Non-partisan explaination of Israel

I don't understand what's going on recently with Israel. I've tried reading articles on trusted news sites, but I just don't understand. Can someone that's not anti-Obama explain it?

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

The UN Security Counsel puts forth a lot of resolutions on Israel about human rights violations against Palestinians, particularly regarding settlements encroaching on what used to be Palestinian territory. The United States reliably vetoes these resolutions, and has consistently in the last 40 years, since the US and Israel have historically had a close relationship. The Obama administration's decision to abstain in this vote allowed this most recent resolution to pass, and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has been very vocal about his anger towards Obama for this. He's also been talking strongly about cutting ties to the (mostly small) nations that co-sponsered the resolution, like New Zealand (he said they've "declared war" on Israel) and Senegal.

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

I think Obama may not feel the need to appease pro-Israel constituents (Dem and Repub alike) here in the US now that he's exiting and he wanted to send a message to Israel that this really is a human rights issue they should be addressing. The resolution passed 14-0. I absolutely understand the pro-Israel stance -- they are a nation with hostile neighbors...even hostile seems like an understatement, but it seems like Palestinians are marginalized in the country.

Edit: Sorry, just realized you asked for something short, and I'm incapable of giving a true short version of anything on Israel! It just seems so nuanced and complicated.

Message edited 12/28/2016 11:27:14 AM.

Non-partisan explaination of Israel

I still don't get it :/

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

It is not Palestinian land. Arabs attacked Israel in 1967. Many Arab nations. Israel won and kept the land. Israel has tried to give the land back MANY times and to withdraw. Israelis want to live in peace but they need to keep control for security. The Palestinians have launched thousands of terrorist attacks.

They want nothing but the complete destruction of Israel. It is not a human rights issue. The Palestinians use all of their money on weapons and none on their people. Without Israel they would have no water, no electricity, nothing. Other Arab nations provide nothing to them.

It's an absolute joke for the UN to continuously condem Israel when these countries kill women, gays etc. it's blatant anti- semitism.

In palestinian schools they literally teach that Jews are they devil and should be killed.

Message edited 12/28/2016 11:41:01 AM.

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

Message edited 12/28/2016 11:49:02 AM.

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

The UN partitioned the land in 1948- half to Arabs and half to Jews. The Jews said thank you very much. The Arabs attacked. Israel won. The Arabs attacked in 1956, 1967, 1973. Israel kept winning. Why should Israel give back any land they won? What other country would be expected to do that? The Palestinians were under Jordanian rule- in refugee camps and lived in squalor prior to 1967. Israel took the land in 1967- to keep security borders after they were attacked. Only now the world criticizes?

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

Message edited 12/28/2016 12:19:52 PM.

Non-partisan explaination of Israel

If you want to take sides, consider. One side makes their woman cover their bodies, doesn't allow them to drive without a man watching them in the car, kills people who are homosexual, and had a hand in the world trade center bombings. No rights, no monies spent on the people in the country and money spent on their hypocritical life style with those white hats on the mens head like they are all sheiks with white stallions.
On the other hand, a little country where they spend time inventing medicines and cures for what ails the world, encourage woman to get educations, spend money on improving the condlitions of the people in the country and don't want trouble but the bullies force them to defend themselves. If one country were to have their way, all the woman on Long Island would be wearing burkas or jihabs or what ever they call them. A boon for fabric companies but a tragedy for the world.

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

The short answer is there is no non-partisan explanation of the situation in Israel. And I say this in all seriousness, as a Jew and a Zionist who is pro-Obama. The situation there is mired in history and context, and there is no short answer or explanation to ANYTHING that happens. If you're interested and do not want your thoughts colored by others' opinions, your best bet would be to look into the history through past news reportings and books/texts from both sides. I'm happy to recommend some for you, however you may also want to get some from people who consider themselves more pro-Palestinian, as my bias leans heavily to Israel.

Non-partisan explaination of Israel

I wasn't looking for a quick answer bc I didn't think there would be one. I just knew that Obama voted it down in the past and now a lot of anti-Obama people in my FB feed are using this as a way to say "See? He's awful and I can't wait until Trump's in office." (Which blows my mind bc Trump's only going to do what lines rich people's pockets.)

