• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: World Politics

MindzEye said:
Salient point. There is no intention from the Israeli side in this for there to be any resolution imo. The pretty obvious strategy is to slowly strangle the Palestinians out and take all of the land.
Click to expand...
bibi has always opposed the two-state solution, yeah.

but the olmert offer in 2008 was... a really damn good one. really damn good.

there won't be peace until both Israel and the Palestinians have leaders who are (openly) committed to it. and sadly Oct 7 has set that timeline back in Israel for what I suspect will be years. one thing to watch is how Yair Golan does in the next Israeli elections. if he does well, maybe there's a chance in the not too distant future... but honestly that seems like unfounded optimism
 
zeke said:
I thought the problem was that Hamas was just a front for Iran?

surely hamas isn't going to attack israel without iran's support?
Click to expand...
Hamas is committed to Israel's complete annihilation and does not recognize its right to exist. how can there be a peace agreement with them? not to mention, they still hold 50 some odd hostages.

if Hamas renounces violence, acknowledges Israel's right to exist, cedes governance of Gaza, and releases the hostages, then maybe?
 
Wayward DP said:
Hamas is committed to Israel's complete annihilation and does not recognize its right to exist. how can there be a peace agreement with them? not to mention, they still hold 50 some odd hostages.

if Hamas renounces violence, acknowledges Israel's right to exist, cedes governance of Gaza, and releases the hostages, then maybe?
Click to expand...

I don't even know that Hamas can even hold onto power without Iran's support tbh.
 
zeke said:
Honest question for the class:

If Iran's nuke program has been significantly hit, and their financial influence even more so so that they can't seem to support the likes of Hamas or Hezbollah anymore, does that get rid of the argument against a 2-state solution?
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, are you arguing for a 1-state solution?

So, a majority Arab country that will have a minority Jewish population? Has that ever worked out well for the Jews, like ever, in history?

And why are Jews the only population that doesn't get to have self-determination? Why can't they have a place of their own?
 
zeke said:
I don't even know that Hamas can even hold onto power without Iran's support tbh.
Click to expand...
let's both hope this is true.

the other factor in the equation is Qatar - they funneled billions of dollars to Hamas, with Bibi's explicit approval. If Qatar buggers off, then maybe Hamas collapses...
 
Pwner said:
Just to be clear, are you arguing for a 1-state solution?

So, a majority Arab country that will have a minority Jewish population? Has that ever worked out well for the Jews, like ever, in history?

And why are Jews the only population that doesn't get to have self-determination? Why can't they have a place of their own?
Click to expand...

read my post again - i was saying the argument against a 2-state solution might disappear if iran is neutralized, meaning the 2-state solution should be viable.

because a 2-state solution is the only solution if you think having a race-based state is necessary for even one party.

personally i think race-based statehoods are something we should be moving away from, but i'm fine with the argument that the jews deserve one as much as anyone else.

but in the abstract, the overriding untenable situation is having a country's worth of palestinians who simply do not have full human rights. that's the issue that is causing all the problems. Those people clearly deserve to have rights one way or another.

and note, Bibi's solution is clearly just kicking all the palestinians out to live in other countries, and have a 1-state solution without them.
 
zeke said:
read my post again - i was saying the argument against a 2-state solution might disappear if iran is neutralized, meaning the 2-state solution should be viable.

because a 2-state solution is the only solution if you think having a race-based state is necessary for even one party.

personally i think race-based statehoods are something we should be moving away from, but i'm fine with the argument that the jews deserve one as much as anyone else.

but in the abstract, the overriding untenable situation is having a country's worth of palestinians who simply do not have full human rights. that's the issue that is causing all the problems. Those people clearly deserve to have rights one way or another.

and note, Bibi's solution is clearly just kicking all the palestinians out to live in other countries, and have a 1-state solution without them.
Click to expand...
Oh, ok, far enough. I think the only solution is a 2-state solution.

Let both populations govern themselves, but to do that, you need to get rid of Bibi and Hamas. Teardown the illegal settlements, move borders if you need to, and have everyone in that region recognize each other. And maybe have free movement throughout the Middle East.

