# So what is the "final solution"? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 31, 2010, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-is-the-final-solution/552095 "2010-08-31T04:11:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2010, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-is-the-final-solution/552095/161 "2010-09-07T17:34:21Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > > > What happens when Iran goes nuclear? What happens when Turkey and Pakistan get radicalized? Then it will be too late to negotiate and build good will. > > Turkey and Pakistan turning to radicalism will, if it happens, certainly have very little to do with Israel’s concessions (or lack of them) in the ongoing peace process, and much to do with the increasing popularity of Islamic radicalism generally in those countries. > > In short, the two are mostly independant variables: Israel could make all the concessions in the world, and those countries could still turn to radicalism (and hate Israel); conversely, Israel could make no concessions whatsoever, and they could not - assuming they turn to some sort of pragmatism and away from Islamic radicalism. > > Note that this has nothing to do with the desireability of making concessions in their own right - but the notion that a failure to do so will result in a catestrophic lack of good will in places like Iran and Pakistan is nonsense. Their hatred of Israel is not based on their perception of Israeli negotiating behaviour - it is ideological. What do YOU think is the basis for their hatred of Israel? Certainly these countries were not less hospitable to Jews than most European countries up until the creation of the state of Israel. And while Europe’s anti-semitism is still pretty bad, its better than it was a century ago, the anti-semitism in the arab community seems to have accelerated considerably since about 1948 or so. I’m not saying that correlation implies causation but the fact radicalism in the middle east seems to start with the Palestinian conflict and expand outwards from tehre gives you reason to at least investigate whether there is some causation there. This doesn’t mean that an equitable solution to the Palestinian conflict will put the geni back in the bottle but continuing the current attitude and approach is likely to accelerate radicalism and undermine attempts by more moderate elements to reverse this radicalism. > [@](#): > > Israel attempting to placate or appease the current gov’t of (say) Iran is a hopeless endeavour. Was Iran so anti-semetic in 1947? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2010, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-is-the-final-solution/552095/162 "2010-09-07T17:39:54Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > > > We’ve done this a million times. Look at the maps of Jewish land ownership before 1948. It does not come close to comprising the modern state of Israel or even the state of Israel proposed by the UN. > > > > [Jewish Owned Land as of 1947 - Palestine Remembered](http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story571.html) > > [http://www.zionism-israel.com/maps/Palestine\_Land\_Ownership.htm](http://www.zionism-israel.com/maps/Palestine_Land_Ownership.htm) > > > > We are where we are but you are revising history to gloss over the fact that we did not get here by virtue of the exercise of jewish rights. > > You’re making the assumption that all the land not owned by Jews was owned by Palestinians. This isn’t true. In fact, the vast majority of the land here has always been owned by the state, be it Ottoman, British or Israeli. > > You second chart only shows what portion of the privately-owned land (a small portion of the total land) was owned by Arabs vs. Jews. It says nothing about state-owned land. I’m assuming nothing of the sort. The statement was that the jews had bought the land and i am showing that they owned a tiny pittance of the land outside of some areas in the north and along the Mediteranean. I would also like to point out that all that “government owned land” was owned by Palestinian communities. Fee simple is not the only form of property right. If I have the right to occupy land, farm that land (or graze my goats there) and I can pass down that right to my heirs, then I have a property interest in that land despite the fact that the land registers record the land as owned by the government subject to my rights to occupy. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2010, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-is-the-final-solution/552095/163 "2010-09-07T18:24:13Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > As I understand it, the philosophy is “we kicked their ass, so let them show some respect before we concede anything.” I’m personally disinclined, and I can certainly understand why Israel is disinclined to make nice with Arab nations whose daily rhetoric is about destroying Israel. When was the last time Jordan or Yemen has said anything of the sort? > [@](#): > > Personally, I think they’re more likely to use nukes on other Muslim nations than on Israel, since nuking Israel even once means the utter destruction of Iran. Which in turn would mean the utter destruction of Israel. Good luck with that attitude. > [@](#): > > I have hopes for Turkey’s military cracking down on radicals as they have in the past, and Pakistan has India to contend with. I’m not sure there’s all that much goodwill to _lose_, frankly. Well, I hope the shoe is never on the other foot because for all the equity that Israel has shown, I don’t know how much it can expect in return. