Re: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:37 amPolitical Crossfire Forums
Political forum discussions also covering current events, constitutional rights, and more!
https://www.political-crossfire.com/
f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
https://www.political-crossfire.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=6591
Page 2 of 5
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:37 amRe: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 6:12 pmRe: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:00 pmEthno-states are all the rage, or, at least, should be rage inducing.
Re: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 1:28 amRe: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 8:22 amRe: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 1:52 amRe: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:37 amWhoa, whoa - you seriously need to learn how to read, without inputting your own assumptions. I never advocated for their forced removal. That conclusion is 100% ideological on your part, and was never suggested here.
What I quite clearly said is that we need to figure out who can take them, and get them moved. I also said we should cease encouraging Palestinians to pursue a goal that is simply not going to happen, and that if we don't, they probably will be ethnically cleansed. None of this is indicative of a desire to drive the Palestinians into the sea - it is instead a frank assessment of the likelihood of the two-state solution succeeding - essentially non-existent - and a call to actually help these people. Part of doing that is presenting realistic solutions - for instance, negotiating with Israel to take in at least some Palestinians, while negotiating with other states to take in the remainder, with full citizenship rights in each country. You could include compensation and transition packages with this, financed by Israel and the international community. There are pragmatic ways to solve this issue - and none of them involve an international Jerusalem with two sovereign states peacefully intertwined with one another. I proceeded to outline why I think this - the lack of support for two-state solutions from both sides, the lack of genuine progress in establishing the conditions of a viable Palestinian state, and the total disinterest by powerful nation states in forcing Israel's hand.
If Palestinians won't consider alternatives, and would prefer to continue their losing traditions, that is on them. There is not much the international community can do to help them. I could see withholding material support to Israel, under a progressive Congress and President, but that is about as far as it will go. The impact will be minimal because US military support has been "the cherry on top" for thirty years - not particularly necessary, just an added bonus.
But, again, as I said - see you in ten, twenty and thirty years. I don't expect your opinions will change over this time. Ideologues are not known for that ability.
What I quite clearly said is that we need to figure out who can take them, and get them moved. I also said we should cease encouraging Palestinians to pursue a goal that is simply not going to happen, and that if we don't, they probably will be ethnically cleansed. None of this is indicative of a desire to drive the Palestinians into the sea - it is instead a frank assessment of the likelihood of the two-state solution succeeding - essentially non-existent - and a call to actually help these people. Part of doing that is presenting realistic solutions - for instance, negotiating with Israel to take in at least some Palestinians, while negotiating with other states to take in the remainder, with full citizenship rights in each country. You could include compensation and transition packages with this, financed by Israel and the international community. There are pragmatic ways to solve this issue - and none of them involve an international Jerusalem with two sovereign states peacefully intertwined with one another. I proceeded to outline why I think this - the lack of support for two-state solutions from both sides, the lack of genuine progress in establishing the conditions of a viable Palestinian state, and the total disinterest by powerful nation states in forcing Israel's hand.
If Palestinians won't consider alternatives, and would prefer to continue their losing traditions, that is on them. There is not much the international community can do to help them. I could see withholding material support to Israel, under a progressive Congress and President, but that is about as far as it will go. The impact will be minimal because US military support has been "the cherry on top" for thirty years - not particularly necessary, just an added bonus.
But, again, as I said - see you in ten, twenty and thirty years. I don't expect your opinions will change over this time. Ideologues are not known for that ability.
Re: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 2:50 pmRe: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 3:33 pmRe: f**k CNN for firing Marc Lamont Hill
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:31 pmI gotta say ex that you’re insistence we just accept the ethnic cleansing and get it over with cause it is what it is — sounds a lot like the kind of rationalizing you’re speaking out against in the other thread related to excusing the misdeeds of presidents.