Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
21. Just removing civilians is in itself not Apartheid, IMHO.
Sat Dec 3, 2016, 11:18 PM
Dec 2016

It's bad enough, but it's conceivable that a democracy could do that. For the Apartheid part, there must be an element of replacement of one ethnic group with another, and I'm not sure that the cases you mentioned actually have that element. However, the wisdom in Israel tranferring its own civilian population into occupied territory in the first place can be seriously questioned. It would lead to an Apartheid system if the civilians under occupation aren't given civil rights.

Just like Umm al-Hiran, it would be considered Apartheid IMHO to remove one ethnic group in order to replace it with another in the West Bank and Jerusalem. I don't particularly like the settlers, and I think their presence will create a bi-national state, but in spite of all that, I find no reason to make them as a group culpable for the wrongdoings of their leaders.

More from OP... shira Sep 2016 #1
There is perhaps no better proof of antisemitism WRT settlers than this. n/t shira Nov 2016 #2
What happened to the Israeli settlements built on Egyptian territory? Little Tich Nov 2016 #3
There is no precedent other than Jews needing to be expelled. shira Nov 2016 #4
Do you have a real source to back up your argument? Little Tich Nov 2016 #7
A source for what? That settlements actually exist elsewhere in other occupied territory? shira Nov 2016 #8
Kontorovich's claims seem to be completely incorrect, Little Tich Nov 2016 #9
All because of political expedience. aranthus Dec 2016 #10
Interestingly, I think the settlements should be allowed to stay. Little Tich Dec 2016 #11
Interestingly, I think that they may need to be moved. aranthus Dec 2016 #13
I agree with you. Best case scenario, pretend there's actual peace & 2 states... shira Dec 2016 #15
For me, it would constitute Apartheid to remove an ethnic group in order to make place for another. Little Tich Dec 2016 #16
Do u think it's legal to ethnically cleanse Jews from the W.Bank? shira Dec 2016 #20
Just removing civilians is in itself not Apartheid, IMHO. Little Tich Dec 2016 #21
You keep saying the author's claims are factually untrue, without pointing to specifics. aranthus Dec 2016 #14
I could find six other examples of settlers being removed after occupation Little Tich Dec 2016 #17
Aranthus is right, you're wrong. With your 1st example, Gaddafi expelled Italians... shira Dec 2016 #12
Perhaps you should ask Kontorovich about his view on the removal of settlers in the six other cases Little Tich Dec 2016 #18
What 6 other cases? Be very clear please. I'll tackle 2 at a time if you want. n/t shira Dec 2016 #19
No surprises in there leftynyc Nov 2016 #5
Israel is evil to clowns who support Chavez, Castro, Hamas.... shira Nov 2016 #6
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Israel/Palestine»A PALESTINIAN STATE FREE ...»Reply #21