Why I Rarely Argue About Israel and the Palestinians Anymore

 

Debating controversial issues is fun for some people; they like the fight and drama. Sometimes they actually have a dog in the fight. But frankly, I’m not a person who likes a fight, and I never have. I’m not afraid of controversy; in fact, sometimes I enjoy discussing controversial subjects when the dynamics are supportive.

But when it comes to the Israelis and the Palestinians, I have pretty much bowed out of those discussions, even though they are with people whom I consider to be my friends. I used to be willing to take on all challenges. It just doesn’t seem worth it anymore. Why, you may ask.

For me to enter a conflict-ridden discussion, I have to feel passionate about it. That certainly applies to Israel. I want to talk with people who I think are reasonable and count on reliable sources of information; this is where the subject gets dicey. There are hundreds if not thousands of sources that are on either side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I obviously believe in the veracity of the publications I read; people who disagree with me trust a whole other set of media. Positions are so polarized that even if there were room for learning, or possibly changing minds, no one is truly interested in that effort. We are simply too far apart.

The same criteria apply to almost any controversial topic: anything on the extreme political Left is most likely to differ drastically with the political Right: Wokeism, government spending, overreach by all branches of government, and the administrative state are just a few examples. The main problem, I believe, is not only are positions polarized, but we don’t believe we can learn anything meaningful from the other side. On the Right, we also question the Left’s motives, their commitment to truth, their understanding of the implications of their beliefs, and their willingness to generate practical compromises.

They only care about winning.

Which brings me back to the Israeli-Palestinian issue. We can argue about the history of the situation, the agendas of all sides, the potential for peace. But I just can’t get past one simple fact:

The Arabs/Palestinians want to drive the Israelis into the sea.

No matter whether a one or two-state solution is negotiated, they are angry, feel abused and injured. And those in charge are committed to destroying Israel and the Jews.

That’s a subject I refuse to contemplate.

[photo courtesy of unsplash.com]

Published in Foreign Policy
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 108 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    cdor (View Comment):
    This is my empirical judgment and not based on statistical proof. But I think it’s pretty darn close to being on the money. I did put #5 as a sub-group to #2. 

    It brings to mind the time when I was practicing Zen Buddhism, and was invited to speak to a group of rabbis and cantors-in-training. They were curious about why I wasn’t practicing Judaism (although I hadn’t formally left). One person asked me if I was a self-hating Jew. I was surprised at my own reaction; I didn’t get defensive or angry. I said, no, I wasn’t a self-hating Jew; I had gravitated to Zen because I realized that I didn’t have a relationship with Judaism and found one in Zen. Then one fellow told me that if he spent an hour with me over coffee, he’d convince me to once again embrace Judaism; I thought he was incredibly arrogant and naive. But then, here I am!

    • #91
  2. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Jack Mantle (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn: The Arabs/Palestinians want to drive the Israelis into the sea.

    Yes. This.

    There is no way to settle anything when one side is calling for the destruction of the other.

    Sure there is. Hiroshima comes to mind.

    We are not calling for the destruction of Japan at all.

    Please find for me where we called for that.

    I interpreted Mantle’s comment as “we were stopping Japan who was the one calling for total destruction of the other (of China, Korea, and all of East Asia + the United States).

     

    Except, Japan was not calling for that either.

    Still no good.

    They may not have made “official calls” for the destruction of China, Korea, and Southeast Asia, but they were carrying out a genocidal campaign that killed tens of millions of people long before our entry into World War II. That was far greater destruction and death than anything modern Arabs have accomplished in total so far.

    I don’t disagree. But, in the comparison being made, my point is that Israel cannot have peace with an enemy who’s goal is their utter destruction. 

     

    • #92
  3. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Must Palestine die for Israel to live? Or at least be redefined into what is convenient but no longer real or itself? And similarly Israel for Palestine to live?

    Perhaps – which is what makes it a tragedy. I don’t see any happy endings, even ‘winning’ comes at a cost.

    Life is a tragedy. But, for many the tragedy is self-inflicted. I think the Palestinian reaction to their circumstances is more than half the problem. They could assimilate where they are — whether in Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, etc. But, no, they foster bitterness and grievance (a leftwing feature, btw) and ruin their own lives by that means. It’s the same with blacks in America.