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > You said:“As an alternative, the Arab nations could promise dramatically improved relations and trade, offering Israel a chance to significantly profit, but they can’t even bring themselves to do that, since the empty rhetoric about destroying Israel (someday) is useful.” > > And you said “It doesn’t mean that Hamas and Hezbollah have signed on to it…” Well, get back to us when they do, okay? Without their compliance, any such initiative, even if it has a nice sweeping capitalized name like “The Arab Peace Initiative”, is useless, yes? No, its not useless to have normalized relations with every member of the arab league (other than Lebanon). Israel has other borders you know. The sympathy for Israel among diplomats has considerably evaporated since Israel has rejected the [flashy blinky lights] ArAb PeAcE InItIaTiVe [/flashy blinky lights] > [@](#): > > And do be so kind as to let us know when and if Hamas and Hezbollah sign on and we won’t have any more rockets crossing the border or suicide bombers wandering into pizzerias. Thanks _ever_ so much. Your position seems to be: Until we can get a guarantee fof peace from Hamas and hezbollah, we do not want think peace with anyone else has any value. I don’t know how to tell you this but there are elements of the Lebanese and palestinian population that will never ever be at peace with Israel and their numbers grow with every generation that Israel digs in its heels. Entirely dismissing the arab peace initiative with no explanation other than “well get back to me when Hamas and hezbollah have signed on” certainly doesn’t make you seem like you are (how did you put it?) “acting like an adult” ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2010, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-is-the-final-solution/552095/164 "2010-09-07T18:37:09Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > > > As I understand it, the philosophy is “we kicked their ass, so let them show some respect before we concede anything.” I’m personally disinclined, and I can certainly understand why Israel is disinclined to make nice with Arab nations whose daily rhetoric is about destroying Israel. > > When was the last time Jordan or Yemen has said anything of the sort? Who cares about Jordan or Yemen? > [@](#): > > Which in turn would mean the utter destruction of Israel. Good luck with that attitude. Do you think other Muslim nations will jump to the defense of Iran after Iran attacks Israel? I’m pretty sure they have a better sense of self-preservation than that. > [@](#): > > Well, I hope the shoe is never on the other foot because for all the equity that Israel has shown, I don’t know how much it can expect in return. I’m sure Israel is used to it. > [@](#): > > No, its not useless to have normalized relations with every member of the arab league (other than Lebanon). Israel has other borders you know. The sympathy for Israel among diplomats has considerably evaporated since Israel has rejected the [flashy blinky lights] ArAb PeAcE InItIaTiVe [/flashy blinky lights] > > > [@](#): > > > > And do be so kind as to let us know when and if Hamas and Hezbollah sign on and we won’t have any more rockets crossing the border or suicide bombers wandering into pizzerias. Thanks _ever_ so much. > > Your position seems to be: Until we can get a guarantee fof peace from Hamas and hezbollah, we do not want think peace with anyone else has any value. Well, let those surrounding nations repudiate and condemn the actions of Hamas and Hezbollah. Then Israel can establish peaceful, mutually profitable relations with these nations. and H&H can go fuck themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2010, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-is-the-final-solution/552095/165 "2010-09-07T19:16:05Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > > [@Malthus](#): > > > > Aprox. 1/2 of the Jewish pop. of Israel is middle-eastern in origin. Make of that what you will. > > > > To my mind, it certainly adds legitimacy the the Pakistan/India comparison. Of course it is not wholly comparable. > > Can you provide a cite for the approximate ratio of arab Jews in Israel? Sure. > **[Israeli Jews](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Jews#Jewish_ethnic_divisions_in_Israel)** > > Israeli Jews or Jewish Israelis (Hebrew: יהודים ישראלים Yêhūdīm Yīśrāʾēlīm) comprise Israel's largest ethnic and religious community. The core of their demographic consists of those with a Jewish identity and their descendants, including ethnic Jews and religious Jews alike. About 46% of the global Jewish population resides in Israel; yerida is uncommon and is offset exponentially by aliyah, but those who do emigrate from the country typically move to the Western world. As such, the Israeli d Note that, prior to the arrival of 1,000,000 Russian Jews following the fall of the Soviet Union, more like 70% were of middle-eastern origin: > [@](#): > > Today over 3,000,000 Mizrahi Jews,[27] and Sephardic Jews live in Israel with the majority of them being descendants of the 680,000 Jews who fled Arab Lands Jewish Exodus from Arab Lands (\<2,500,000), due to expulsions, and anti-semitism, with smaller numbers having immigrated from the Islamic Republics of the Former Soviet Union (c.250,000), India (70,000), Iran (200,000 - 250,000), Turkey (80,000). Before the immigration of over 1,000,000 Russian mainly Ashkenazi Jews to Israel after to collapse of the Soviet Union, 70% of Israeli Jews were Sephardic or Mizrahi Jews. Compared with: > [@](#): > > Today, Ashkenazi Jews constitute the largest single ethnic group amongst Israeli Jews With about a population just under 3,000,000[24] living in Israel. About 1,100,000 of them are descended from or are immigrants from the former Soviet Union who came to Israel after the fall of the Former Soviet Union 1991, (about 300,000 of them are not considered to be Jewish under halakha. Most of the other 1,800,000 