different way because stating it this way is misleading). i’ll take your word for it and concede the point. > > By the way, I note that you suddenly discovered that Arafat had some links with Palestine, after all. > > > [@](#): > > > > Jews did go to other parts of Palestine from Hebron in 1929 when Arabs started murdering them. There had been Jews in Hebron for a very long time (it was where Abraham lived and is buried), and in 1929 the community was driven out to other parts of Palestine. > > Though I knew there had been a Jewish community in Hebron for a very long time, I didn’t know about them being driven out in 1929, so I won’t comment. > > > [@](#): > > > > Now the Jews who returned to Hebron in 1967 are treated by the world as evil usurpers. Nope, no double standards there. > > Depends. Are the Jews currently living in Hebron related with the community which lived there before or not. That’s the important point. I just don’t believe that “I’m Jew” gives you the right to be compensated for something wrong which happened to an unrelated person which happened to be Jewish too. For instance, a Jew who recently immigrated to israel can’t claim that the fact that _other Jews_ who were living in Palestine in 1929 were evicted gives him the right to live there. > > And I’m under the understanding that a significant part of the current Jewish population in Hebron belong to the “Greater Isreal should be ours because Gos said so” crowd rather than to the “I’ve the right to live in Hebron because i’ve my family roots here” crowd. > > Or else, by the same logic, I could, if my neighbor is wrongfully evicted, go to a court and ask to be indemnized. Because…see…he’s my neighbor/cousin/friend…so I should be personnally compensated for what happened to him. > > > [@](#): > > > > See, there’s the colonialism thing again. Do you bring this up in everyday conversation? > > I just said if you’re settling a place which is ruled by a colonial power against the will of the local, it makes absolutely no difference whether this place is situated in Uganda or in Palestine. It’s _exactly_ the same thing. So, if you think that the Jews settling in Uganda would have been colonialism, the it follows that the Jews settling in Palestine was colonialism too. Either none is, either both are. > > > [@](#): > > > > Aha! Something we disagree about. Well, I don’t think either one of us is going to convince the other. > > I don’t think so, either. And since it seems that the kernel of your position about the legitimacy of Israel is “Jews were living there 2000 years ago” , I think this debate is pointless. > > And I would add that there aren’t many people who would be convinced by this argument, except from (a part of) the Jews and (a tiny part of) the christians (essentially fundamentalists). > > > [@](#): > > > > What made the Turks legitimate and the British illegitimate? Skin color? The Turks were hated, by the natives, too. > > That would be because I’m under the impression that on the overall, the Turkish rule was more generally accepted as legitimate by the local population than the british mandate would be later. I suppose I would need someone more aknowledgeable to post and settle this issue (or at least give some reassonably accurate informations) \*\* Tamerlane \*\* ? Are you around here? > > > [@](#): > > > > And it wasn’t accepted by the Turks. But that’s OK, because as I said before, the returning Jews weren’t looking for their own country at first. > > And I’ve no issue with that. Only once it became clear that they would need to fight for the right to stay in the land they considered their homeland did the need for a state arise. > [@](#): > > Now, I begin to have an issue. It falls down to : “They don’t want us to live here? Then let’s take over the place by force”. Might makes right, once again. So what about Arabs who came to Palestine after the 1880s? Did they have more right to the land than the Jews did? Because the population of Palestine in the 1880s was pretty tiny. Many of the people who now claim refugee status come from familes that entered Palestine at the same time as the Jews. Why one group is legitimate and the other is illegitimate smacks of racism to me. [/quote] Same answers than above : people who came peacefully and were allowed in, Jewish or Arabs, had every right to staty. People who forced their way in didn’t. Beside, anybody whose family has been living in Palestine since 1880 has a _way_ more valid right to stay, than, say, a french Jew who just decide to fly on the next plane and apply for Israeli citizenship. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/165 "2003-07-03T18:44:12Z")
