Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

But if you really want to discuss the "worse" part, why should the Israeli question be treated differently than all other land areas?

This is a wrong framing of the question. I don't think anyone wants to treat it differently than all other land areas in similar circumstances. ALL of those are wrong. Now, mention any other specific "land area" similar, and we can talk.

But if you insist, I can think of some reasons this is to be treated differently: because Israel, despite being as abusive as other countries, is a favorite child of the West powers, and receives much more military, diplomatic and media support.

Just an example: we hear for the persecution of gays, or twitter users, or women's right in Arab countries repeteadly. How many times do you hear about things such as this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehadrin_bus_lines http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/...

or this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2078771/Israel-brace... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/27/naama-margolese_n_1...




>>Now, mention any other specific "land area" similar, and we can talk.

I did. See Karelia above. Or choose a few others of the dozen (more?) of land area changes after the WWs.

So a country should be hated and double standards are ok, if some west countries accept it more than brutal dictatorships!? Sigh...

And sure, the othodox jews have extreme subgroups that are as crazy as e.g. the Saudi government. But what the Hell does that prove? You know full well that you can find similar in any democracy.

You must be trolling.


> I did. See Karelia above.

Karelia? You think this bears any resemblance to the Palestinian situation?!!! I'm not at all for countries annexing other countries territory and moving their borders. But the situation here is worse than most other cases -- and sure as hell not at all similar to Karelia.

Here's a better example: consider Mexico demanding California back, establishing a state there, treating Californian's as second class citizens, and confining them in small areas north of Sacramento.

(Well, the difference would be that Mexico had California a couple of centuries ago, not a couple of millennia. And immigrants from there already consist of 30% of the population of the state. So, in that case, they'd have a slight right to want it back).

>And sure, the othodox jews have extreme subgroups that are as crazy as e.g. the Saudi government. But what the Hell does that prove? You know full well that you can find similar in any democracy.

Segregated women/men bus lines? No, you cannot find this kind of crazy sh*t in any normal democracy, especially in Western Europe. You might find religious nuts being able to impose such rules inside their churches, monasteries or homes or clubs. Which is kinda OK. But on a bus line??? In public roads?


At least you dropped the "point" that it is OK to hate countries which are tolerated more by the Western world than disgusting dictatorships...

>>Karelia? You think this bears any resemblance to the Palestinian situation

You ignored my point again, but I think you know that.

Both cases were area losses where part of the population left. If anything Karelia was much more unfair.

That it looks very different now, compared to all the other land losses from the same time period, depends probably mostly on the Palestinian suffering made permant -- by the Arab states.

>>Segregated women/men bus lines? No, you cannot find this kind of crazy sh*t in any normal democracy

You mean it is different in your home and in your bus?

Amish do more extreme things, imho.

Also, how is it in France in those immigrant areas where the police are very careful to thread?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: