Fourth Geneva Convention, Section III, Article 49.
The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.
9 Likes
Donald Trump is one general election away from our nuclear codes. At this point, I say why not allow the Iroquois, Shoshone, Navajo, and the rest of the tribes a chance to run the show? I’ve always wanted to live amongst the peyote anyway.
5 Likes
I said “most”, because I was being literal. my numbers for Jewish rule are three or four centuries higher, but I guess we get to a point where it become nitpicking. And complicated, like when the Turks ejected the Arabs from Israel. The primary point I am making is that it is fallacious to take the view that the Palestinians had happily lived in Israel since prehistory, until the Jews came in in 1948, and started kicking them out. It is way more complicated than that. It almost always is.
I am not an expert on the area. I have a little knowledge, and I have spent some time there. I do know a little about cultural exchange and genocide, which is why I tend to chime in when these topics come up.
2 Likes
if @Mister44 is willing to nit-pick he could argue that it’s still not a war crime but only violation of international law (not sure who introduced the term, I wasn’t paying attention)
Eh. I’m not familiar enough with the Conventions to know which parts are actually defined as “war crimes.” I just found the part of the Conventions that I thought were being referred to.
and I’m grateful for the link, I wasn’t aware that it’s stated that clearly in the convention - typically international law is an unreadable mess
Happy to help!
I guess when the goal is to have everyone actually adhere to the intent of the law, being plainspoken is a good thing. What that says about the rest of international law that it’s written by the rich for the rich to screw everyone else while looking fair upon first glance I really couldn’t say.
Even that is complicated. Everyone seems to agree that it was wrong for the Texans to drive out the Comanches, but the Comanches had only recently genocided the Jumano tribe, when the Comanches adapted horse warfare, and swept out of their native territory in Wyoming shortly after 1700. The Jumano were a major force in the new world, they built Gran Quivera, which is no small thing. Now, they exist mostly as traces of DNA scattered among the Apaches. So, is the genocide of the Jumano by the Comanche and Apache people acceptable, while the actions of the Spanish and Texans against the Comanche and Apache are not? I really do not have the answer to that. I do not want to fall into the trap of lumping all of the native peoples together based on my racial preconceptions, as they are distinct from each other in many important ways. A tribe that practices advanced agriculture and irrigation while living in stone and adobe houses in large cities is very distinct from a nomadic tribe which live a hunter-gatherer lifestyle, especially when they do not share a common language or religion.
Just a thought.
7 Likes
I am very much aware of this, as I myself as a staunch critic of Israel’s actions.
However, I will say this, because you’re attempting to invoke the “I’m not antisemitic, I’m anti-Zionist!” fallacy: Regardless of what you assert here, there is still a significant amount of criticism of Israel that is antisemitic in nature, and that uses that fallacy to attempt to silence or undermine responses that point out the antisemitic aspects.
Beyond that, I’m not going to say anymore; I’m expecting to get attacked further just for this reply.
3 Likes
Could you provide at least one reasonably objective source that proves that a significant amount of criticism of Israel’s actions is antisemitic in nature? (By the way, that’s what I’m mostly seeing in this thread, criticism of its actions, not of Israel itself.) I ask because at least 99% of what I’ve seen and heard is against oppression of Palestinians, and not at all in some way against Jewish people. Actually, maybe 100%; the few antisemites I’ve ever met never seem to have given a thought to Israel. Also, many of these critics I’ve met are Jewish themselves (and do not fall fairly into the category of “self-hating Jews” just because they’re against Israeli state-sanctioned oppression of and theft from Palestinians).
4 Likes
I’ve already said that I’m not going to respond further, and given that you’ve called me a Nazi in the past on this topic, I really have zero incentive to assume that you’re willing to listen to me in good faith.
turns off notifications for topic
2 Likes
There is a huge difference between pointing out the illegal occupation and implying they are similar to bugs.
4 Likes
Because the West Bank was seized in the 1967 war, so during war time. the continued occupation stems from that.
3 Likes
Given who’s been stealing the land, and why, I think “pawns” might be more accurate than merely “settlers”.
- I guess ‘since 1948’ doesn’t cut it? I don’t really understand what you want to say here. If today the irish would occupy holland I’m quite sure the rest of the world would stand by the dutch. Even if the irish (with help from their expats in the US) had the better weapons and ‘won’.
But you are right stuff is not black and white.
-
Maybe not so much in the current press or in the comments section of websites. There has been plenty of condemnation of that though.
-
Israel receives a lot of support from the west. In return you expect better behaviour.
The peace through diplomacy has been a farce mostly. You can’t negotiate a peace with someone while your building their land full of houses for your own people.
Of course none of the parties are innocent. Israel is the only one with support from the west, though.
- I don’t understand what you mean here. You mean to say “the palestinians are a minority, they should accept suppression”? Never mind it is their land we’re talking about?
The rise of antisemitism in the arab world is a rather new phenomenon by the way, and mainly caused by Israels offensive tactics.
- I don’t have time to watch it atm, will try later.
3 Likes
Nobody is doing that.
Not in the press maybe (but the process has been slow, about 20 years ago Israel could do no wrong in the mainstream media here in Holland). But there are zero consequences. No economic sanction, no UN resolutions. All vetoed by the west.
If any other country would pull the shit that Israel does, there would be a UN peacekeeping force there to keep the parties apart and demolish the illegal settlements.
Btw, ‘illegal settlements’ sounds like it’s a few villages here and there. But look at this map:
Then you understand why the palestinians are as angry as they are.
3 Likes
Of course, Israel has several times made offers that amount to an almost complete return to the 1947 borders.
But those have been repeatedly rejected. Every palestinian organization to my knowledge has a clause somewhere in its mission statement that calls for the rollback of Israel to what you show as the 1946 map.
And this simply is not going to happen. Ever. Unless the Iraqis or Pakistanis manage to nuke the land to the point where it’s uninhabitable by anyone, the almost-Judenfrei situation of 1946 is never coming back.
1 Like
Hell, us indigenous people would like you to stop building and selling resources of the land you already acknowledge we “own” now without our consent or compensation.
“own” is in quotes because if we owned it, then we would be able to sell it to non-natives instead of parceling it off on “leases” that we don’t ever seem to get back or compensated for.
Sigh. Sometimes I feel like the only way for displaced people to not be in conflict with their displacers is to disregard nationality/origins all together, but I think that would make a culturally poor world. It would be nice if we could all accept each others history/culture/religion without all the baggage of conflict and hate, but that is impossible to do while hate speech and outright violence continues to happen.
8 Likes
Actually, I was talking about here, in this thread.
I’m well aware of geo-political situation regarding the occupation, as are many people here.
Settler colonialism is a hell of a drug.
5 Likes
