First term it was a "blink and you'll miss it" thing, but yes it was on the RoR.
I can't google up a link because Trump proposed again the Palestinians not have a right to return back in Feb but that was in the context of the Gaza war.
I interpret a "Right to Return to Green Line Israel" (and rejections of that lack) as "Israel can't be a Jewish state". The clearest black letter summation of that stance was their bottom line in the 2000 peace talks.
In practice that means the Jews would be forced to live as minorities in an Islamic state gradually, with a transition over the course of decades.
The RoR (i.e. the right to destroy Israel) is the rock that keeps destroying a negotiated deal.
they’re not even offering the second [a negotiated deal]
If the Palestinians were to offer to match the last deal in 2007 or something like that including a RoR to a Palestinian state, then we'd see the Jewish peace wing re-elected to take it.
As recently as Trump's first term they've made it clear the Right of Return can't only be to a Palestinian state, it needs to destroy Israel as a Jewish one.
As long as they're still fighting over whether or not the Jews get a state, they also have to take ownership on not being able to negotiate a deal.
Palestinian leadership should negotiate with the Israeli government rather than go on quixotic quests to destroy Israel.
Why? There's nothing to negotiate.
As recently as in the first Trump term, the Palestinians have made it clear their bottom line is "Israel is destroyed as a Jewish state". The Jews obviously aren't going to agree to that.
The Palestinians are trying to terrorize the Jewish state until their citizens flee the area.
That means engaging in either large scale terrorism or lots of small scale terrorism.
They don't need to actually destroy the state of Israel in [this push] for them to be successful long term.
The status quo is fine. Israel gets stronger, the Palestinians choose to not.
If things really get out of hand Israel won't kill all of them but it will make them flee. We might see that happen this time if Israel empties out Gaza and then levels it.
And no, it won't be "a moral atrocity". It's a war. Normal rules apply, even with Jews.
Afaict, by normal military ethics Israel is doing fine adjusted for the situation they're in.
Compare what they're doing to what we did in WW2. If we get a pass on all that stuff because we're fighting Na.zis and a Japanese death cult, then so does Israel.
Just because it's Jews fighting Islamic Na.zis and an Islamic death cult doesn't mean the rules change.
Palestinian terrorism causes poverty. Not on Israel, but on the Palestinians. Ditto these wars.
They're not going to learn until they're allowed to actually lose one of these wars, but part of "poverty" is "can't build an army functional enough to destroy Israel".
The Palestinians and their allies seem to think that a negotiated deal with Israel is too horrible to contemplate.
The negotiated part is fine, it's Israel being allowed to exist as a Jewish state which is the problem.
The closest we got to a peace deal was in 2000 where the Palestinians formal suggested Israel could be destroyed slowly over the course of decades.
If we stop substituting wishful thinking for facts, we end up with the conclusion that
they're serious. Their actions, words, charters, and negotiation stances all line up.
That doesn't mean they're stupid, or that they don't understand that Israel is stronger. It just means their first priority is getting rid of the Jews, not doing good things for their children and economies.
Different people can have different mindsets and different priorities that we do. It's a mistake to think they secretly think the way I do or that they haven't thought it through.
You take a few hours off and take over the library. That doesn't have to affect your studies at all. It's no different from hanging out with your friends or whatever.
A zero on the final is the wrath of god. An "E" (60%) might drop you a rank or two but a zero probably means you fail the entire class.
These convictions are the corrections for the individuals but will do nothing to correct the system.
This was an example of the system working.
The cops beat someone to death and got charged with murder, thus the two that pled out. Even one the ones who watched got fired, charged with stuff, and convicted of some stuff.
That's a sea change right there. The body cams made a huge difference. A few years ago no one would have been fired.
The real issue is what happens without the public attention and outrage, and there we go to JB's comment about unions.
There are so many charges against those 5 it's hard to see what's going on in detail.
Bottom line is all 5 will be sentenced June 16th and we'll get summations then.
One of them pled or was has been found guilty of basically everything and is expected to do 15 years. Another has also pled guilty to various charges. Those two seem to be the most serious. Two of the others were found guilty of not very much (but something). The last is a mix between those two extremes.
Weirdly only 4 of the 5 have been decertified. Not sure if that's "one was barely involved" or if it's "we don't bother with someone going to prison for that long".
the protesters have five demands: divestment from “Zionist occupation, apartheid, and genocide,” an academic boycott of “all complicit institutions, including the cancellation of the Tel Aviv Global Center,” “cops and ICE off our campus,” an end to “Columbia’s occupation of Harlem; return land to Harlemites and open the gates,” and amnesty for all students, staff, and faculty “targeted by Columbia University’s discipline.”
