When I took a trip to Canada, immigration asked the guy ahead of me where he was staying and he said “with my girlfriend” and subsequently got grilled for 10 min about the details of his relationship. And if he had refused to answer he would have been denied entry.
You seem to have missed the point completely so let me point it out for you (no pun intended).
> demand on foreigners to inform the Israeli authorities within 30 days of starting a relationship with a Palestinian ID holder.
Most countries grill people who come on a touristic visa to stay with their SOs simply because there is usually a sperate visa scheme for that purpose.
The issue here is that the policy only targets part of the population, hence the outcry.
Palestinians as foreigners ? Ok, then, thanks ! You just recognized Palestine as a country …
( pro-Israel people can’t have it both ways : denying Palestinian statehood or implying it depending on the issue being discussed…)
Palestinians, people that belong to a nation with national borders that exist today, that have remained in the same place for thousands of years, are stateless individuals? That's strange.
Given the Canadian government's over the top reaction to the trucker protesters earlier this year I'm not at all surprised to hear they behave like the oppressive Israelis when dealing with foreign travelers. Didn't used to be this way, even a few years ago.
As a Canadian, who lives near one of the main sites, it was not over the top. The "truckers" (in reality, it was some truckers, and a lot of yahoos looking for a good time or attention) were tolerated for quite a while doing quite a few things that went well beyond any reasonable protest, were in fact blatently illegal, easily amounted to occupying key infrastructure that the vast majority of Canadians did not want them to occupy, creating many hazards with constant intended-only-for-emergency-use air horns, diesel fumes, and intimidation. They substantially shut down commerce and cross-border traffic for days and weeks. They even posted a manifesto demanding the government step down, with no basis in law or popular support.
Ironically, it was the mainstream media, the legends in their own minds streamers, and a few select looking-for-attention US channels that made it seem like they had a lot of popular support (through in-crowd shots, amplifying poorly substantiated claims, etc), where at best they have pockets of support.
Oh, and spend more than 30 seconds talking to them, and you'll see how quickly their ideas go to poorly researched conspiracy theories.
No other western country has suspended its own constitutional rights over a protest that was non violent and led to 0 deaths. No matter how you spin it, and how much you dislike the protesters that still makes it an unprecedented move.
But it is amusing to see how some people here in canada are totally ok with that, and still manage to blame the US or whatever for pointing out that the federal government did exactly what it did. Demanding that the government steps down is legal, and is normal for a protest. We had it happen in quebec in 2012 during the student protests, but no one was calling that an overthrow attempt. And if the bar for basically stripping the citizenry of rights is "disruptive protests", then we don't have protest rights. Even the most reactionary right wingers in America weren't calling for suspending their constitution after the 2020 protests.
(And the discussion has nothing to do with popular support, no one was claiming they were supported by the majority. It's not even relevant, why would that matter when the problem was the insanely dangerous step of suspending charter rights. Trying to make it about something else is a red herring.)
They used a very defined set of rules, which automatically includes a review (which is in progress). What the occupiers did was unsafe, harmful to a lot of people,and very strategic because they had a few ex military and police in their ranks. There was no reasonable way to remove them without causing greater disruption. There are a lot of unprecedented moves these days, deaths are not a good benchmark, clearing up disruptive idiots with white gloves is the least of my concerns.
The only problem with the government's reaction to the honkers was that it took too long.
Remember Sir John Diefenbaker's: freedom of speech is the right to say whatever you want, it is not the right to do whatever you want.
The moment those honkers started interfering with the tranquility, safety and professional activities of other people they were no longer doing free speech, they were doing vandalism and terrorism. BTW, it was terrorism supported by foreigners (in the US).
The convoy did things that were all previously seen in Canadian history. Occupying the street in front of Parliament Hill with vehicles, honking incessantly, being very antagonistic towards the local populace.
What was novel was the amount and time they spent doing those things. I had previously seen tractors occupy Wellington Street, and being generally very loud. For six hours. They afterwards left in orderly fashion, their point made. The convoy was delusional in the thinking that leaving after the protest was not part of the discourse.
Palestine is occupied Israeli land and Israel is building settlements there. Israel only keeps Palestine de jure 'external' due to international pressure, with the extra advantage of not having to give Palestians the same rights as Israelis (i.e. Apartheid). Claiming it is not apartheid based on some territorial technicality is disingenious.