    The only good lesson I took away from 12 years of post-Vatican II CCD (Catholic Sunday school) was this: it’s not what happens to you in life that matters. It’s how you choose to respond. Palestinians have responded poorly. Palestinians hurt worst.

    And those Palestinians who desire freedom, democracy and human rights are subject to persecution in the Palestinian territories.

    It’s like trying to be supportive of a free press in North Korea. There are North Koreans who support freedom of the press. But if they try to act on their beliefs they end up dead or in prison.

    So, I don’t think we need to commit to the idea that Palestinians are monolithic in their beliefs, only that the sensible Palestinians are intimidated and rendered ineffective by other Palestinians.

    True, that, but I would point out that they marinate their young in Jew hatred and what you marinate your young in affects them forever. 

    Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go take my kid to drag queen story hour – this week it’s When Aidan Became a Brother

    • #93
  4. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    Years ago I ranked anti-semitism in the following order, and I think it still holds true:

    1) Muslim Islamists

    2) Political leftists

    3) African Americans

    4) Neo-Nazis

    5) Self-hating Jews (see #2)

    Interesting list, cdor. It sounds like you’re ranking groups according to their hatred of Jews. It would be hard for me to dispute it.

    Edit: I’m not sure if I’d put African Americans so high on the list; I just wonder if they hate us as much as they once did.

    Fascinating list. I also would put African Americans lower on the list. Also, there is a great overlap between Political Leftists and Self-Hating Jews, who might be considered to be nearly 100% in the former camp.

    Let’s put African Americans and Neo-Nazis both at number four so they can get a good look at each other and the positions they share. 

    • #94
  5. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    There are very few conflicts or disputes where one side is all right and the other side is all wrong. In the case under discussion here, one can be supportive of Israel , but still recognise that Palestinians have legitimate grievances and that there are factions in Israel who won’t countenance peaceful co-existence. Of course, far too many people see Israel as being the aggressor/occupier/murderer but will excuse any wrongdoing by Palestinians. 
     
    I don’t wish to appear to be overly sentimental or simplistic, but recognising flaws on one’s own side and wrongs suffered by the other side seems to me to be essential in moving towards some improvement in relations between the two sides. 

    • #95
  6. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    I don’t wish to appear to be overly sentimental or simplistic, but recognising flaws on one’s own side and wrongs suffered by the other side seems to me to be essential in moving towards some improvement in relations between the two sides.

    You voice a common sense and practical solution. No matter what happens, they are going to share the general land area. Getting along will be central to their success.

    • #96
  7. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    There are very few conflicts or disputes where one side is all right and the other side is all wrong. In the case under discussion here, one can be supportive of Israel , but still recognise that Palestinians have legitimate grievances and that there are factions in Israel who won’t countenance peaceful co-existence. Of course, far too many people see Israel as being the aggressor/occupier/murderer but will excuse any wrongdoing by Palestinians.

    I don’t wish to appear to be overly sentimental or simplistic, but recognising flaws on one’s own side and wrongs suffered by the other side seems to me to be essential in moving towards some improvement in relations between the two sides.

    This may be technically true, but you’ve got to admit that there is a gaping imbalance of morals here.  The Palestinian side wants to either exterminate or at the very least, kick out all the Jews, while the Jewish side simply wants to be left alone and is willing to live with Arabs in peace.

    • #97
  8. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    There are very few conflicts or disputes where one side is all right and the other side is all wrong. In the case under discussion here, one can be supportive of Israel , but still recognise that Palestinians have legitimate grievances and that there are factions in Israel who won’t countenance peaceful co-existence. Of course, far too many people see Israel as being the aggressor/occupier/murderer but will excuse any wrongdoing by Palestinians.

    I don’t wish to appear to be overly sentimental or simplistic, but recognising flaws on one’s own side and wrongs suffered by the other side seems to me to be essential in moving towards some improvement in relations between the two sides.

    This may be technically true, but you’ve got to admit that there is a gaping imbalance of morals here. The Palestinian side wants to either exterminate or at the very least, kick out all the Jews, while the Jewish side simply wants to be left alone and is willing to live with Arabs in peace.