Depends on whether or not they're allowed (forced?) to go back to Gaza.
In a normal war, we allow and encourage civilians to flee the combat zone.
And what are the alternatives? A "cease fire" where Hamas is left in charge and does this again in a decade or so? Israel keeps chasing the civilians from the North to the South and then back again?
The people of Gaza are suffering but Israel also has the right (and duty) to continue the war.
There is a big empty desert right over the border. Egypt has been building camps as a contingency if this happens.
Egypt isn’t going to take them in
Because the Palestinians go to war with whatever their host country is. However we shouldn't have any sympathy for Egypt.
Egypt has been the main source of weapons and whatever via those tunnels. If they're going to support Hamas over the border then forcing them to be involved in the cleanup is reasonable.
It's a war. Israel removes the civilians, kills the militants, then lets the civilians back.
Assuming they want to come back to a bombed out parking lot with lots of unexploded ordinance around.
There is no reason Israel has to lose give up the war because Hamas refuses to surrender. There is also no reason Israel has to fight it in a way that maximizes civilian deaths.
Moving the civilians out is more ethical, not less ethical, than the alternatives.
Israel has the power to engage in ethnic cleansing and might to win the war in Gaza. I.e. force the civilians to leave and assume everyone left is going to martyr themselves.
Not recognizing this and rigidly adhering to ideology means the conflict continues forever.
Rule #34: War is good for business
The head of Hamas gets to hide in another country and "earn" billions of dollars. The Priests have enemies to oppose and feel important.
No one needs to admit they could have accepted a better peace plan in 1948, 2000, 2007, and so on. No one needs to admit they lost to Jews or that their god failed them.
There are a lot of sunk costs they've already paid.
I'd say their plan is to keep the conflict going for centuries until they win.
That's fine. Different cultures have different priorities and this is clearly theirs. However IMHO we the West should allocate blame fairly and not let this issue corrupt our institutions.
Our tax dollars in the UN shouldn't be paying for Palestinians to be doing this sort of thing. We should also be clearly pointing out that there is no moral equivalence and the various crimes are ethically and legally on Hamas.
So if Israel shoots up an ambulance because Hamas uses them as troop carriers and Israel can't tell the difference, then that's on Hamas, not Israel.
Hamas could surrender and disarm, like the Axis did after WW2.
“As long as you don’t want to be ethnically cleaned, you will be,” is not much of an argument.
As long as the war goes on, the much weaker side is going to suffer more for it than the stronger side.
The war is going to go on until the Palestinians stop trying to destroy Israel.
Given that there were two native groups to that area, someone was always going to get "ethnically cleansed"... and having population exchanges is pretty normal in the context of country creation.
All of that abuse and "repression" goes away if the Palestinians are willing to drop the Right Of Return (i.e. the Right to Destroy Israel) and make peace.
As long as the end goal is "No Israel, No Jews", peace is impossible and they live with the side effects.
It's also not a good idea to describe normal wars as "genocide". Since we have no way to stop war, that will result in the various conventions which stop actual genocide being dismantled.
...imagine that instead of killing my family over there, they’re killing my family here...
OK, let's picture that. Mexican drug gangs take over a city in Northern Mexico and invade, slaughter, and kidnap thousands of Americans in South Texas.
We go to war and level the city in Mexico that they're in. They refuse to surrender, return the hostages, and even brag about how they're going to come back and repeat the entire mess until every American is dead.
There are claims of "genocide" because of the realities on how the war has to be fought and how every death is claimed by the gang to be a civilian.
The international community agrees with those claims and asks us to stop.
That's true per person. If the Lion's share of the family's money comes from someone else, then it doesn't really matter what happens to their job.
These are part time jobs to avoid paying benefits and they're deliberately structured so it's very hard to live off of them. So they don't live off of them.
First term it was a "blink and you'll miss it" thing, but yes it was on the RoR.
I can't google up a link because Trump proposed again the Palestinians not have a right to return back in Feb but that was in the context of the Gaza war.
I interpret a "Right to Return to Green Line Israel" (and rejections of that lack) as "Israel can't be a Jewish state". The clearest black letter summation of that stance was their bottom line in the 2000 peace talks.
In practice that means the Jews would be forced to live as minorities in an Islamic state gradually, with a transition over the course of decades.
The RoR (i.e. the right to destroy Israel) is the rock that keeps destroying a negotiated deal.
they’re not even offering the second [a negotiated deal]
If the Palestinians were to offer to match the last deal in 2007 or something like that including a RoR to a Palestinian state, then we'd see the Jewish peace wing re-elected to take it.
As recently as Trump's first term they've made it clear the Right of Return can't only be to a Palestinian state, it needs to destroy Israel as a Jewish one.
As long as they're still fighting over whether or not the Jews get a state, they also have to take ownership on not being able to negotiate a deal.
Palestinian leadership should negotiate with the Israeli government rather than go on quixotic quests to destroy Israel.
Why? There's nothing to negotiate.
As recently as in the first Trump term, the Palestinians have made it clear their bottom line is "Israel is destroyed as a Jewish state". The Jews obviously aren't going to agree to that.
The Palestinians are trying to terrorize the Jewish state until their citizens flee the area.
That means engaging in either large scale terrorism or lots of small scale terrorism.
They don't need to actually destroy the state of Israel in [this push] for them to be successful long term.
The status quo is fine. Israel gets stronger, the Palestinians choose to not.
If things really get out of hand Israel won't kill all of them but it will make them flee. We might see that happen this time if Israel empties out Gaza and then levels it.
And no, it won't be "a moral atrocity". It's a war. Normal rules apply, even with Jews.
Afaict, by normal military ethics Israel is doing fine adjusted for the situation they're in.
Compare what they're doing to what we did in WW2. If we get a pass on all that stuff because we're fighting Na.zis and a Japanese death cult, then so does Israel.
Just because it's Jews fighting Islamic Na.zis and an Islamic death cult doesn't mean the rules change.
Palestinian terrorism causes poverty. Not on Israel, but on the Palestinians. Ditto these wars.
They're not going to learn until they're allowed to actually lose one of these wars, but part of "poverty" is "can't build an army functional enough to destroy Israel".
The Palestinians and their allies seem to think that a negotiated deal with Israel is too horrible to contemplate.
The negotiated part is fine, it's Israel being allowed to exist as a Jewish state which is the problem.
The closest we got to a peace deal was in 2000 where the Palestinians formal suggested Israel could be destroyed slowly over the course of decades.
If we stop substituting wishful thinking for facts, we end up with the conclusion that
they're serious. Their actions, words, charters, and negotiation stances all line up.
That doesn't mean they're stupid, or that they don't understand that Israel is stronger. It just means their first priority is getting rid of the Jews, not doing good things for their children and economies.
Different people can have different mindsets and different priorities that we do. It's a mistake to think they secretly think the way I do or that they haven't thought it through.
You take a few hours off and take over the library. That doesn't have to affect your studies at all. It's no different from hanging out with your friends or whatever.
A zero on the final is the wrath of god. An "E" (60%) might drop you a rank or two but a zero probably means you fail the entire class.
There aren't supposed to be consequences to this.
Final exams at Columbia started today. More than one night in the tank would have meant they're missing their finals because they've been arrested.
Missing the Finals => Failing the Course.
The Church is in favor of whatever is good for the Church, and the Church needs an enemy.
These convictions are the corrections for the individuals but will do nothing to correct the system.
This was an example of the system working.
The cops beat someone to death and got charged with murder, thus the two that pled out. Even one the ones who watched got fired, charged with stuff, and convicted of some stuff.
That's a sea change right there. The body cams made a huge difference. A few years ago no one would have been fired.
The real issue is what happens without the public attention and outrage, and there we go to JB's comment about unions.
There are so many charges against those 5 it's hard to see what's going on in detail.
Bottom line is all 5 will be sentenced June 16th and we'll get summations then.
One of them pled or was has been found guilty of basically everything and is expected to do 15 years. Another has also pled guilty to various charges. Those two seem to be the most serious. Two of the others were found guilty of not very much (but something). The last is a mix between those two extremes.
Weirdly only 4 of the 5 have been decertified. Not sure if that's "one was barely involved" or if it's "we don't bother with someone going to prison for that long".
It wouldn't be "a civil war". It's more "they, personally, would be killed".
We've seen the peacemaker get killed at least twice.
And that issue is a lot worse for the Palestinians because they are the heads of militia/terror groups as opposed to functioning states.
