As someone with family in Israel and strong views on the ME conflict, I think this is great news. Anything which supports/encourages the Palestinians making their own lives better and producing stuff which doesn't explode is a good thing for everyone in the region. This sort of thing is how a viable Palestinian state is going to come about, if ever.
I think that the part of your comment regarding "producing stuff which doesn't explode" is very unnecessary. Your level of bias is clearly evident here. Instead of trying to pull both sides together through the positiveness of such news you add fuel to the conflict. Having family in the region does not make your statement any more authoritative then it would for someone with family in Palestine.
I hope you rethink your intentions here and in future posts about this terrible conflict attempt to be more evenly considerate. Remember there are always two sides to every story.
I made no attempt to hide my position; I actually intended to make it quite clear. The point of my comment is that this isn't Google taking sides, and that this should be seen as a good thing by people on both sides of the conflict, to one of which I belong. That's why I mentioned having family there - not because I think it makes my opinion correct, just because I think it makes the perspective from which I'm coming that much clearer.
That is trolling. All you're doing is reciting your standard "Israel is evil occupier" routine typical of someone of a certain political bias. No sources or added incite. It is however a fact, that since a high percentage of suicide bombers came out of Palestinian territories when compared to other countries, it is accurate to imply that a different economic course could diminish the terrorist aspect of the Palestinian economy. endtime's comment may seem inflammatory to you, but it is only objective recognition of economic factors. Your's is analysis of far more complex issues and simplifying of the moral choices in the conflict.
Actually, you're the one trolling. The parent didn't say Israel is evil; he stated that Israel has taken actions that stifle Palestine. That is an objective fact and one that is separate from whether or not Israel is justified in doing so. You're going out of your way to project your opinions onto the commenter because he stated a fact.
In short, you're doing precisely what you just accused the parent commenter of doing, but wrapping it up in pseudo-logic.
He didn't say the word evil, but he characterized Israel as evil, which is just as bad.
>he stated that Israel has taken actions to stifle Palestine. That is an objective fact...
False, saying Israel takes actions to stifle the Palestinians implies the intent is to stifle, when the intent could just as easily be defensive and as minimally stifling as possible. Those are both opinions. endtime merely pointed out what is there for everyone to see: the Palestinian territories dedicated an uncommonly high percentage of their economic output to terrorist activities, regardless of if you think "they had to do it."
In short, the logic is clear, the amount of man hours dedicated to terrorist activities is objective, saying the Israelis intend to stifle the Palestinians is analysis.
In short, the logic is clear, the amount of man hours dedicated to terrorist activities is objective, saying the Israelis intend to stifle the Palestinians is analysis.
Such a strawman ... I never said anything about Israel's intentions.
And frankly, you're being ridiculous. Whatever Israel's intentions are, blockades are stifling, putting fences through people's land is stifling. Are you really prepared to argue otherwise?
Again, it's your prerogative to argue that Israel is justified in their actions, but when you try to make it so that even stating facts is equivalent to attacking Israel, all you're doing is "stifling" debate.
By the way, the net effect of Israel's actions on Palestine's economy is objective as well. The idea that your side's pain is objective and everyone else's is "analysis" is ... unfortunate.
> blockades are stifling, putting fences through people's land is stifling. Are you really prepared to argue otherwise?
I never argued otherwise. It can be argued that Israel doesn't have a choice, for the reasons of self defense, but to implement security measures which happen to be harmful to the Palestinian economy, effectively absolving Israel of any responsibility of the economic effects and placing it on groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. The point is, talbina put the blame on Israel (implicitly), even though that's just typical one-sided analysis that adds nothing to the discussion.
How is it trolling to point out that the Israeli government has made economic development in Palestine very difficult?
I'm pretty neutral on the conflict as a whole (I'd need to know way more to have a real opinion), but I'm pretty certain I'm against the Israeli blockade of Gaza[1].
It's pretty hard to build stuff when you can't import cement, steel, or glass. And the food restrictions have contributed to malnutrition in Gaza.
They did finally ease the restrictions in June (after 3 years), so I think it's a lot better now. I can't find a list of what's still not allowed.
Because you side against the blockade because you either don't believe the Israeli reasons why the risk of not blockading are serious enough to warrant something as harsh as a blockade, or you just don't care about the consequences for the Israelis either way. The former is far more complicated than a casual observer could know offhand and the latter is obvious one-sidedness which speaks for itself. Take you're pick.
FYI: The food restrictions were never of a nature that would cause malnutrition, that is propaganda. If you know even a bit about the issue you know the Israelis have reasons for blockading construction material, so the question is if you are neutral, why you don't believe them.
I've never writen a political comment on HN before, and probably never will again. But this is one of these rare occassions where I really feel the need to do so, knowing it'll probably cost me karma and goodwill.
Anyway...
Of course there's a high percentage of suicide bombers in Palestine - it's their only option against an oppressive regime. They don't have tanks, they don't have fighter planes and they don't have a navy. It's their last resort. They have nothing else with which to fight.
No one here said the Palestinians don't have a good reason for doing suicide bombings. We'll all just be happier if they'll have a good economy so they'll stop blowing up.
The comment is quite relevant and it's not "rhetoric" ... it's precisely true. Israel may or may not be justified in its actions, but it has taken actions that have lead to all of the things the parent mentioned.
Considering the original comment said "Anything which supports/encourages the Palestinians making their own lives better and producing stuff which doesn't explode...", I'm glad they made a reply to it.