When Palestine gets full sovereign statehood maybe then we can watch evangelical politicans perspectives on far-right Christian Youtube channels.
It is not Israel's state to offer. Either they annex the land and give Palestinians universal suffrage as the democratic country they claim to be, or unilaterally pull out of the land they are occupying (which includes land in Syria). They don't need to consult with Palestinians to withdraw to internationally recognised borders.
There was no clear offer of statehood in any case, only negotiations where both sides accuse the other or themselves for failure.
So the US can just declare the black hoods as external terretories and then the South could have continued as they were in the 60s. Amazing what you can achieve by some legal shananigens.
Fact is, Israel is in controll of those terretories, these people are suject to the Israeli state.
Gaza and West Bank are almost entirely autonomous. They are self-governing with their own civil administration, police force, school system, etc...
Israel controls, to only a limited extent, their international borders until a final peace deal is signed because there is a constant missile smuggling operations going on, with those missile being fired across the "border" into Israeli cities.
People need to start advocating for a peace deal, and stop taking "sides".
Mhh funny when I drove threw the West Bank we passed multiple Israeli army positions.
In fact, only the Zone A areas are 'autonomous' and those zones are not connected, so to go from one place in the country to another you pass Israeli army positions where people are harnessed and often shot.
But I'm sure if people in the Us to go past a Red Army check point when going from New York to New Jersy that would be totally fine.
Not to mention how systematically Israel has stolen resources such as water from those 'self-governing' bantustans. You are sell governing but the water is now gone, why are you doing such a bad job?
Israel is also intervening in the affairs of those territories consistently. Its much more comparable to the Indian princes under the English empire. Sure those were 'autonomous' but usually people are not gullible enough to actually be believe that. Israel has major influence in most matters that is usually important for govenrment.
The amount of autonomy a city surrounded by foreign army can have is really, really limited.
> constant missile smuggling operations going on
If there was no smuggling people would starve and wouldn't have medicine.
> People need to start advocating for a peace deal, and stop taking "sides".
People like you need to open their eyes and stop reading international propaganda about the situation. Even some leading Palestinian researches are now saying Israel has transformed the situation in the West Bank as such that it basically no longer possible to make it into real state.
Just endlessly advocating for a 'peace' when the status quo is clearly in favor of 1 party while the other systematically being exploited and reduced is actually taking a side. By just saying we should just have conference after conference where its basically Israel and the US bribing PA leadership to accept more limited aims, is favoring Israel.
Israel has long ago realized that as long as they talk a good game about peace internationally while on the ground making peace an impossibility the gullible Westernes who don't understand what's happening on the ground will continue to talk about peace while Israel systematically steals more and more land and water. While Israel imports more 'Jews' (very loosely defined) and while Palestinian refugees of the second generations die and their claim to rights gets weaker and weaker.
Look at the powers in Israel, look at the parties, look at the parliament, look at the situation on the ground, the idea that they have even the slightest interest in any kind of peace is delusional. They are slowly transitioning the status quo to where they want it to be. They have long ago started a strategy of 1000-cuts and since the international situation is in their favor they will just continue to execute that strategy.
But instead of having those 1000-cuts in the news, Israel does its best to flood Western media with ever bit of fireworks that flies over the border while the fighter jets Israel get rarely mentioned. A single Palestinian attacking somebody with a knive makes more press then a new 10000 people development in the West Bank.
"Amazing what you can achieve by some legal shananigens" applies the opposite way. These are technically parts of Israel, but Israel is not really in control of West Bank, and not at all in control of Gaza strip. They are halfway and fully controlled by hostile terrorist organizations that repeatedly claimed that the state they are "part of" must be destroyed, and implied or explicitly called for genocide as part of that.
They are not “technically parts of Israel” at all. Israel is righteous to defend its right to exist while at the same time denying the same right to Palestine and refusing the concept itself of a two-state compromise, never mind the only internationally recognised borders.
This is part of Israel just as much as Kherson is part of Russia.
I am responding to the comment saying "Fact is, Israel is in controll of those terretories, these people are suject to the Israeli state."
So you are making my point for me - yep, exactly, Israel is not in control of these territories and it's normal that rules that apply to Israeli citizens don't apply to their residents. My point exactly, glad that you agree!