They've also done no ideological preparing for it. They can't take that to their people without betraying everything they've told them thus far.
the protesters have five demands: divestment from “Zionist occupation, apartheid, and genocide,” an academic boycott of “all complicit institutions, including the cancellation of the Tel Aviv Global Center,” “cops and ICE off our campus,” an end to “Columbia’s occupation of Harlem; return land to Harlemites and open the gates,” and amnesty for all students, staff, and faculty “targeted by Columbia University’s discipline.”
https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2025/05/07/pro-palestinian-protesters-and-public-safety-officers-clash-at-emergency-rally-in-butler-library/
Depends on whether or not they're allowed (forced?) to go back to Gaza.
In a normal war, we allow and encourage civilians to flee the combat zone.
And what are the alternatives? A "cease fire" where Hamas is left in charge and does this again in a decade or so? Israel keeps chasing the civilians from the North to the South and then back again?
The people of Gaza are suffering but Israel also has the right (and duty) to continue the war.
Remove all the civilians where?
There is a big empty desert right over the border. Egypt has been building camps as a contingency if this happens.
Egypt isn’t going to take them in
Because the Palestinians go to war with whatever their host country is. However we shouldn't have any sympathy for Egypt.
Egypt has been the main source of weapons and whatever via those tunnels. If they're going to support Hamas over the border then forcing them to be involved in the cleanup is reasonable.
It will be immoral as well.
It's a war. Israel removes the civilians, kills the militants, then lets the civilians back.
Assuming they want to come back to a bombed out parking lot with lots of unexploded ordinance around.
There is no reason Israel has to lose give up the war because Hamas refuses to surrender. There is also no reason Israel has to fight it in a way that maximizes civilian deaths.
Moving the civilians out is more ethical, not less ethical, than the alternatives.
Nobody is going anywhere.
Israel has the power to engage in ethnic cleansing and might to win the war in Gaza. I.e. force the civilians to leave and assume everyone left is going to martyr themselves.
Not recognizing this and rigidly adhering to ideology means the conflict continues forever.
Rule #34: War is good for business
The head of Hamas gets to hide in another country and "earn" billions of dollars. The Priests have enemies to oppose and feel important.
No one needs to admit they could have accepted a better peace plan in 1948, 2000, 2007, and so on. No one needs to admit they lost to Jews or that their god failed them.
There are a lot of sunk costs they've already paid.
I'd say their plan is to keep the conflict going for centuries until they win.
That's fine. Different cultures have different priorities and this is clearly theirs. However IMHO we the West should allocate blame fairly and not let this issue corrupt our institutions.
Our tax dollars in the UN shouldn't be paying for Palestinians to be doing this sort of thing. We should also be clearly pointing out that there is no moral equivalence and the various crimes are ethically and legally on Hamas.
So if Israel shoots up an ambulance because Hamas uses them as troop carriers and Israel can't tell the difference, then that's on Hamas, not Israel.
Hamas could surrender and disarm, like the Axis did after WW2.
“As long as you don’t want to be ethnically cleaned, you will be,” is not much of an argument.
As long as the war goes on, the much weaker side is going to suffer more for it than the stronger side.
The war is going to go on until the Palestinians stop trying to destroy Israel.
Given that there were two native groups to that area, someone was always going to get "ethnically cleansed"... and having population exchanges is pretty normal in the context of country creation.
These sorts of conflicts can last generations. This one already has and shows no sign of stopping.
All of that abuse and "repression" goes away if the Palestinians are willing to drop the Right Of Return (i.e. the Right to Destroy Israel) and make peace.
As long as the end goal is "No Israel, No Jews", peace is impossible and they live with the side effects.
It's also not a good idea to describe normal wars as "genocide". Since we have no way to stop war, that will result in the various conventions which stop actual genocide being dismantled.
...imagine that instead of killing my family over there, they’re killing my family here...
OK, let's picture that. Mexican drug gangs take over a city in Northern Mexico and invade, slaughter, and kidnap thousands of Americans in South Texas.
We go to war and level the city in Mexico that they're in. They refuse to surrender, return the hostages, and even brag about how they're going to come back and repeat the entire mess until every American is dead.
There are claims of "genocide" because of the realities on how the war has to be fought and how every death is claimed by the gang to be a civilian.
The international community agrees with those claims and asks us to stop.
What would it take for us to agree?
That's true per person. If the Lion's share of the family's money comes from someone else, then it doesn't really matter what happens to their job.
These are part time jobs to avoid paying benefits and they're deliberately structured so it's very hard to live off of them. So they don't live off of them.
non-tenure track faculty feeling more free to be extremely partisan seems counterintuitive.
They have less to lose. Often a lot less. There's also the issue of whether being extremely partisan is a problem at becoming tenure track.