How Does the Far Right Influence the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?

  • News
  • Thread starter damgo
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Israel
In summary, the far right in Israel is a vocal and influential group that advocates for a hardline stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They believe in the expansion of Israeli settlements and reject the idea of a two-state solution. Their actions and rhetoric often contribute to further polarization and tension in the region, making it more difficult to reach a peaceful resolution to the conflict. However, their influence has also sparked backlash and opposition from more moderate voices within Israel and internationally.
  • #36
Greetings !
Originally posted by russ_watters
Hmm... Maybe I should start a thread on that.
Can you apply the principles of the scientific
method to aspects of politics?
Not to a full extent, I think. Basicly, all you
need is to know everything that happened.
However, then you have to also consider
the enitial POVs of the observer and his
moral and ethical POVs.

For example, you can fully know that a
terrorist plans to carry out an attack.
But, people disagree over the assasination
of such a person in this case. (Personally,
I have no idea why... ) And that's just
one example.
Originally posted by damgo
drag, you spin a pretty tale, how about
providing some documentation for these
assertions? They seem somewhat slanted.
Ideally from a source that doesn't talk
about the Nazi links of anti-war protestors,
or how Islam is an evil religion, or how
God deeded over Judea and Samaria to the
Jewish people...
Excuse me ?
Could you, please, provide evidence of my
messages in this forum containing intentional
lies and propoganda (like the "you know who's"
messages) ?
Originally posted by damgo
An alternative explanation is that the IDF
simply does not like the extra scrutiny
and irritation forced upon it by peace
demonstrators. This is a common phenomena
in the US -- both liberal and conservative
local politicians, university officials,
etc, very often try to crack down on protests
they think might be at all 'disruptive.'
This is not a good thing.
Of course they don't like it, why would they ?
When these people twist the facts on international
TV and put themselves and everybody else
in danger by interfering in military actions
they're not doing anything to earn any
sympathy from the IDF, naturally.

BUT, that's not why they are banned.
They are thrown out because of their
highly suspected connections with terrorists
and because of the possible potential that
such connections would grow if they are not
prevented at an early stage.

Live long and prosper.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
^^^ E v i d e n c e.

I'm not accusing you of intentional lies and propaganda; I don't think anyone here posts those. I just suspect that you are misinformed. I would like to know where you are getting your information re the IDF and protestors, so I can judge its accuracy and reliability for myself. Capiche?
 
  • #38
Originally posted by drag

Of course they don't like it, why would they ?
When these people twist the facts on international
TV and put themselves and everybody else
in danger by interfering in military actions
they're not doing anything to earn any
sympathy from the IDF, naturally.

BUT, that's not why they are banned.
They are thrown out because of their
highly suspected connections with terrorists
and because of the possible potential that
such connections would grow if they are not
prevented at an early stage.

Live long and prosper.

Maybe you could post a link to something...I provide links when I can...and you sound much more like propaganda than I do. 'Israel is right no matter right' sounds a lot more biased than my attitude of 'Both sides have flaws that should be addressed.'
 
  • #39
Originally posted by Zero
'Israel is right no matter right' sounds a lot more biased than my attitude...
Heh. Nice of you to include single quotes as no one has said any such thing.

For example, you can fully know that a
terrorist plans to carry out an attack.
But, people disagree over the assasination
of such a person in this case. (Personally,
I have no idea why...) And that's just
one example.
Ok, I'll go with that. The issue is even more basic than an ethical dilema on killing a terrorist before an attack. Not everyone would call that terrorist a terrorist. A LOT of people like to say "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter." Is he? No. There are international laws/treaties that define quite clearly what actions are right and wrong in an armed conflict. Certainly individual circumstances can be more complicated, but any two rational people should be able to look at one specific act (for example blowing up a bus full of kids), use the agreed-upon definition, and agree that it is terrorism, murder, completely wrong, and not justified under any circumstances.

But people don't agree. This is partly because some people will apply different criteria or definitions in different circumstances in order to be able to use whatever word they want to describe an action. This means those people are irrational.

Applied to science, it would be akin to saying MY definition of up is down, therefore the sky is down. People won't accept such absurdities in a scientific discussion. Why do people accept them in a political one? Doublethink?

edit: Hey, wait - that's Einstein's relativity: The laws of the universe are the same for all observers regardless of their frame of reference. It applies to politics as well.
 
Last edited:
  • #40
Russ...I was 'quoting' a general attitude, the one where ANYTHING showing Israel in a less-than-perfect light is automatically treated as a lie. I wasn't claiming that anyone would be honest enough to state what is obviously their opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #41
Originally posted by Zero
Russ...I was 'quoting' a general attitude, the one where ANYTHING showing Israel in a less-than-perfect light is automatically treated as a lie. I wasn't vlaiming that anyone would be honest enough to state what is obviously their opinion.
Your good looks are like someone shining a flashlight in my eyes, its so glaring.

*edited for ANOTHER personal attack!*
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #42
Well, maybe that isn't their opinion, but that is certainly some people's worldview. What else explains labeling peace activists as terror supporters?
 
  • #43
Originally posted by russ_watters
Your good looks are like someone shining a flashlight in my eyes, its so glaring.

*edited for ANOTHER personal attack!*
Right, Zero. Maybe I should have worded it differently.

How about: The hypocrisy in YOUR POST is glaring?

And you're really REACHING to find personal attacks aimed at you from others since I'm sure you know you have posted many.

And btw: it must be nice to be able to attack others while editing other people's posts for what you consider personal attacks. If I were in a similar position, I'd resign from being a moderator of a forum I have a strong personal opinion about. Conflicts of interest are unethical. But hey - ethics are important to me.
 
Last edited:
  • #44
Hell, I thought it was kind of funny...



...and if you have some actual point to make on this thread, why don't you try making it. If not, don't post.
 
  • #45
It's a standard zionist argument, ie let the Arabs give the Palestinians a scrap of land they can call their homeland. Trouble is, the real Palestinian homeland and the jewish one are the same place. Israel must compromise or we'll get nowhere
Why ? they have their own homeland !

Ah but, we are forgetting the zionist trump card: they are god's chosen people in god's chosen location and, in the zionists' own words, the Palestinians are vermin and worthless scum. If you have the big bearded guy in the sky on your side, you can do anything you want.
This shows who is the hate side ... and obviously , this reflects why they consider their actions not terror , while palestinians actions are terror .

There is nothing to think about. The
Palestinians are the side to blame for
the conflict and that is it. If the
Palestinians stopped fighting there would
be no conflict and they'd have a good
country many years old by now. All that
knocking your forhead on the floor stuff
simply ain't helping.
Really ? Duhh !
This is what they did from 1967 to 1988 ! and what happened then ?

*Edited for PF Guideline violations*


Who else can be better to moderate the PaWA forum than Zero ? ( With all my respect to other Moderators ) ... Zero Is The Best Moderator In here ( Personal opnion )
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #46
Thank you, Zargawee...and there's no need to drag up old personal attacks, and respond with personal attacks of your own.
 
  • #47
Whats wrong in Isreal?

There are the Isrealis there on one hand, and the palestinians on the other.

Wipe them all out and...no problem!
 
  • #48
Greetings !
Originally posted by damgo
I would like to know where you are getting
your information re the IDF and protestors,
so I can judge its accuracy and reliability
for myself. Capiche?
From relativly direct sources.
Originally posted by Zargawee
Really ? Duhh !
This is what they did from 1967 to 1988 !
and what happened then ?
The Palestinians weren't exactly peacefull
all that time, but more important and relevant
is the fact that they had no central government
or rule to nagotiate with or manage them.
Partialy, the reason for that was Israel -
they had no real interest in a palestinian leadership
because at that point in time it would've clearly
most likely be an enemy of Israel and receive
military support from neighboring countries.

But, I was talking about the past 10-15 years
and aspecialy about the current situation.

Live long and prosper.
 
  • #49
From relativly direct sources.
Like? Quote? And relative to what?
 
  • #50
The Palestinians weren't exactly peacefull
all that time, but more important and relevant
is the fact that they had no central government
or rule to nagotiate with or manage them.
Partialy, the reason for that was Israel -
they had no real interest in a palestinian leadership
because at that point in time it would've clearly
most likely be an enemy of Israel and receive
military support from neighboring countries.
There Was a military support from we neighbors , but it stopped just after the end of the six-day war in 1967 , and after that Palestine has gone on it's own , so it's Israel's fault for not giving the Palestinans the opprtunity to have their own leadership.

But, I was talking about the past 10-15 years
and aspecialy about the current situation.
Then Never talk about "The Zionists Lived in there 2000 years ago" Or anything like that .
Because it's just some Bull-$hit , and You Don't want to talk about it.
 
  • #51
Originally posted by Zargawee


Really ? Duhh !
This is what they did from 1967 to 1988 ! and what happened then ?

Zargawee- There was no peace from the PLO or Palestinian terrorist in that time period. In 1968 the PLO Covenant was declared, this declares the duty of Arabs and Palestinians all over the world to destory Israel, it specificly calls for "armed revolution, until they liberate their homeland" homeland meaning the entire area including israel "proper". Along with this covenant came an increase in terrorist activities including the hi-jacking of the El-Al, the car bombing in yehude market that killed at least a dozen and injured many more. Also in 1968 the war of attrition initiated by egypt and jordan. 1970 or 71 was a very serious terror attack that killed 12 small children. In 1970 the PLO were also very busy with Black September, in which the PLO attempted to take over Jordan, they were not successful and were forced out of jordan taking refuge in Lebanon, we won't get into the horrors against christian villages in the mountains, literally wiping out entire villages of lebanese christians, leaving body parts scattered all over the land to the point that identifying bodies consisted of collecting the heads that were laying upon the ground. Lovely peace this was.
in 1972 there was the horror of the Munich Olympic games where the PLO terrorist murdered 11 israeli athletes. Around this time is also when PLO terrorist were sending letter bombs to Israeli officials around the world, one of which killed an attache in London.
1973 the yom kippur war.
1974-24 young children are murdered by PLO terrorist.
after this murder, in 1974 the Gush Eminim (sp?) movement began, this is the movement that this thread is directed towards, it claimed jewish rights over historic israel and pushed to settle judea and samaria (west bank and gaza)
75 or 76- savoy hotel in tel aviv attacked by terrorist from the sea
78 terrorist hijack a bus and kill dozens
after this there were terrorist attacks on ambassadors and attaches in london, paris, washington etc.
Early 80's:
PLO is busy attacking Israel from Lebanon
IDF headquarters bombed killing almost a hundred.
this goes on and on, there was no "peace" although it might be viewed as relatively peaceful compared to the present intifada.
In 1988:
Hamas published their charter, it was based on the forged protocals of Zion and called for the destruction of israel.
Arafat accepted 242 and declared Palestine a state in absentia, this also is perhaps the first movement to recognize the possibility of accepting the existence of an Israeli state, which would not have been popular to surrounding arab countries(particularly syria) or even to many of the terror factions under the PLO "Umbrella".
 
  • #52
This is nothing comparing to what is happening now ...
Look at this Topic ** Contains SO VERY Agonizing Pictures **

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2187

Add to that , You forget to say what The Israeli did on that period of time ... they did much worse !
 
  • #53
Originally posted by Zargawee
There Was a military support from we neighbors , but it stopped just after the end of the six-day war in 1967 , and after that Palestine has gone on it's own , so it's Israel's fault for not giving the Palestinans the opprtunity to have their own leadership.
Zargawee, you neglect to consider the part that jordan, syria and egypt play in Palestine's non-recognition. They had no problem with swallowing up palestinian mandate lands, Jordan was particularly hostile towards Palestinian nationism. Also, Egypt and Jordan were in opposition to one another and Egypt saw the Palestinians as a means of opposing Jordanian interests.
When they lost the June 1967 war along with a large amount of territory, this loss brought old "Arab" enemies together. Everyone wanted to get their land back and Palestinian recognition by the Arabs was lost in the shuffle. Because of this self interest of the surrounding arab countries Un 242 was written with no thought whatsoever to establishing a Palestinian state (they don't mention the palestinians at all, only a small reference to "the refugees"). The motive of the Arabs (including Jordan) was to get a resolution that would maximize the return of territory to the existing Arab states.
 
  • #54
Greetings !
Originally posted by Zargawee
Then Never talk about "The Zionists Lived in
there 2000 years ago" Or anything like that .
Because it's just some Bull-$hit , and You
Don't want to talk about it.
I never talked about this on this forum.
In fact, I don't think I ever went earlier
than the 20th century on this forum.

As for pictures, I've seen a lot on both
sides, victim pictures do not show the
way they happened. (btw, your link ain't
working.)

Live long and prosper.
 
  • #55
Originally posted by Zargawee
This is nothing comparing to what is happening now ...
The past gets hazy the further away it is. It really has been as bad as now mostly nonstop for 50 years. Even in the 80s the Arabs hijacked a plane every month or so. American trave to Europe was a real big problem. When I was a kid in mid-80s, I went on a trip to Europe and they had soldiers guarding American Express offices because of the high threat of terrorism.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

News US wants to pump Iraqi oil to Haifa
2
Replies
54
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top