And no, self-determination here cuts the other way too. "Self-determination" is what Putin uses as a pretext to first say Crimea "wants to be part of Russia" (this is actually believable to me, knowing history and having visited there decades ago - but it still shouldn't matter, Crimea is Ukraine). Then they said "DNR wants to be part of Russia", and want to have a "vote" in Kherson to allow it "self-determination".
Same as with scum and warlords in DNR/LNR and Russian army, HAMAS/FATAH and their supporting dictators from Jordan/Egypt/Syria are just scum and warlords who rejected the 2-state compromise every time they thought they have enough force to crush Israel. They are pretty much carbon copy of DNR/Putin with their "self-determination" - except weak, so instead of invading they engage in propaganda to get the gullible in the West on their side, and do legal maneuvering.
That report mentions nothing about the treatment of Arabs within Israel, where Arabs have equal rights to Jews or any other group. Rather it compare Israel with its neighbour, which everyone in this thread agrees is either a separate territory or a separate country.
Foreigners have to declare a relationship with a Palestinian within 30 days to the country occupying the West Bank. How is that similar in any way to what's happening in the US!??
Why does it apply only to relationships with Palestinians and not with Israeli citizens?
People who are born and live in Israel's occupied territories are barred from Israeli citizenship due to their ethnic and religious background. That's apartheid.
Giving citizenship to anyone born within (Jus soli) is actually not very typical in the world. The US is somewhat of an outlier. Most countries run on the principle of inheriting citizenship.
This is not a perfect analogue to the racist policies of the South African government 1948-1990, but it's not difficult to spot similarities. This certainly looks discriminatory towards all non-Israelis. And have you noticed how the artificial construct of South African "home lands" with limited autonomy look similar to the Palestinian Authority?
>It's just a declaration, pretty much like those you have to do when you want to enter the US, except with different criteria.
One explicit difference being that this is not about people entering Israel. It's about people entering those parts of the Israeli occupied areas with limited self governance through the Palestinian Authority. These people are supposed to travel over land through the Jordan border crossing only. The article even mentions quite explicitly that only in exceptional cases shall the people concerned be allowed to use Ben Gurion airport.
> Are you against Israel being a sovereign state perhaps?
Not at all. I do realise the situation in and around Israel is not simple. That doesn't mean one can't call discrimination when one notices it though...
Their unwillingness to surrender ever more (litterally less every year) territory and and water rights to colonial settlers. Their inwillingeness accept that refugees have no right to return.
Yeah they would have "sovereignty", just without most of the rights of a real state.
Do you support the "colonial settlement" of Indo-Europeans outside of the original Yamnaya territory, or should they all go back to the steppe and give Finns, Dravidians, Basques, etc. right to return?
Should the English GTFO to Denmark/Normandy/... and give the island back to the Welsh/etc.?
What about Turks, should they move back to Central Asia and give Anatolia back to Greece?
If those are not your proposals, perhaps we can just chill for a few hundred years until Israelis living where they have built a state is old enough for you to accept? :D
Oh yeah for extra credit, do the facts that Crimea, definitely, and Eastern regions, arguably, were transferred to Ukraine very recently; and then Ukraine supposedly "oppressed" them by revoking some status from Russian language, etc., justify the annexation of Crimea and/or the invasion by Russia? Cause, you know, "history", and "oppression"!
Yeah its always funny when the defense of colonialism is 'ohters' did it too.
The different of curse being that what we are talking about is much more recent and until very recently in living memories, with people still having the keys to the houses they were forced out of.
And secondary that by now the Vikings stopped arriving in Engalnd, while the Zionists continue to steal more and more land despite their agreements not to do so.
We can't change history, but saying well in the past we didn't prevent colonization, so why not just accept the systematic repression of Palestinian and the clear policy of ethnic cleansing. How is that morality? How can you justify that? That you have to talk about the viking age to justify your position tells volumes.
But the reality is, Israel is established, and its not moral to push them out and destroy it. However, how the fuck can you justify that the colonization is still going on. Literally ever year Israel is doing its best to import as many people as they can settle them into strategic territories in the West Bank where they continually take away more and more water.
And even worse leading right wing parties internal plan is to shed another few million Palestinians and then treat the small Palestians enclaves as Bantustans or not unlike Jews Gettos in Nazi Germany. Used at most to extract cheap labor.
So good luck with your historical justification for oppressing people. I'm sure the Nazis were also justified in their policy 'hey, historically jews were slaughtered during the crusade, so why are people so angry at us?'.
