There are 65 comments.

1. Member
   Henry Castaigne

   @HenryCastaigne

   6:26 PM EDT ⋅ May 14, 2021

   Zafar (View Comment):
    Because if I am good then you must be bad, or if you are good then I must be bad.  But people are not that clean cut, are we? And neither are peoples or cultures.

   No. The Palestinians are a bad culture and the Israelis are a good culture. Israeli culture has free Mosques, free churches, fabulous gay bars and they advance science in a capitalist economy. The Palestinians outside of Israel aren’t capable of religious freedom, gay rights or advancements in sciences. I have heard that the Israelis were pretty brutal in the first wars but so was everyone at that time. The Israelis for all their imperfections still try to be civilized while the Palestinians praise suicide bombers.

2. Member
   Paul Stinchfield

   @PaulStinchfield

   

   4:34 AM EDT ⋅ May 15, 2021

   Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

   Zafar (View Comment):
   Because if I am good then you must be bad, or if you are good then I must be bad. But people are not that clean cut, are we? And neither are peoples or cultures.

   No. The Palestinians are a bad culture and the Israelis are a good culture. Israeli culture has free Mosques, free churches, fabulous gay bars and they advance science in a capitalist economy. The Palestinians outside of Israel aren’t capable of religious freedom, gay rights or advancements in sciences. I have heard that the Israelis were pretty brutal in the first wars but so was everyone at that time. The Israelis for all their imperfections still try to be civilized while the Palestinians praise suicide bombers.

   Not to mention the Palestinians praising genocide.

   And never forget that there were Arab pogroms against the Jews before Israel existed–before Zionism existed, in fact. Oppression of non-Muslims, especially Jews, was baked into the ideology.

   For that matter, note how Christians are treated in Egypt: Beatings, rape, murder, and arson.

3. Coolidge
   TBA

   @RobtGilsdorf

   6:35 AM EDT ⋅ May 15, 2021

   James Lileks (View Comment):

   Caryn (View Comment):
   BTW, the East Jerusalem case is particularly egregious. The homes were purchased by Jews during the Ottoman period and registered with the appropriate authorities. When the British Mandate of Palestine began, they were again registered with the new authorities. When Jordan took the Old City in 1948, the Jews were forcibly removed from their homes and Arabs moved in with cheap rental agreements. Since the Jewish reunification of Jerusalem in 1967 the original owners have been trying to get their homes back. The Arabs continued with their cheap rent, but eviction proceedings were begun in 1997 when they stopped paying. This has been in the courts for over 20 years. Those people are being evicted for non payment of rent. The Jordanians were the occupiers who violated the Geneva Conventions, not the Israelis. Eugene Kontorovich, a legal scholar of constitutional and international law and a professor at George Mason University, is worth reading on the topic.

   In a way, it’s a a perfect microcosm of the whole magillah. Jordan – which was simultaneously an ancient country and a brand-new one – annexed land that was neither Jordanian or belonged to Israel in the post-Balfour arrangement, right? This wasn’t regarded as Jewish land, but of course it had Jews living there, and that was unacceptable once Jordan had it, so, ausfahrt, as the Germans say. Isn’t this how things usually go when borders shift after a conflict? If Israel has the right to do what it wishes with the West Bank because they won it in a defensive war, doesn’t that nullify Ottoman-era claims laid down before the land was taken by another power?

   It seems a bit absurd to apply these niggling legalisms to a vague area that has been whipsawed back and forth, but OTOH it speaks well of a society that does address the issue through the numbing process of the courts. On the gripping hand, it seems to validate the idea that the titles granted by defunct states should have the force of law in a post-Ottoman / post-Balfour world of 2021, which opens the door for Palestinian claims to houses vacated in 1947. BUT! Those houses were vacated because the occupants left in anticipation of the elimination of the newly-formed state; does that equate with a relinquishing of title?

   It’s a combination of law, war, and force majeure, which is always a mess, but when you add in the obvious but curiously unremarked-upon objective need to make the entire area Jew-free, you get a mess. In the end, none of this matters; what matters to Hamas is the amount of crude fire they can hurl into the sky. But the days of rote bored applause from neighboring state are over, no? Jew hatred is so 2014. It’s like your mullet-wearing cousin ranting about disco in 1982.

   From your mouth to Mohammad’s ear. 

4. Member
   Henry Castaigne

   @HenryCastaigne

   7:06 AM EDT ⋅ May 15, 2021

   TBA (View Comment):

    

   In a way, it’s a a perfect microcosm of the whole magillah. Jordan – which was simultaneously an ancient country and a brand-new one – annexed land that was neither Jordanian or belonged to Israel in the post-Balfour arrangement, right? This wasn’t regarded as Jewish land, but of course it had Jews living there, and that was unacceptable once Jordan had it, so, ausfahrt, as the Germans say. Isn’t this how things usually go when borders shift after a conflict? If Israel has the right to do what it wishes with the West Bank because they won it in a defensive war, doesn’t that nullify Ottoman-era claims laid down before the land was taken by another power?

   It seems a bit absurd to apply these niggling legalisms to a vague area that has been whipsawed back and forth, but OTOH it speaks well of a society that does address the issue through the numbing process of the courts. On the gripping hand, it seems to validate the idea that the titles granted by defunct states should have the force of law in a post-Ottoman / post-Balfour world of 2021, which opens the door for Palestinian claims to houses vacated in 1947. BUT! Those houses were vacated because the occupants left in anticipation of the elimination of the newly-formed state; does that equate with a relinquishing of title?

   It’s a combination of law, war, and force majeure, which is always a mess, but when you add in the obvious but curiously unremarked-upon objective need to make the entire area Jew-free, you get a mess. In the end, none of this matters; what matters to Hamas is the amount of crude fire they can hurl into the sky. But the days of rote bored applause from neighboring state are over, no? Jew hatred is so 2014. It’s like your mullet-wearing cousin ranting about disco in 1982.

   From your mouth to Mohammad’s ear.

   It took Christians over a thousand years to start becoming civilized themselves was Jesus was a very honorable man. It makes textual sense to blame Christians rather than Christianity or Yeshua the anointed one. I can’t say the same for Islam.

5. Coolidge
   EHerring

   @EHerring

   4:32 AM EDT ⋅ May 19, 2021

   The war hasn’t ended because Israel hasn’t rolled in with tanks and razed the place.