Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Proposal on Embassy Locations
128 countries have decided that they have every right to tell another nation what can and cannot be its capital city. Each of these countries marked in green has said that Jerusalem is not Israel’s capital city and that agreeing with Israel that it is should be punished.
Let us extend the principle. If one nation can tell another nation what its capital is, then it follows that the United States can declare for those nations where their capitals are. Instead of having to put our embassies close to their governments and where they think their capitals are, we can put our embassies in places convenient for us.
- Oh, look, the United Kingdom has endorsed this principle. So, we can move our embassy to their new capital, according to us, of Brighton. Less traffic, fewer people, lower real estate prices, and it’s a nice seaside town.
- Who else do we have? Japan? New capital on the island of Iwo Jima, perhaps?
- Zimbabwe? Nobody wants to actually be in Zimbabwe. Let’s move their capital to somewhere more convenient, like Newark, New Jersey. Nobody wants to be there, either, but it’s much more convenient than Harare.
- The Principality of Andorra? Wait, we don’t have an embassy or other mission in Andorra. Well, that’s okay. We’ll move the capitals of both Spain and France there, and then we will have an embassy there.
If they complain, we just say, “But in the UN, you said…”
Published in Humor
We actually have pretty high rate of immigration per capita. The country has a fairly pro immigration policy.
Of course this is made politically possible by very strong border protection (helps that we’re an island) – and none of this is relevant to how Australia deals with its indigenous population. (Mixed, but they’re citizens and nobody tries to deprive them of those rights.)
I think it’s made of fire retardant material, and it’s under a lawn and behind a fence. (Also – they aren’t doing too awful a job. Give them a chance?)
Why aren’t you burning down whatever building that houses the Government organ that bugs you the most?
Would you be Jewish and live in a Palestinian state?
Dude, are you moving the goal posts?
Never mind.
The issue is having equal rights.
If yes, then possibly. If no, then I would prefer not.
And in any case – the claim that Palestinians say that there can be no Jewish Palestinian citizens in a free Palestine is demonstrably false. Right? So why make it? How does that reflect well on your argument?
An open invitation to be butchered by savages, how can anyone resist?
You might be able to prove that many Arabs sold property to Jews in the 1940’s. I doubt you could prove that they expected to reclaim it after the Jews were dead. It’s not the kind of thing that can be proved.
Yes, that is an interesting paper.
As I interpret that paper, it does not support your assertion that the official Israeli position is that “someone running away due to fear of violence isn’t a refugee.” In fact, I don’t see any claims, in that paper, that the paper has captured and explains the official Israeli position:
“The participants were Israeli and international experts on the Middle East Peace Process and the Palestinian refugee issue, acting in a personal capacity.”
I generally favor the idea of compensating people (or, rather, by this time, mostly heirs of people) who lost property. The practical challenge, of course, would often be in establishing proof of pre-1948 ownership.
Do you understand that, according to the definition of “proof,” there basically isn’t any that you can get from online sources?
The best you can find is someone with an opinion, quoting biased people, at about the same remove as my comment above.
Most of the Palestinian-leaning media follows a much, much less strict standard of “proof” about Israel than what you’re complaining about. Hell, they quote Hezbollah sources.
It’s much more fun to just yell at each other than to try to “prove” stuff.
Wrong.
Hezbollah – you know, the people who are basically running the whole area – keep killing Jewish people because, you know, they’re Jewish. That’s at least a pretty strong hint, even for you.
So it’s an ambit claim – iow, ‘not provable’.
When people disagree, these kind of claims and counter-claims don’t seem to contribute constructively to their conversation.
Jmho, but it may be better to stick to claims that are provable?
I’ve never heard of Hezbollah aspiring to rule Palestine, or indeed of the PLO or PA wanting Hezbollah to rule Palestine.
Is this another impossible to prove claim?
But wrt Hezbollah and Jews – I’m afraid you’re at least partly right. (Though not wholly.)
Like this?
I’m not Jewish, but I can understand their wish for a “safe space,” though it’s not turned out to be one. The 40’s were pretty hard on them.
No, that is provable – for individual Palestinians.
Edit: and frankly the claim that (individual) Palestinians sold their property to (individual members of) the Yishuv with the express intention of returning after an Arab invasion to take it back for free is provable, it’s just completely nonsensical.
What is the timeline? When did they sell? When did they first ‘know’ about this Arab invasion? When did they even know about the new States’ proposed borders, votes by the UN, etc? How did they know about these rather crucial details decades before they happened? Witchcraft? A crystal ball? A phenominal talent with tarot cards? The whole claim only has a gauzy appearance of maybe being true if one has no familiarity with the dates or events involved. If one does it is completely unbelievable.
But to prove the claim:
Who are these people?
Can they be interviewed?
If they exist, they can be.
Can their stories be corroborated by others?
Can their claims to have sold land be confirmed?
These are basic first steps to prove or disprove a claim.
I sympathise with the wish for a safe space as well, but taking a country that was already full of other people (who were not responsible, note it, for the Holocaust) and deciding that it was going to be Israel seems like a recipe for ongoing conflict.
Or just plain craziness.
Take your pick.
You understand that the Jewish claim on Jerusalem predates the Holocaust by a couple thousand years, right? (And also the founding of Islam?)
It wasn’t just plopped down there at random.
That is an amazingly detailed list of “first steps.” Pretty much all of it would require me to travel to Israel, do voluminous research, and get a bunch of Palestinians to admit that they sold their land to Jewish people in the first place. Which would get them killed. Right.
You also seem to think that the various wars in that region were all surprises. The only thing that was surprising about any of them was the timing. The most-startling one was the 1967 war, and the only shock about that one was that the Israelis didn’t wait for their neighbors to start things for a change.
I can’t think of any news story about the Mideast that has gone into anything like that sort of detail. Ever.
On the other hand, my friend (again, since you seem to have forgotten) the Palestinian said so, about his own people. Which is pretty much all I need.
Here’s how it’s done.
Other people may need more. No offence intended.
Zafar, I followed the link to the Times of Israel and I think it raises more questions than answers. Even taking the quote from Ashwari at face value (and assuming it represents the aggregate view of the Palestinian leadership(s)) it suggests to me that just about any Jew holding property -however acquired-within the new Palestinian State can be designated a “settler” and therefore excluded/ejected from the State. And I don’t see why Israeli citizens should be excluded from residency as long as they abide by Palestinian laws? As a variation on my original proposition I ask: Is there anyplace else on Earth where the “international community” would support the permanent exclusion -as a matter of founding principle-of the citizens of a specific country from residency in another State?
And as a follow-on, how is the exclusion of “settlers” to be implemented?
No, I don’t believe there is, but nonetheless:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/controversial-citizenship-law-that-bans-palestinians-married-to-israelis-from-living-in-israel-10327385.html
In other words, you’re willing to take the word of old people you’ve never met as “proof,” as long as it’s against Israel.
Right.
Well they’re willing to state publicly what happened, and their stories are corroborated.
Point is: it can be done.
Yeah, they’re willing to go along with what all of their neighbors say.
Going along with Hezbollah propaganda in that region isn’t exactly brave, while admitting that Israel is right in any respect is often a death sentence.
Again with Hezbollah.
Please note: Hezbollah is a Lebanese movement, it isn’t really associated with Palestine.
Is it possible that you’re confusing it with Hamas?
But there are so many reasons to say that Israel is wrong, I don’t think people who have been impacted by the Nakba or Naksa need to be threatened by a death sentence to say that.
If you look at the Zochrot archives you’ll notice they interview people involved in both sides of the conflict. Iow, they also interview Jews who were part of the Irgun and Stern Gang.