The one point I want to make is: is there a country in the world that isn't a "race-based" state? You may point to North America, but I have to take a personal holiday for The High Holidays, while everyone gets Easter and Christmas off for free.
 
zeke said:

View: https://x.com/MazMHussain/status/1937595176630792217
Click to expand...


what's interesting is that we should realize that in Trump's head, the propaganda win is actually more important than the reality on the ground.

he thinks it's best for the US and for the world if everyone thinks they destroyed those bunkers, and he probably also thinks having Iran toe that line is the best way for them to agree to peace as well. He probably doesn't even actually care if they develop nukes as long as nobody knows about it and thus starts a war over it.

So in his head he will literally think that any american that undermines that propaganda (aka tells the truth), is a traitor to America's best interests and an enemy to world peace.
 
Pwner said:
The one point I want to make is: is there a country in the world that isn't a "race-based" state? You may point to North America, but I have to take a personal holiday for The High Holidays, while everyone gets Easter and Christmas off for free.
Click to expand...

well christmas is just a date stolen from the pre-existing pagan celebrations anyways. holidays are just holidays.


But to have this argument - i will argue that the West has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the less you value "race" as a basis for statehood (i.e. the more you value abstract laws as foundational morals and the more you value healthy immigration and borderless trade) is clearly the path to greater wealth health prosperity freedom and power than trying to maintain a state based on racial or cultural or religious purity.
 
Pwner said:
The one point I want to make is: is there a country in the world that isn't a "race-based" state? You may point to North America, but I have to take a personal holiday for The High Holidays, while everyone gets Easter and Christmas off for free.
Click to expand...

Most of our holidays are secular and no one cares what your religion is when you apply for citizenship.

Point taken, but at best it's a deeply incomplete point.
 
I don't think there is a good argument against a two state solution. Its historically just been the radicals on both sides getting in the way to stop it.

But post October 7 its not clear that there is an apatite on either side.

Hamas is weakened without Iran, but only the Palestinans/PA can ever really take the power away from them and give it to moderates.
 
I actually do get the argument that the 2-state solution is untenable if Israel is beset on all sides by violent enemies.

But if Russia/Iran's influence is waning so much that Syria falls and Hezbollah left undefended, which probably means Hamas left unsupported too, then the argument against the 2-state solution starts looking pretty weak.
 
MindzEye said:
Most of our holidays are secular and no one cares what your religion is when you apply for citizenship.

Point taken, but at best it's a deeply incomplete point.
Click to expand...
Sure, but wait until Hinduism or Buddhism, or Islam, overtake Christianity as the dominant religion in the West. And we get Diwali off instead of Easter.... not that there is anything wrong with that, because it is all secular.

All we have to do is look at our Southern Neighbours, or France and Europe, on how they are handling it (some better than others).

I am not even arguing that the West is bad, quite the opposite. These secular Holidays have just become placeholders for Public Holidays. But come December, all one hears is Jesus.

And the only way the West became secular was because people (Founding Fathers, the Commonwealth) were tired/angry of Christian sects vying for power and to see which would become the State Religion to tell them what to do, often in a violent fashion. Much better to wash your hands of it and let Christians celebrate however they want to, which has the side benefit of other religions, atheists, and Academia being left alone.
 
zeke said:
I actually do get the argument that the 2-state solution is untenable if Israel is beset on all sides by violent enemies.

But if Russia/Iran's influence is waning so much that Syria falls and Hezbollah left undefended, which probably means Hamas left unsupported too, then the argument against the 2-state solution starts looking pretty weak.
Click to expand...
sure, but you still need a Palestinian partner, which does not exist in any viable form
 
Pwner said:
Sure, but wait until Hinduism or Buddhism, or Islam, overtake Christianity as the dominant religion in the West. And we get Diwali off instead of Easter.... not that there is anything wrong with that, because it is all secular.

All we have to do is look at our Southern Neighbours, or France and Europe, on how they are handling it (some better than others).

I am not even arguing that the West is bad, quite the opposite. These secular Holidays have just become placeholders for Public Holidays. But come December, all one hears is Jesus.

And the only way the West became secular was because people (Founding Fathers, the Commonwealth) were tired/angry of Christian sects vying for power and to see which would become the State Religion to tell them what to do, often in a violent fashion. Much better to wash your hands of it and let Christians celebrate however they want to, which has the side benefit of other religions, atheists, and Academia being left alone.
Click to expand...

there's no taking over. 2nd generation immigrants of all stripes are much less religious. by the 3rd generation it pretty much disappears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top