Non-partisan explaination of Israel

Just cant wait until January 20, for the new administration! Just a note that anytime Israel has given back anything to the Palestinians there was distruction. No one told the arabs to leave in 1948 they choose the wrong side and ran! Its the land of Israel that the Palestinians want to distroy, no matter what lands are given back or settled it will never be enough until they destroy Israel and all the Western Democratic countries of the world. Hope that will never happen under Trump which is why I voted for him!!!

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

Message edited 12/28/2016 4:01:15 PM.

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

So the best analogy I can come up with for the US is the French and Indian War. The US fraught and won land. So did Israel in the 1940s and in the 1960s. Imagine after the French and Indian war where the US won, Nearly 50 years later, Americans wanted to build cities on the land they won. They want to build a suburb of St. Lewis. Now the UN says you can't build your home in a new suburb of St. Lewis. You would look at the UN and say WTF.

Ok now here is the background. You know how the US settlers bought the Island of Manhattan for 34 and some beads? In the early 1900s the British bought farms and land from Arab people. The British gave Jewish people the land of Israel. So now some people are angry because their great great great grandparent sold the old family farm. They argue that it should still be theirs. The issue is that Palestinians were not a county. Really, they should be Jordanians, Libians, or Syrians, but none of the other Arabs want them. So they are stateless people. There are Arab and Muslim Jews whose family did not sell their land and they became Israeli Arabs with all of the rights and privileges of Israeli citizenship.

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

Non-partisan explaination of Israel

There are no unbiased answers. I read an old book that could have been written yesterday called "The Arabs," which seeks to explain the history of the area and what many previous posters say is absolutely true. It is a place of conflict. It was before Israel became Israel and it remains so. Not to generalize, but the people of the region only want to fight over land, but not develop it, modernize it, or make it habitable. Whenever there have been proposed solutions, it's been another war. It is no secret that Jews and Israel are not well liked, but it kind of makes no sense if you think about it. All they want is a place to be..and it's SMALL...there is the REST of the Middle Eastern land and the Northern part of Africa ripe for advancing civilization, Muslim culture, etc. which is HUGE and full of resources (Nile River, etc.)

I am pro-Israel but this will not make me pro-Trump by any means. I do feel they are picked on and many other, horrible atrocities are not given any mind (Syria). Not that any one should be persecuted, but no one should be bullied, either. Israel has many more positives than negatives coming from it and it should be seen as such....

Re: Non-partisan explaination of Israel

I don't disagree with the pro Israel stance on here but I see it with a bit more nuance.

Some thoughts in no particular order:

I also recommend The Arabs by David Lamb. It's older, so it's more for the historical context, but it is very non partisan. It's written by a journalist. Reserve it from your library if you're really interested in this issue.

The settlements are illegal according to the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. Now, before anyone jumps down my throat, it's another question entirely whether or not the territories should be considered "occupied" and not "part of Israel because they won it in a war they didn't start." (This is where my largely pro Israeli stance comes in - they've been acting on the defense from literally day one.)

The British didn't buy anything. The Ottoman Empire lost WW1, and since it was crumbling anyway, its takeover and domination by the European powers was inevitable. The Sykes Picot agreement was a secret agreement between Britain and France carving up the Levant (the area around and including Israel) before they even won the war. In it they agree to facilitate and protect free Arab States. Then comes the Balfour Declaration, in which they promise to create a Jewish state; many see that as a violation of Sykes Picot. Either way, there was an awful lot of interference going on.

The reason why Israel said "Thank you very much" is because they got over half the land even though they had less than half of the people. (Yes, the Law of Return meant they needed space to resettle European Jews after the hell they had been through, but I can see how the other side can view the division as unjust.) Anyway, the inception of the Jewish state is not without its controversy and speaks to a basic question - how much of a right do the dominant world powers have to carve up the territory of others?

I think Israel is in a tough spot because its enemies beef is really with the European powers who carved it up but they take it out on them. On top of that, said powers are constantly punishing them for actions other countries get away with easily.

On the other hand, Israel has had some HARD right government leaders who have railed against a two state solution and not made things easier over the years.

I don't think mocking the Palestinian lifestyle is the answer here. Just because a nation isn't modernized or their religion is different from yours doesn't mean they don't have a right to statehood.