I do not at all agree they are oppressing people or there's any kind of systematic repression. I view the settlements, although regrettable, as a normal defense mechanism, given that Palestinians have never followed the rules before when they thought they have enough power or enough dictators supporting them to force the situation.
As for oppression in general, would you claim Israeli Arabs have worse life than Palestinians? I doubt it. Living under Israeli control in a peaceful way I'm pretty sure working much better for them.
On the other hand, in the name of belonging to a different desert death cult, i.e. out of pure anti-semitism, surrounding states sacrifice the Palestinians' lives. They used to just invade every now and then; now that they are weak they instead invest in brainwashing people like you. They rejected 2-state compromise more so than Israel, then they captured the Palestinian territories in 1948 war and controlled them for 20 years (were people then crying about occupation and oppression?) but that was not enough for them either, etc. They are not good faith actors and are treated really well by Israel given that - compared to most other states treating people in the same situation, including now (e.g. Myanmar). "Keys to houses" lol. They could have been living normal lives in Israel OR Jordan for 50 years. But no, in the name of "different death cult"/nationalistic propaganda they choose to suffer and make Israelis suffer.
"Literally ever year Israel is doing its best to import as many people as they can settle them into strategic territories" funny, when right-wingers say it its rightly called out as a racist conspiracy "replacement" theory. I am personally pro-immigration; but hey, I guess it's horseshoe theory in action :D
like it or not, more than 60% of all countries in the world recognize the State of Palestine as a full sovereignty state. It is a fact, not something remain to be negotiated.
Recognition from those countries is a fact. Recognition from more countries depends on peace talks. I’m sure you understand this and we don’t need to explain it.
It depends on both sides to show genuine willingness of the rights of the peoples on both sides.
Absolutely, Israel still has more steps to take towards peace (eg, removing settlements).
Historically though, PA leadership has rarely demonstrated any honest desire for compromise or peace. Hamas, currently the government in Gaza, literally calls for the “obliteration” of the State of Israel as part of its charter.
> Hamas, currently the government in Gaza, literally calls for the “obliteration” of the State of Israel as part of its charter.
You are free to call Hamas a terrorist group, I don't have big problem on that.
However, a very bold however, using the existence of Hamas as an excuse to paint the ongoing sufferings of Palestinians as "there is a reason behind it" or "Palestinians have their own faults as well" is not helpful - Palestinians kids growing up in isolation, poverty, anger, fear and lack of education are the ones joining Hamas tomorrow.
The responsible party in Palestinian territories is Hamas. It’s not a bad idea for Israel to start supplying their neighbour (maybe with big “a gift from Israel” stickers on whatever they donate) but Hamas is the government.
> Just because a bunch of countries believe (or don’t believe) something doesn’t make it a fact.
The statehood is all about recognization. Please check your favorite dictionary, e.g. mine says
state·hood
/ˈstātˌho͝od/
the status of being a recognized independent nation.
When talking about such recognization, there are around 8 billion people living on earth today, out of that 8 billion real people, only about 1.5 billion (18%) living in countries that do not recognize the State of Palestine as a full sovereign state. a quick break down -
750 million living in Europe, almost the entire Europe refuses to recognize the State of Palestine.
450 million in North America
130 million in Japan
30 million in Australia & New Zealand
70 million in Thailand
When the vast majority of the human race recognize it as a state, when the statehood is all about recognization. It is a fact.
By that argument, the State of Israel is not a state? Since those same countries (Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc) do not in fact recognize Israel’s existence.
The recognition you point to from other countries, is, at its heart, political. Those other countries are Muslim majority and vehemently anti-Israel. Ignoring that political and religious bias is intellectually dishonest.
But, if you still maintain Palestine is indeed a state, please answer the following:
- when was its independence?
- who is the leader?
- what is its currency?
- who are its main trade partners?
Israel is of course a state, it is a state established in 1948 and its border should thus remain in the shape and form of 1948.
> when was its independence?
15 November 1988 for declaring independence.
29 November 2012 for becoming an observer state of the United Nation General Assembly.
It becomes a fully recognized state when the UNGA observer state status was obtained after a formal vote by countries around the world. You are free to consider it as the consensus of the human race.