> [@](#): > > This is almost certainly false. Arabs didn’t enter into Palestine until the 7th century. Are you actually seriously believing that all the populations we now call “arabs” are only the direct descendants of the people who lived in Arabia in the VIIth century??? Are you joking or am I misunderstanding what you mean??? > [@](#): > > And as I just mentioned, there was a HUGE jump in population in Palestine after the 1880s. Relatively speaking, very few of the Palestinians who claim refugee status are from families that had been in the area for long. And even fewer of the Israli Jewish population in Israel are from families that had been in the area for long. Your point is? That both have a legitimate right to live in Israel or that none of them has such a right? Or are you thinking about some rule like “Arabs whose familes had not been in the area for long have no right to stay, but Jews whose families had not been in the area for long have every right to”? I’m sorry, but this would _stink_ ethnic segregation. > [@](#): > > Well, then why does France have the borders it does? Why is Alsaice part of your country? Why isn’t it German territory? Doesn’t change the fact that taking a place by force isn’t a justification, but a method, as I wrote. So, I don’t know in what way it contradicts my statement. > [@](#): > > If you are going to argue that you are right, you should be able to say WHY you are right. 2000 years old claim are definitely not valid. Claims from people who were personnally wronged are definitely valid. That might appear to be arbitrary to you, but I’ve the feeling that most people would agree with me on these two points. And, since your opinion seems to be the reverse : “2000 years old claims are legitimate, but claims from people personnally wronged aren’t” I would say it seems extremely arbitrary to me too. And actually extremely weird. > [@](#): > > I think that while might does not make right, it sure settles the argument when all other means fail. The simple reason why Israel exists now is because the Jews won in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973. That’s certainly true. But since we’re talking about the legitimacy of the creation of Israel, this statement definitely means “might makes right”, sorry. > [@](#): > > I feel badly for the Palestinians […] However, I also know that letting Palestinians back into Israel will destroy Israel, and I don’t want Israel destroyed. If the Palestinians can live in peace with Israel with a state in Gaza and the West Bank and some sort of sharing agreement for Jerusalem, fine. That’s quite irrelevant to our argument about the legitimacy of Israel. We weren’t talking about the solution which should be implemented. > [@](#): > > If not, then the least worst solution is, unfortunately, massive deportation from the West Bank. But they aren’t going back to Israel, and they lost their right to live in Israel when they lost the last 5 wars. Wel…This last one irritates me a lot. I’m not going to begin a rant, but viewed that way, there are two equally “least worst” solutions : deporting all the Palestinians _or_ deporting all the Jews. I perceive no difference. And your last sentence is once again a “might makes right” argument. Beside, where would the Palestinian be deported exactly??? Would have a random country to be invaded just in order to drop the palestinians there??? > [@](#): > > I really don’t like the idea of mass deportation. That’s so kind of you. Should I congratulate you? > [@](#): > > In fact, I hate it. But the other options are genocide, either of the Jews or the Palestinians, and I hate those options more. There’s also the solution of deporting the Jews, as i already mentionned, while we’re at it?. But this one seems worst to you than Genocide. Or just killing them all, Jews and Palestinians alike. Whatever… Should I understand that the Palestinians are better off living in refugee camps because the only other solutions you can figure out are ethnic cleansing (deporting them all) or genocide? Your statements really become to _reek_. > [@](#): > > But mass deportations have happened repeately in the 20th century. A million Hindus and Muslims moved when Pakistan split from India. Greek and Turkish Cypriots were moved. The Palestinians need to either accept that they are no different from Indians, Pakistanis, Cypriots, Germans, and everyone else who was relocated after their side lost. 1°) The fact that “bad things ™” were done in the past doesn’t justify doing the same now. 2°) Pragmatically speaking : all these people were resettled somewhere where people were willing to accept them at least to some extent. Germans in Germany, Cypriots on the other side of the island, etc…Where do you think the Palestinians would be deported to after this ethnic cleansing, exactly? 3°) It still _reeks_. Sorry, I can’t help myself. > [@](#): > > And let me tell you, if a REALLY crazy right-wing government gets elected in Israel due to a massive Palestinian atrocity (nuclear bomb in Tel Aviv, perhaps?), there won’t be any question as to whether the Palestinians should have a right of return, because there won’t be any left. In other words, how bad the situation of the Palestinian could be doesn’t really matter, since it could be worst and the Israelis could just choose to commit a genocide instead, so we shouldn’t really feel concerned about the Palestinians as long as they don’t don’t all lie in mass graves. I think I need to open the window for some fresh air… > [@](#): > > You mean like the Communist Manifesto? Or do only religious books get scorn from you? For instance the communist manifesto. Because you can argue for