    There are lots of Arab nations and none of them have good human rights records.  The nation in the Arab region with the best human rights record is Israel and yet Israel is treated as though it were China or North Korea.

    Israel isn’t perfect.  But compare Israel to Iran.  In Iran you can get put into prison for making a video of you and your friends singing a song by the Bee Gees.  In Israel, even if you are an Arab-Israeli, you can run for public office.

    Israel would be better than it is if it were not targeted for destruction by Iran and others.

    • #98
  9. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    I don’t wish to appear to be overly sentimental or simplistic, but recognising flaws on one’s own side and wrongs suffered by the other side seems to me to be essential in moving towards some improvement in relations between the two sides.

    You voice a common sense and practical solution. No matter what happens, they are going to share the general land area. Getting along will be central to their success.

    The problem is, while we can all feel good about ourselves for our civility admitting Israel’s flaws, the Palestinian leadership is utterly intractable in its stated goal of eliminating the Jewish state, and presumably the Jews along with it. I’m generally not a fan of the (moral) equivalency routine. I prefer making distinctions.

    It should go without saying that Israel is flawed (only lefties expect perfection everywhere all the time). One of them is NOT the desire to eliminate its neighbors.

    • #99
  10. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    I don’t wish to appear to be overly sentimental or simplistic, but recognising flaws on one’s own side and wrongs suffered by the other side seems to me to be essential in moving towards some improvement in relations between the two sides.

    You voice a common sense and practical solution. No matter what happens, they are going to share the general land area. Getting along will be central to their success.

    Yeah, what the hell, dude? I thought this was a debating society. 

    • #100
  11. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    Steven Seward (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    There are very few conflicts or disputes where one side is all right and the other side is all wrong. In the case under discussion here, one can be supportive of Israel , but still recognise that Palestinians have legitimate grievances and that there are factions in Israel who won’t countenance peaceful co-existence. Of course, far too many people see Israel as being the aggressor/occupier/murderer but will excuse any wrongdoing by Palestinians.

    I don’t wish to appear to be overly sentimental or simplistic, but recognising flaws on one’s own side and wrongs suffered by the other side seems to me to be essential in moving towards some improvement in relations between the two sides.

    This may be technically true, but you’ve got to admit that there is a gaping imbalance of morals here. The Palestinian side wants to either exterminate or at the very least, kick out all the Jews, while the Jewish side simply wants to be left alone and is willing to live with Arabs in peace.

    I support Israel unreservedly, sometimes to my personal cost. I feel sympathy for ordinary Palestinian civilians, who have been lead on a path of destruction by wicked leaders and by other evil forces, and who are used as a distraction by Muslim regimes who have failed their own people. As I have said, a lot of people and entities have a strong interest in prolonging the conflict. 

    • #101
  12. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Must Palestine die for Israel to live? Or at least be redefined into what is convenient but no longer real or itself? And similarly Israel for Palestine to live?

    Perhaps – which is what makes it a tragedy. I don’t see any happy endings, even ‘winning’ comes at a cost.

    Life is a tragedy. But, for many the tragedy is self-inflicted.

    For all  of us, to some degree.

    I really wish trauma brought out the best in groups, but it really doesn’t seem to.

    Not the Nakba or occupation for Palestinians, not the Holocaust for Israeli Jews.

    I think the Palestinian reaction to their circumstances is more than half the problem.

    The problem is that a critical mass of Jews didn’t believe that they could live safely in diaspora, and that they turned out to be in many ways (or at least in Europe and then the Middle East) correct.

     

    • #102
  13. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    I was thinking about this in the other thread, when it was commented that a moderate Palestinian movement was started 18 times, and 18 times the leaders were killed, with the implication being the Israelis assassinated them. But, that is counter-intuitive, isn’t it? Why would Israelis want radicals leading the Palestinian people?

    They wouldn’t.  For all the bad mouthing they would much rather be dealing with Arafat and the PFLP (in fact they did deal with Arafat and the PFLP) than Hamas (with whom they refuse to deal).