I haven't made the count, but the number of people living in countries that recognize Taiwan is tiny and likely smaller than one percent of the total population. Therefore, by the definition as supplied, Taiwan cannot possibly be a state. Yet it is fairly clear that it is in many ways more state-like than Palestine, and it has a firmer grasp than Palestine does on its self-defined territory (at least for the time being).
Ultimately, states don't have unanimous definitions and just relying on a dictionary definition is not sufficient.
If I walked into your house with a gun and said "this is my house now", maybe you and you neighbor can have a semantic debate over whether I actually think I am entitled to the house, but we all know that I know it's not my fucking house.
Yes exactly. We agree on this. Israel and the Palestinian territories are separate. The government of the Palestinian territories is Hamas, and Hamas is responsible for the conditions therein.
Israel is not the same as the Palestinian territories, it is a neighbour, and in the state of Israel, Jews and Arabs and Christians and Atheists have very similar rights.
Have ukranians conducted a terror campaign against Russian citizens, kidnapping, torturing and killing innocent civilians, with widespread popular support behind the killings?
Most of Israeli Jews are of middle eastern origin. Their ancestors have never been to Europe, and they have been forced to flee their homes and go to Israel because of persecution by Muslim Arabs across the middle east — the same genocidal racism that stands behind current conflict.
If you're so misinformed about the region that you think israelis are “European”, please refrain from commenting on the topic.
Jews lived in these places for 1000 of years and it just so happen that they had to leave those countries at the same time Zionism was marching forward.
Also, jews of Iraq have no more claim to land in Palastine then Jews of Galacia.
I thought they were referring to the post-ww2 'spoils of war' perspective, rather than 'we were here the longest' (for certain values of 'we' and 'longest'). But so many promises have been broken, so many borders changed, so many people swapped in and out, it's hard to call it sensible.
Why is this Abrahamic religion split accepted in the first place. Or is it racist? Long-running feuds?
It's sad to see so many families harmed in all this, their land taken away.
Jews from Europe and the former Soviet Union and their descendants born in Israel, including Ashkenazi Jews, constitute approximately 50% of Jewish Israelis.
It’s less than what any other reasonable and self-respecting country would do. Inhabitants of that area do not recognize Israel as the state they reside in, and certainly they are not Israeli citizens. This rule regards a zone which has been at war for decades and which had daily suicide attacks until very strict checkpoints were placed.
Strange then that Gaza is firing missiles into Israel rather than negotiating for peace and independence.
Israel has repeatedly said that Gaza can be free and independent if they would just stop firing missile over the border into Israel and sign a peace agreement.
It's insane that people here are taking sides, including the above linked organizations, instead of pressuring Hamas (which controls Gaza) to accept a peace deal.
There are not settlements in Gaza. There are no Israeli soldiers in Gaza. It's the simplest easiest peace deal - stop shooting missiles at Israeli cities.
...and for those who don't understand why they do not do this incredibly easy thing - it is because Hamas is entirely funded and owned by Iran, who specifically forbids any peace with Israel.
Maybe Israel should stop shooting people on the Gazan side of the wall within the so called "buffer zone". Why one side shooting is good and the other side is bad?
Shooting at the border goes both ways at the Gazan border. It's a tense border in what is effectively a war zone. No one should approach it from either side.
Again, stop trying to take sides in a war you have no skin in the game. It's easy to tell Gazans to keep fighting Israel from the comfort of your basement.
Real courage is in advocating a peace deal for Gaza.
Not that what the rules actually say matters to anyone here, but you can read the text for yourself (the article even links to them):
"A foreigner married to a resident of the Area, or forming a
couple with one, must proceed to make arrangements
according to Part 4 of this procedure before arriving at the
Area. If the relationship starts after the foreigner arrived
at the Area, then the authorized COGAT official must be
informed in writing (at a special e-mail address) within 30
days of the relationship's start. At the same time, an
application must be submitted to the Palestinian Authority
for formalizing the status in accordance with Part 4 of this
procedure. For the purpose, the "starting date of the
relationship" shall be considered the day of the
engagement ceremony, of the wedding, or of the start of
cohabitation – whichever occurs first."