and against it on a rational basis. There’s no such possibility with a religious book. Either you believe in God, and in _this_ particular god, and even in a particular interpretation of the “words” of this particular god, and then, it’s absolutely true without possible debate, either you don’t belong to this particular religion, and it’s absolutely irrelevant, without possible debate. > [@](#): > > Then why bring it up? In order to point out that the Hebrews weren’t there before everybody else, according to what you believe as being an “evidence”. If doesn’t matter whether they slaughtered the previous inhabitants, women and children included because these other people too had killed women and children or not. That wasn’t my point. There has been plenty of threads deedicaced solely to the various atrocities depicted in the bible where you argue about this particular issue. > [@](#): > > You refused to define what rights are and where they come from. I think you should stop using that word if you won’t define it. Indeed, I don’t have any abstract definition of “rights” in mind which would support my position. Let’s say I’ve only the “feeling” that someone who is living somewhere has more right to stay there than someone whose religious tradition tells him his ancestors were living at the same place 2000 years ago. On what definition of “right” is based your assumption that the reverse is true. Until know it seems to be “right is defined by what is written in my sacred book” and “right is defined by whoever wins the war”. > [@](#): > > After WW II, Europe was covered in refugee camps. They were empty by the 50’s, because the Europeans took in the refugees. The Palestinians are still in camps because they are being used as political pawns by other Arabs and Muslims. The fact that Palestinians has been used as political pawns still doesn’t mean that they’ve not been wronged by the Israelis. The fact there were issues following WWII doesn’t mean that the current issues don’t need to be adressed. The europeans took in the refugees they thought where their owns. Who’s going to take in the Palestinians? And anyway, it’s still unrelated to the legitimacy of the cretion of the Jewish state. I don’t want to debate about religion because there’s no point. However, when you don’t give specific answers and instead rely on some sort of general feeling, I consider that a religious argument, too. > [@](#): > > My answer is that statute of limitations is bunk. I was hoping that you would see that, but I guess you haven’t. So, I assume you think that no wrong done should be redressed? For instance, if I manage to steal your wallet, there’s no reason to adress your complaint? I got it right? (though apparently there’s an exception if my great-great…grandfather stole the wallet of your great-great-great…grandfather 2000 years ago) I doubt it. You most certainly do think that wrongs done should be adressed. But you also think that wrongs done to the Palestinians don’t need to. So, you must necessarily have in mind some concept or feeling about the statute of limitations. > [@](#): > > Except that this standard has never actually been applied in the history of, well, history. There are probably still Germans alive who were booted from Sudetenland and from Poland. They ain’t going back, and no one is talking about boycotting Poland or the Czech Republic until they do. But Israel gets singled out. Go figure. Once again, wrongs done in the past don’t excuse wrongs done in the present. And perhaps people feel less concerned about the Germans who were expelled from the Sudeten and who are living a rather comfortable life in Germany than about the huge number of palestinians who are _still currently_ living cramped in refugees camps. People feel more concerned about current issues which are all over the medias than about 50 y.o. issues most of them never heard about. Yes, that’s really strange. Must be because people hate the Jews. I can’t see any other explanation. > [@](#): > > You just described the US, AU, NZ, and CA pretty well. Indeed. And, as I already stated, the settlers taking over the land in the US, Australia, etc…didn’t have any more right to do so than the Israeli had to take over Palestine. So, I don’t see any contradiction. > [@](#): > > Yet no one is boycotting their graduate students or calling Kiwis Nazis. Perhaps people would if the natives were currently treated in the US in the same way they used to be 150 years ago. Don’t you think so? Besides, there are plenty of people who are concerned about the issues of the aborigene rights in Australia, for instance. It has been a very hot topic down there quite recently, IIRC (precisely related to claims on land, actually). But looking around, though I know there are some issues in ireservations in the US, I wasn’t aware the Cherokees were living in refugee camps or were denied the right to leave their reservations, or had no political rights re. the government which rule the land they’re living on, etc…Maybe I’m not well-informed… > [@](#): > > I want to know the reason for the double standard. Saying that it happened a long time ago is not an answer that I find acceptable. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. I’m sorry but it is an answer I find acceptable and that most people find acceptable. People feel much more about things which are currently happening than about things they learn about in history books (but as soon as you replace the history book by “sacred scripture”, of course…) ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/166 "2003-07-03T18:48:09Z")
