Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

shira

(30,109 posts)
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 12:04 PM Jun 2016

Arguing with apologists for terror

I have had more arguments than I can count with American, British, or other European critics of Israel; either in person when I was living in the UK, or in writing over email or Facebook since I moved to Israel. The day after the shooting at Sarona I almost got embroiled in another such discussion but I resisted the temptation to respond to some comments on a friend’s Facebook feed. I knew the experience would be infuriatingly pointless.

Here is how I imagine the conversation would progress, based on past experience. The words of my imaginary interlocutor, replete with straw men and deliberately inflammatory assumptions, are drawn from real comments I’ve heard/read in similar discussions. (My ‘voice’ is in italics):

“It’s terrible what happened yesterday in Tel Aviv, but it’s because the Palestinians feel so hopeless at the lack of a peace process.”

“But it’s Mahmoud Abbas, not Netanyahu, who’s refusing to negotiate…”

“Yeah, well that’s because Israel keeps building settlements.”

“But we did implement a ten-month settlement freeze and Abbas only showed up at the negotiation table in the tenth month. Then he walked away at the end.”

“Well, if Israel’s serious about peace, why doesn’t it just get rid of the settlements?”

“What, like in Gaza?”

“Gaza’s different! Israel put a siege on Gaza. That’s why Hamas started shooting rockets.”

“Other way around I’m afraid. The siege was implemented because of the rockets.”

“Then why do you think the rocket attacks started?”


more...
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/arguing-with-apologists-for-terror/
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
1. It's pointless to argue with those people
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:43 PM
Jun 2016

They have a narrative and they will stick with it even it means apologizing for a terrorist organization. And people wonder why Americans largely support Israel. It's because of stupid arguments like the ones you're pointing out.

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
2. In most places, a brutal occupation causes resistance to that occupation - but some believe that
Fri Jun 10, 2016, 11:18 PM
Jun 2016

this principle doesn't apply to Israel.

Interestingly, the crappy living conditions and oppression of Palestinians seem to precede the violence, almost as if oppression causes resistance. I believe that better living conditions and less oppression of Palestinians will lead to less violence, and that worse living conditions will lead to more violence. I also think that most Palestinians are more affected by the current situation rather than the situation in 1948.

This of course makes me into one of those "apologists for terror", even though I'm actually not an apologist for terror. Maybe I should go to re-education camp...

 

branford

(4,462 posts)
3. Israel didn't occupy the Palestinian territories from until 1967.
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 12:46 AM
Jun 2016

They were controlled by Egypt and Jordan, and even after 1967, relations between other Arab states and the Palestinians has ranged from terrible to outright war (Black September).

If your point of reference is truly 1948, you're denying Jews the right of self-determination and believe Israel's existence is negotiable. This, by most standards, is antisemitic.

Not only does your apparent perspective infantilize the Palestinians and denies them free agency, it absolves them any responsibility for anything. If your response to shooting civilians and thousands of rockets intentionally launched into cities (and the inevitable joyous street celebrations in the territories that follow) is little more than a list a set of pro forma Palestinian grievances, you are indeed an apologist for terror.

Whether you like it or not, the Palestinians are represented by Hamas in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. Both organizations are anti-democratic and corrupt human rights abominations, with the PA looking only slightly better in comparison, and whose vocal territorial claims refer to matters well before 1967. Particularly after Gaza became an even worse hell for both Israelis and the Palestinian inhabitants after the full and unconditional Israeli withdrawal (under noted right-wing Likud Prime Minister Ariel Sharon!), why would or should Israel make further concessions and incur additional indeterminate risk under the current state of affairs? Besides the Gaza withdrawal, Israel also withdrew from the Sinai after it's peace with Egypt and Jordan. Israel has established multiple precedents demonstrating a willingness to concede territory for peace. The Palestinian record of delivering peace and security has not been nearly as established.

If you care about the Palestinians, you should focus your attention on demanding they get their own house in order. That will be the quickest and most assured means of resolving this decades old conflict. Other similar groups such as the Kurds have managed far more under worse and longer circumstances, and without the billions of aid, yet they and others have managed to build generally functioning civil societies. Is there something fundamentally wrong with the culture of most of the Arabs in the Middle East, not just the Palestinians, that is incompatible with democracy, human rights, modernization and general prosperity?

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
4. Word salad.
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 02:19 AM
Jun 2016

I still think that oppression breeds violent resistance. It's not excusable, but it's explainable.

 

branford

(4,462 posts)
5. Israelis are not willing to make concessions are take risks
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 09:10 AM
Jun 2016

with a people who openly celebrate the murder of civilians and fire rockets into cities to terrify the civilian population.

This, too, is totally explainable and understandable (i.e., the "cycle of violence&quot .