    I think it much more probable that Islamist power seekers took out their competition. 

    What happens, unfortunately, is that because religious extremists are less vulnerable to material corruption they are the last ones left standing in the court of Palestinian public opinion. The least bad option.

    When you’re occupying a people, then corrupt/corruptible leaders are exactly what you need, and exactly who you choose to deal with and empower. (Take the Palestinian Authority, for example….)

    So short term gain (corruptible Palestinian leaders to bargain with about things like territory or the right of return or policing Palestinian resistance to settlers) for long term loss (secular politics diminishes, and religious crazies take centre stage, because they are the only ones who refuse to sell their people out for a mercedes benz and a green card).

    • #103
  14. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/06/peacemaking-stalinist-style.php

     

    “Death solves all problems,” Josef Stalin is quoted as having said, “no man, no problem.” A significant number of influential people are now applying the Soviet dictator’s logic to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Their formulation is as simple as it is homicidal: “no Israel, no problem.”

    Iran’s rulers express their genocidal intentions forthrightly. “We will not back off from the annihilation of Israel, even one millimeter,” Brig.-Gen. Abolfazl Shekarchi, spokesman for the regime’s armed forces has vowed.

    Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, proxies of Tehran, have the same goal, as does Hamas, the terrorist organization that rules Gaza (also supported by the Islamist regime).

    Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority (PA) that governs the West Bank, is cagier. He doesn’t call for Israeli Jews to be killed but he does provide financial rewards to Palestinian terrorists and their families.

    • #104
  15. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/06/peacemaking-stalinist-style.php

     

    “Death solves all problems,” Josef Stalin is quoted as having said, “no man, no problem.” A significant number of influential people are now applying the Soviet dictator’s logic to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Their formulation is as simple as it is homicidal: “no Israel, no problem.”

    Iran’s rulers express their genocidal intentions forthrightly. “We will not back off from the annihilation of Israel, even one millimeter,” Brig.-Gen. Abolfazl Shekarchi, spokesman for the regime’s armed forces has vowed.

    Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, proxies of Tehran, have the same goal, as does Hamas, the terrorist organization that rules Gaza (also supported by the Islamist regime).

    Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority (PA) that governs the West Bank, is cagier. He doesn’t call for Israeli Jews to be killed but he does provide financial rewards to Palestinian terrorists and their families.

    Good grief. But no surprise. Thanks, Bryan.

    • #105
  16. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/06/peacemaking-stalinist-style.php

     

    “Death solves all problems,” Josef Stalin is quoted as having said, “no man, no problem.” A significant number of influential people are now applying the Soviet dictator’s logic to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Their formulation is as simple as it is homicidal: “no Israel, no problem.”

    Iran’s rulers express their genocidal intentions forthrightly. “We will not back off from the annihilation of Israel, even one millimeter,” Brig.-Gen. Abolfazl Shekarchi, spokesman for the regime’s armed forces has vowed.

    Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, proxies of Tehran, have the same goal, as does Hamas, the terrorist organization that rules Gaza (also supported by the Islamist regime).

    Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority (PA) that governs the West Bank, is cagier. He doesn’t call for Israeli Jews to be killed but he does provide financial rewards to Palestinian terrorists and their families.

    Good grief. But no surprise. Thanks, Bryan.

    Susan, have you joined JewsAgainstSoros.com? Read about it here:

    https://amgreatness.com/2023/06/11/we-are-jews-against-soros/

     

    • #106
  17. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Susan, have you joined JewsAgainstSoros.com? Read about it here:

    https://amgreatness.com/2023/06/11/we-are-jews-against-soros/

    Thanks, WC. I’ve signed up. Not sure what they’ll be doing but I’m curious.

    • #107
  18. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    “. . . .  if Iranian occupation of Iraq brings liberty and democracy, I’d take it in a heartbeat, the same way I hoped America could spread democracy.  Nature of government trumps national identity.  Had Palestinians had a liberal democracy starting 1920, I don’t think the Israelis would have found it necessary to part ways.  Until Palestinians internalize liberty, democracy, their sovereignty will remain a threat to Israel and, most importantly, to Palestinians themselves.”

    • #108
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.