I’m going to stop responding to you, \*\* Jonbodner \*\* . It’s the first time i’ve to cut my post in half on this board because it was too long, and I only replied to the first part of your response. I give up, it takes too much time. Anyway, I think we’ve both made our points clear. ---
**Author:** ![JonBodner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@JonBodner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonBodner)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/167 "2003-07-03T19:11:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by clairobscur \* > \*\*That must be a joke. Pretty much everywhere, Saudi Arabia is despised and criticized in harsh words. Even amongst arab people, generally speaking, Saudi Arabia is held in contempt. I’m yet to have met a single arab telling me something positive about this country or about the Saudis as a people. But I listened to plenty of highly negative, and actually xenophobic comments about them. Sure, I didn’t conducted a pool in arab countries about this issue, but my anecdotal evidences all hint in the same direction. \*\* Um, I can’t argue against anecdotal evidence, so I won’t. However, Saudi Arabia is going to host a human right conference in October, and human rights NGOs are going to attend: [http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=28245&d=2&m=7&y=2003](http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=28245&d=2&m=7&y=2003) Think they’d go to a human rights conference hosted by Israel? There is also the experience of the Durban conference in 2001. Even Mary Robinson, no friend of Israel, was troubled by the anti-Israel and anti-semitic tone. I don’t remember any anti-Saudi Arabia statements from Durban, but I could be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![JonBodner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@JonBodner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonBodner)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/168 "2003-07-03T19:12:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by clairobscur \* > \*\*I’m going to stop responding to you, \*\* Jonbodner \*\* . It’s the first time i’ve to cut my post in half on this board because it was too long, and I only replied to the first part of your response. > > I give up, it takes too much time. Anyway, I think we’ve both made our points clear. \*\* Shucks. I was going to defend myself against your charges of racism, but I guess I won’t bother. ---
**Author:** ![JonBodner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@JonBodner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonBodner)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/169 "2003-07-03T19:20:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Hank Fescue \* > Did you even read this cite ? Yes, it’s an even-handed look at what happened, from a web site that tries to be even handed as it promotes peace. It looks like you’re hoping that by cherry-picking quotes to support your side, other people won’t read the cite, as it refutes your statement that calls from the Arabs to the Palestinians to get out of the way never occured. But I could be wrong. I really encourage everyone to spend time on [www.mideastweb.org](http://www.mideastweb.org) if they care about this issue. If they are just looking for slanted evidence, well I’m sure that someone will gather it here. ---
**Author:** ![MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bb73d2/32.png) [@MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MC_Master_of_Ceremonies)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/170 "2003-07-03T19:48:17Z")
Yep, on a GQ thread someone asked for an unbiased middle-east source and that’s the one I recomended. ---
**Author:** ![JonBodner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@JonBodner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonBodner)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/171 "2003-07-03T20:37:24Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JonBodner \* > \*\*Shucks. I was going to defend myself against your charges of racism, but I guess I won’t bother. \*\* OK, I will defend myself after all; I’ve got some time today. The reason I didn’t talk about a massive deportation of Jews is because there won’t be one. If Arab armies invade Israel and win, the Jews will be slaughtered. There will be no forcing out of their homes. There will be simply be murder on an awful scale. This is, of course, if you believe what the Arabs themselves say. If you think that the Arabs say they want to commit genocide, but really they just want to do something else, that’s fine, but it’s not in accordance with reality. Meanwhile the most rabid voices in Israel call for expulsion of the