are descended from the first Zionist settlers in the land of Israel, and Holocaust survivors with an additional 200,000 having immigrated or descended from immigrants from English speaking countries, South Africa, and South America since the founding of the state. It’s only a wiki article, but the facts are not controversial. > [@](#): > > Pakistan/India was not some post hoc justification, I think the use of this rationale in the Israel context is post hoc. Like I said, we are where we are. We can’t go back but we shouldn’t rewrite history simply because the new bversion provides a more favorable context during negiotiations for one side or the other. I don’t understand. Israel needs no “justification”, any more than any other country does. Does anyone ask whether Jordan is “justified”? It is what it is. The facts are that, until quite recently, the majority of the population of Israel was descended from Jews who had always been in the Middle East. Even today, that is 50% or so. The perception that Israel is made up solely of a buncha Europeans who moved in and kicked out the locals is simply factually false. Not that debunking this is necessary for _justification_, mind. It is simply a false perception. In reality, European Zionists made up the catalyst for a more complex reaction. There were always Jews living in Israel, as there were throughout the ME. Jewish nationalists attempted to set up a “national homeland” for Jews under Ottoman ageis. This was part-and-parcel of a general stirring of ethno-nationalism throughout the ME and beyond - one profoundly distasteful to Ottomans, who saw the potential for ethno-nationalism to tear their multinational empire apart … which, encouraged by the Brits and others during WW1, it duly _did_. Not least to be afflicted with ethno-nationalism were the Turks themselves, who soon enough contracted to a “nation” - Turkey. The Brits were soon enough sorry and sore about that, since it worked the same magic eventually in its own multi-national empire - hence, India and Pakistan. Everywhere that ethno-nationalism ‘happened’, you got the same thing - population transfers. Be it Greeks and Turks, or be it Pakistanis and Indians, everywhere you got ethno-nationalist borders, some folks fell on the wrong side of them. In some places, like India/Pakistan, these were conducted with ferocity and massacre; in others, like Israel/Arabs, not so much; more the _fear_ of ferocity and massacre. In some places, the ethno-nationalities were evenly balanced and a modus vivendi was attempted - such as Lebanon. Only, it did not work out so well for them. Point being, the Israeli situation is by no means exceptional; the only unusual element is that the ethno-nationalism was, if you like, introduced from outside. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2010, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-is-the-final-solution/552095/166 "2010-09-07T19:29:40Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > What do YOU think is the basis for their hatred of Israel? Certainly these countries were not less hospitable to Jews than most European countries up until the creation of the state of Israel. And while Europe’s anti-semitism is still pretty bad, its better than it was a century ago, the anti-semitism in the arab community seems to have accelerated considerably since about 1948 or so. There are two main influences: 1. As stated above, ethno-nationalism. This developed in ME countries at the same time as it developed in Israel - but that is because they were both part of a larger pattern: the development of ethno-nationalism generally among folks who had previously not experienced it. The same thing - ethno-nationalism - happened in, for example, India, at much the same time: correlation is, in this case, not causation. 2. The development of Islamic radicalism. This too is not “caused” by Israel; it is a development internal to Islamic nations. Both Arab ethno-nationalists and radical Islamicists have one thing in common (though often they hate each other like poision): they both find in Israel, as both a secular and religious “other”, the perfect folk devil. Thus, no amount of appeasement on the part of Israel is going to make the slightest difference (though as I said, various measures may be good to take for their own sakes). > [@](#): > > I’m not saying that correlation implies causation but the fact radicalism in the middle east seems to start with the Palestinian conflict and expand outwards from tehre gives you reason to at least investigate whether there is some causation there. Again, there is nothing to investigate. Arab nationalism doesn’t “start” with Israel - both Zionism and Arab nationalism are simply two faces to the same ethno-nationalist coin, if you will. Islamic radicalism predates Israel by a considerable margin in its influences and post-dates Israel in its current manifestation. > [@](#): > > This doesn’t mean that an equitable solution to the Palestinian conflict will put the geni back in the bottle but continuing the current attitude and approach is likely to accelerate radicalism and undermine attempts by more moderate elements to reverse this radicalism. I suspect that the currents of radicalism are very little affected by concessions (or lack of concessions) made by Israel. The reason Israel is interesting to radicals is because it acts as a _folk devil_. As with any folk devil, it really does not matter whether the target makes concessions; if they do so, it is because they are afraid of your rigteous wrath, which _increases_ your reason to be radical. > [@](#): > > Was Iran so anti-semetic in 1947? Are you claiming that the Ayatollah was a product of the Palestinian conflict? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-what-is-the-final-solution/552095.md?page=8)