"Under this procedure, entry and resident permits for the
Area are divided into various categories. Permits under
Part 2 of this procedure are intended for a short visit in
the Area, lasting no more than three months, whereas
permits under Part 3 of the procedure are resident
permits issued for various specific purposes in
accordance with the provisions of this section. Part 4 of
this procedure refers to applications for formalizing status
in the Area and to the possibility of receiving permits for
foreign spouses of the Area's residents to reside together
with their Palestinian spouses (i.e. spousal permits) when
an application that the foreign spouse's status be
formalized has been submitted by the Palestinian
Authority but rejected."
In short, if you become engaged, married, or cohabiting, then yes you may not qualify anymore for the visa you entered under (and need a different permit), and have to report that within 30 days.
> In short, if you become engaged, married, or cohabiting, then yes you may not qualify anymore for the visa you entered under (and need a different permit), and have to report that within 30 days.
Who gives Israel the rights to issue such visas in the first place? US made tanks and missiles? Why should Palestinians apply Israeli visas to enter and stay in Palestinian land?
Well, for the most part, these are people flying into Tel Aviv, Israel.
...but to answer your more general question: Since the most recent Arab invasion of Israel, Israel controls all border crossings into the Palestinian territories - even though the Palestinian territories are self-governed.
If Gaza and/or the West Bank were to sign a peace deal with Israel, then this would end.
So I suppose the question is - Why aren't Gaza and the West Bank signing a peace agreement?
The real answer is different for both of those entities. For Gaza, it's simple. Gaza is entirely run by Hamas, an Iranian funded terrorist group. And Iran has explicitly instructed them to never sign a peace deal with Israel. There aren't even any settlements in Gaza - nor Israeli military there. Moreover, the border is well established.
The West Bank is far more complicated given settlements, division of Jerusalem, and water rights - but a deal was very nearly achieved in the last negotiations (all points were settled) but Arafat walked away from deal because he didn't want Israel to hold any portion of Jerusalem at all - even the portions inhabited entirely by Jews.
Isreal has a well established history of not honoring treaties so I don't see why Arab countries would be expected to honor their end of the deal.
The Palestinians will probably do the right thing and preserver until the israelis cross yet another red line. Let's just hope - for the israelis sake - that they don't cross a line to far.
> The regulations laid out in a lengthy document include a demand on foreigners to inform the Israeli authorities within 30 days of starting a relationship with a Palestinian ID holder.
I hope the lengthy document also lays out the specifics of what constitutes the "start of a relationship" so that all such relationships can be duly planned to comply with the framework. Hopefully it also covers the handling for "in-flight" relationships.
I like how much context the media gives on this issue
"Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan in the 1967 Middle East War" - no mention, of course, of the fact that Jordan occupied it after 1948 war. And that at the initial Palestinian state was supposed to be Jordan, known then as Trans-Jordan, and the later, proposed UN partition created the state of Israel with multiple impossible-to-defend chokepoints to cut - if somehow they accepted this partition in 1948, given the real, factual history of attacks on it by neighboring states they wouldn't exist already.
With journalists who ought to be well-informed, I cannot chalk it up to incompetence - it's anti-semitism, pure and simple.
ADDED oh and, having been an immigrant to both Canada and US, all this kind of stuff is relatively normal. By relatively I mean given the relative security situation. Especially on family visas (not my case) where the US literally checks on your private life to ensure it's not fraud. On non-immigrant visa they grill you about potential jobs you might have lined up, or any relationships you might have, in case you are lying about your intent. Or, you could try to check out the medical restrictions that (used to?) exist when immigrating to Canada. Of course just like with the history, half-truths are necessary here to create the correct narrative that this is somehow abnormal.
Perfectly reasonable for a zone which has been at war for decades, and a country which has avoided daily suicide attacks by placing checkpoints and strict borders. This is another undesirable but necessary step in that direction.
I'm at the opposite end, where it's hard to be outraged about a new rule like this for a different reason. It's a place where a state sniper openly murders a journalist and nothing happens. I had already assumed this kind of thing was in place.
it is funny how american "ally"ness with israel somehow manages to put a cover on the "western" democracy values and "freedoms"....
i am pretty sure the moment israel-usa relations turn sour, usa would wake up to the "inhuman treatment" and "apartheid"....
right now its all fair and square and under the approval of American interests so its all fine. even EU hasn't had that "woke" moment with Palestinian yet, most probably because of the same pro-israel lobby....
I mean the answer is pretty clear even for Europe. With ISIS committing acts of terror in Europe, it helps to have a country in the Middle East as an ally.