Palestinians, not mass murder (and political parties like Kach and Kahane Chai that call for expulsion are outlawed in Israel). I’m sure that if you wanted to, you could find Israelis that want to commit genocide, but you won’t see them in positions of power, and they have no support from the Israeli population as a whole. The way I see it, there are only three options on the table: peace with a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, Jerusalem shared, and no right of return for Palestinians, mass expulsion of the Palestinians, mass murder of the Jews and/or the Palestinians. I’m hoping for #1, but rather than have #3, I’ll take #2, as the least worst option is what often wins out in the real world. If you think this is racist, fine, so be it. But I don’t. As to where to put any expelled Palestinians, how about the homes of the 630,000 Jews who were thrown out of Arab countries? There are also the homes of the six million Jews killed in the Holocaust. Between the two, there’s probably enough housing. And I’m only being slightly flippant here. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Fescue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/49beb7/32.png) [@Hank\_Fescue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Fescue)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/172 "2003-07-03T21:25:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DSeid \* > \*\*Um Hank. This was your claim, unrelated to any claim about any that “no one is ever …” You go on to say how knee jerk this reaction is. Yet you have one anectdote of one poster calling you such a name and not because he was losing an argument, but because the suggestion was so ludicrous that it hard to understand what could motivate it. You keep making that charge that these accusations occur all the time and your basis for it is Sam’s one charge at you? Boy even I know a few more than that, but again they were usually justified. That’s what you need to give up. It happens _rarely_. I only suspect it when there is a pattern of misrepresentation and distortions by a poster and usually with allusions to past negative stereotypes. \*\* It is knee jerk and it is common. ABC news even did a story on it. Here is what they describe as a “typical” e mail. > [@](#): > > “Your anti-Semitic approach to Israel is the reason I stopped watching your show,” one viewer wrote in a typical e-mail to ABCNEWS’ Nightline. [http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/israel\_antisemitism020421.html](http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/israel_antisemitism020421.html) If criticism of Israel is labeled anti - semitic commonly enough to make a news story out of it I think my point stands. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Fescue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/49beb7/32.png) [@Hank\_Fescue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Fescue)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/173 "2003-07-03T21:35:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DSeid \* > \*\*Hank, > > I did read the cited page. A very fair even handed recapitulation of the history. Documents well that one factor involved in the flight of Arabs was encouragement by Arab leadership. That another was percieved fear, and another was fear based on incidents of real violence althoughThis was not a planned public policy. The authors also note And of course documents that the same type of expulsion, confiscation etc occurred to Jews in Arab areas without exception. Now if you read that cite and want to take bits that only support what you want to see go ahead, but such a tactic does make one suspect that your motivations are not ones of actually understanding the truth. \*\* The truth is understood. Where it has been stated here that the “vast majority” of Arabs left volutarily by the call of Arab leaders, the cite proves otherwise. The incidents of Arabs ordered to flee are not much more than a foot note based on a few statements and rumors. OTOH, the intentions of the Israeli leadership are documented quite well. It only takes common to sense to know that the only course to achieve a Jewish state with a Jewish majority in a nearly total Arab area is get riof the Arabs. The take is “we came here and the Arabs just decided to leave.” How convienient. Get a grip on reality. The plan was to get rid of the Arabs from day one. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/174 "2003-07-03T22:10:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JonBodner \* > \*\*As to where to put any expelled Palestinians, how about the homes of the 630,000 Jews who were thrown out of Arab countries? There are also the homes of the six million Jews killed in the Holocaust. Between the two, there’s probably enough housing. And I’m only being slightly flippant here. \*\* I’m going to answer to this one. We aren’t talking about great principles anymore, here, but about a practical case : Israel round up the Jews and decide to deport them. But to deport them where and how? Currently, nobody want them in. So, the only way (apart from letting them starving in a no-man’s land until someone accept to take them in) would be to _force_ another country to let them in. For instance attacking Jordan, conquering part of its territory, and once done, bringing the Palestinians in then leaving and letting the Jordanians sort out the isssue. I really can’t see another way this could be achieved, I mean without a war with whatever country Israel would pick as convenient to deport the Palestinians. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/175 "2003-07-03T22:29:19Z")
> [@](#): > > i]Originally posted by clairobscur \* > > That would be because I’m under the impression that on the overall, the Turkish rule was more generally accepted as legitimate by the local population than the british mandate would be later. I suppose I would need someone more aknowledgeable to post and settle this issue (or at least give some reassonably accurate informations) \*\* Tamerlane \*\* ? Are you around here? \*…In fact, as Foreign Office and Arab Bureau reports later were to show, Moslem opinion, even in non-Turkish areas, generally supported the Ottoman Empire and its alliance with Germany. Storrs was wrong , too, in supposing that Moslems were opposed to a Jewish Palestine because of the war; Moslem opposition to a Jewish Palestine had arisen long before the war, in the wake of Zionist colonization at the end of the 19th century. * * * In evaluating reports that there was dissatisfaction with Ottoman rule in some sections of the empire, British Cairo particularly misunderstood one of the salient features of the Moslem Middle East: to the extent it was politically conscious, it was not willing to be ruled by non-Moslems. Behind enemy lines there were Moslems who were dissatisfied with the Young Turk government, but they proposed to replace it with a different Turklish government, or at any rate an Islamic government. They regarded rule by Christian European power, such as Britain, as intolerable.\* From A Peace To End All Peace:_The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East_ by David Fromkin ( 1989, Avon Books ). - Tamerlane ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2003, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/176 "2003-07-04T01:09:13Z")
Thanks, \*\* Tamerlane \*\*. I didn’t really expect that you would notice my request for more infos, so I’m pleasantly surprised. Seems you’re as talented as the djinns in the arabian nights tales; we only have to call for you and you appear in a puff of smoke, bringing with you any cite we could be wishing for from your magical unending library. ---
**Author:** ![OliverH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/278dde/32.png) [@OliverH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OliverH)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2003, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/177 "2003-07-04T15:28:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JonBodner \* > \*\*Um, I can’t argue against anecdotal evidence, so I won’t. > > However, Saudi Arabia is going to host a human right conference in October, and human rights NGOs are going to attend: > > [http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=28245&d=2&m=7&y=2003](http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=28245&d=2&m=7&y=2003) > > Think they’d go to a human rights conference hosted by Israel? > \*\* Do you have any evidence to the contrary? Actually, I am not sure why you bring up this point at all. The fact that Saudi Arabia is hosting such a conference is hardly something detrimental to the human rights situation there. Quite the contrary, the Gulf Cooperation Council has recently established a human rights round table and promised to improve the situation in their territories in negotiations, among others, with the EU, in preparation of free trade agreements. Hosting a human rights conference sounds like a pretty good step on establishing certain norms. But I take it you would prefer no developments to take place? > [@](#): > > \*\* > There is also the experience of the Durban conference in 2001. Even Mary Robinson, no friend of Israel, was troubled by the anti-Israel and anti-semitic tone. I don’t remember any anti-Saudi Arabia statements from Durban, but I could be wrong. \*\* The fact that you don’t remember any such statements hardly proves anything, other than that you didn’t notice any. Which might be due to a)you not hearing any, for a variety of factors, which can, but not necessarily do, include not _wanting_ to hear any b)none being reported by the media in your area, which might be due to either bias, or perceived lack of public interest or, c)that there weren’t any. It’s the latter you have to show to have a case. Even then, you’d have to show relevance to the issue, given that the Durban conference was one that specifically dealt with racism, not with human rights problems in general. ---
**Author:** ![OliverH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/278dde/32.png) [@OliverH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OliverH)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2003, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/178 "2003-07-04T15:37:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JonBodner \* > \*\*OK, I will defend myself after all; I’ve got some time today. > > The reason I didn’t talk about a massive deportation of Jews is because there won’t be one. If Arab armies invade Israel and win, the Jews will be slaughtered. There will be no forcing out of their homes. There will be simply be murder on an awful scale. > > This is, of course, if you believe what the Arabs themselves say. If you think that the Arabs say they want to commit genocide, but really they just want to do something else, that’s fine, but it’s not in accordance with reality. \*\* What is not in accordance with reality is labeling the position of radical minorities as that of ‘the Arabs’. It is probaly precisely that what is considered racism. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Meanwhile the most rabid voices in Israel call for expulsion of the Palestinians, not mass murder (and political parties like Kach and Kahane Chai that call for expulsion are outlawed in Israel). \*\* Last I checked, Netanyahu was a politician with quite some support, and not member of an outlawed political party. He called for measures that translate to ethnic cleansing repeatedly. > [@](#): > > \*\* > I’m sure that if you wanted to, you could find Israelis that want to commit genocide, but you won’t see them in positions of power, and they have no support from the Israeli population as a whole.\*\* And yet you engage in precisely that behavior with the arab side. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2003, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/179 "2003-07-04T20:23:04Z")
Oliver, Please support your statement about Netanyahu advocating “ethnic cleansing.” I am no Bibi fan, and I am for a crackdown on any discriminatory practices whether it is against Arab citizens of Israel, or Jewish citizens in Arab lands, or Israeli scholars in Europe, or immigrants in general in the US, but this kind of hyperbole is unhelpful. Netanyahu is a hardliner with some fair amount of support. He believes that the PA cannot be trusted to deliver on security, that Arafat and others still desire the destruction of Israel in its entirity, and that Israel must take tough actions to provide for its security in other ways. He plays well to those who lust after a greater Israel. And the less that the PA does to crackdown on those who attack Israel the more his POV will gain support among others who just want to be able to get on a bus without fear. But he has never called for anything that resembles ethnic cleansing. And while it is an overstatement to call the POV that Israel should be destroyed with mass slaughter as _the_ Arab POV, it is fair to say that Israel’s destruction as a goal is well supported in the Arab mainstream, and not just among a few small radical factions. Conversely most Israelis (including Arab-Israelis) believe that peace is possible and would be willing to give up most of the West Bank and Gaza to get it. There is insignificant support for mass deportations let alone for worse. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Fescue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/49beb7/32.png) [@Hank\_Fescue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Fescue)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2003, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195/180 "2003-07-04T20:47:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DSeid \* > \*\*Oliver, > > Please support your statement about Netanyahu advocating “ethnic cleansing.” I am no Bibi fan, and I am for a crackdown on any discriminatory practices whether it is against Arab citizens of Israel, or Jewish citizens in Arab lands, or Israeli scholars in Europe, or immigrants in general in the US, but this kind of hyperbole is unhelpful. Netanyahu is a hardliner with some fair amount of support. He believes that the PA cannot be trusted to deliver on security, that Arafat and others still desire the destruction of Israel in its entirity, and that Israel must take tough actions to provide for its security in other ways. He plays well to those who lust after a greater Israel. And the less that the PA does to crackdown on those who attack Israel the more his POV will gain support among others who just want to be able to get on a bus without fear. But he has never called for anything that resembles ethnic cleansing. > \*\* Actually he has advocated ethnic cleansing and he is damn sneaky about it too. > [@](#): > > “Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass explosions among the Arabs of the territories.” Benyamin Netanyahu, then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, former Prime Minister of Israel, tells students at Bar Ilan University, From the Israeli journal Hotam, November 24, 1989. > [@](#): > > Ethnic Cleansing is a process in which advancing army of one ethnic group expels civilians of other ethnic groups from towns and villages it conquers in order to create ethnically pure enclaves for members of their ethnic group. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-think-israeli-moral-leverage-re-the-holocaust-is-about-played-out/185195.md?page=10)