My point also still stands. You and others deflect and refuse to deal with historic and often egregious Palestinian misconduct, no less tacitly (or openly) support some demands that are wholly incompatible with the vast majority of the most liberal of their governmental supporters (e.g., "river to the sea," total right of return, etc.)

When you use the establishment of Israel in 1948 as the baseline, when the only people purportedly occupying the current Palestinian territories were the Egyptians and the Jordanians, their fellow Arabs and Muslims, do you ever wonder why many people don't believe you really seek peaceful coexistence between Jew and Arab, but rather deny Jews self-determination, the very principle you're advocating for the Palestinians, and its perceived as antisemitism?

Ironically, the Palestinians, and virtually everyone else but the Israelis, are oppressed by their own tyrannical and/or theocratic leaders and governments, but the silence about this state of affairs is deafening, and the double standards impossible to miss.

Simply, your type of "explaining" and "understanding" is indeed comparable, if not explicitly, an apology or excusal of terror.

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
8. Allowing the Palestinian economy to function is no concession, it would even lead to less violence
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 10:30 PM
Jun 2016

IMHO.

Did you know that the GDP in the West Bank and Gaza is around $1700, with little or no projected increase, and this is only because of Israeli restrictions? (http://www.imf.org/external/country/wbg/rr/2015/092115.pdf graph p8)Please explain to me how Palestinian poverty makes Israel safer, because I'm dumb enough to believe the opposite...

I'm not sure why past events should be allowed to prevent countries from making peace. Things change - with your reasoning, the US would still be at war with Canada...

BTW, I'm referring to 1948 only because the OP does. History and politics shouldn't mix.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
9. Israel already allows that, it's the corrupt PA & Hamas that could care less for its people.
Sun Jun 12, 2016, 10:31 AM
Jun 2016

Gaza 2005 withdrawal was the model. Israel withdrew, left greenhouses for the Palestinian economy (which were destroyed immediately) & got rockets in return. That mindset hasn't changed from the Palestinian side, which receives more monetary aid from the world per capita than any other nation. All that money goes to its corrupt leaders, or to terrorist families being paid by the PA, or into Hamas tunnels and rockets.

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
10. Every single report I've read on the economic situation for Palestinians in the occupied territories
Sun Jun 12, 2016, 08:30 PM
Jun 2016

singles out Israel as the main obstacle for economic development. I've asked you for some kind of info about the Palestinian economy that would contradict these findings, but you haven't backed up your argument with anything.

The UN, the World Bank, the IMF, ACRI; all of them believe that Israel is the problem, while you blame the Palestinians without backing it up with a shred of evidence. I'll side with UN, the World Bank, the IMF and ACRI on this issue.

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
11. If those reports don't mention salaries to terrorists, the terror tunnels....
Mon Jun 13, 2016, 04:56 AM
Jun 2016

...or all the money being funneled to corrupt PA/Hamas leaders, or even the destroyed greenhouses.... then those reports are shit.

You know that.

Show me where those reports mention any of the above. If you can't, then those reports are garbage and I don't need to tell you that. Also, look around the mideast neighborhood and find one nation there with a functional economy & then tell me why the Palestinians should be expected to do better with their leadership, all of whom are billionaires.

This is where you punt or just deny everything.

All this info. BTW is easy to google under the keywords: Palestinian, economy, terror, foreign aid, corruption....

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
12. Are you saying that Israel should continue to strangle Palestinian economy until the Palestinians
Mon Jun 13, 2016, 07:55 AM
Jun 2016

jump through all those hoops?

I think that an improved economy would make it easier to reform Palestinian society and make Palestine less dependent on handouts. You're putting the cart before the horse...

Or maybe I don't really understand your argumentation...

 

shira

(30,109 posts)
13. Israel's not strangling anything & anyone advocating for ending the Gaza blockade....
Mon Jun 13, 2016, 11:59 AM
Jun 2016

...is just an apologist for terror, since Hamas is technically at war with Israel. Opening up Gaza would lead to more war and death, not a better economy.

1. Palestinian leaders are billionaires
2. They destroyed the greenhouse industry in 2005 which would've pumped $$ millions into the economy
3. Hamas uses most of their money on terror tunnels
4. The PA spends millions of dollars a year on paying terrorist (martyr) families
5. There are no nearby Arab countries with functioning economies. The Palestinians can't be expected to do better, not while still being at war against Israel.

Are you capable of acknowledging any of this?


 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
6. Killing civilians in a cafe is not "resistance"
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 07:14 PM
Jun 2016

Most progressives oppose unreservedly the murder of innocent people.

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
7. Many resistance movements have killed civilians - Irgun is a good example of that.
Sat Jun 11, 2016, 09:59 PM
Jun 2016

It doesn't make it morally right - Begin and Shamir both deserved long prison sentences just like the Tel Aviv terrorists...

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Israel/Palestine»Arguing with apologists f...