It's largely due to that alliance that ISIS even cares about Europe. The "alliance" itself is largely one-way - the US and Europe topple the government of any country that looks at Israel funny, and in return they get.. what?
The usual answer is oil, but the cost of the Iraq war is estimated at $1.9 trillion [1]. Even if all of Iraq's oil industry was taken by the US, and its revenue was 100% profit that went entirely to the US, at the current record-high export of $11 billion/month [2], it would take 15 years to break even.
But neither of those assumptions hold - oil industry profit margins vary between 5% and 30% [3,4], and the media seems shockingly disinterested in reporting how oil company ownership or profit flow changed following the war, but let's be generous and say it resulted in half of their total profits being diverted to the US (that weren't already diverted before).
Under these more realistic but still very generous assumptions (using the 30% high-water mark for profit margin), it would take 97 years to break-even. That is also assuming Iraq would remain a stable pawn to US interests for that entire time, and it wouldn't take more military spending to keep them in line.
Except that the cost was paid by Iraqi citizens, and, to a small degree, American taxpayers, while the profits go to a small group of people/companies. In other words it’s still extremely profitable to US - to the part of the country that makes decisions.
look at this. India, back before 1991, had this printed on their passport. I dare any human rights advocating country to do this today against Israeli apartheid state?
so europe, with all its tall talks of freedoms and human rights is openly supporting an apartheid state just because it wants an "ally" in a region that they cannot police themselves so they want constant infighting there rather than back home..... nice
Well…yeah. Realpolitik is about the reality on the ground not ideals and a perfect world that doesn’t exist.
Countries that lives in a fantasy world where you can cut off contact with every country that doesn’t meet your standards find themselves isolated pretty quickly.
The relationship has been pretty sour since Netanyahu for a lot of Americans. He openly meddled in internal US politics, like Putin but with less gaslighting.
I jsut watched Hanity from back in the day on this outrage, its worse than I thought, the man ordered his burger medium-well done. What kind of a savage does that?
It's easy to ask Palestinians and Gazans and Israelis to fight and die from the comfort of our western basements, but how many of you have the courage to point to a peace deal and publicly advocate that the sides sign it to end the conflict?
How many comments and articles on social media (including HN) push people to take sides instead? Seldom to I see articles or comments even mention the last viable peace deal that was on the table.
It's the worst kind of journalism, and it attracts the worst kind of online participants.
I know border crossings can take a while, but explaining my polycule is going to make this a long process. I hope they have time for tea, paper diagrams and Google Calendar.
This policy is nothing compared to the reality of the situation on the ground. The treatment of the native Palestinian people is much worse than this and Israeli crimes are consistently covered up by the mainstream media and Internet companies like Google.
I got the same all the time in US immigration (flying to texas) they ask me thousands of personal questions about my family, my universities, if I am gay or bisexual??? I think people need to take a good look at US immigration too,
I live in israel, I am jewish practicing and a lot of my friends (outside of work, we are running togethere) are muslim, and most people don't care about politics, just saying it's not that black and white....
Im not jewish and visited Israel recently for several weeks. Despite thinking I had a pretty good knowledge base of the situation beforehand, actually being there, and talking to people with actual stake in the region it became obvious that the opinions of people who have never been to Israel and dont have any skin in the game (95% of this thread) are completely off base, un-nuanced and literally worthless.
Visiting the country for only a few weeks isn't going to give you much more insight on the place than random commenters, especially if by your own admission you were already prone to overestimating your understanding.
I dont like giving an opinion for the same reasons I was complaining about. I dont have stake in the region and there is so much nuance in the history im still missing. Things that I found striking though were that there are huge populations of arabs that live peacefully in Israel so this apartheid narrative is complete nonsense. The power dynamics are pretty set in stone, Israel will never have to give up an ounce of land that they dont want to. Anyone that talks about who has what right to what pieces of land are completely out of touch with that. It is irrelevant at this point. And Israel is making massive investments in the country. Palestinians could easily partake in that economic expansion but instead devote a significant portion of their economic activity to the conflict with Israel which has 0% chance of changing anything ever. Pretty sad imho
> there are huge populations of arabs that live peacefully in Israel so this apartheid narrative is complete nonsense.
For many, the narrative has superseded reality. And that’s the crux of the issue. If only more people had your level of willingness to explore the facts on the ground with their own eyes. Thank you so much for sharing your perspective.
