Will Assad manage to keep Syria undivided?

  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: mmh, but there was still an agreement between the UN and Jordan to settle refugees there, including sales contracts that came about at the time between Jordan. State and refugees came about, which Israel first decided to recognize before it decided otherwise. Many of the residents of Sheikh Jarrah are said to come from Talbiye, today West Jerusalem, right on Balfour Street, do you want to give the people their quarters back there? Would be fair right? Before 48, Sheikh Jarrah was a mixed but mostly Muslim quarter, the settler organizations (not the original Jewish owners, but are now the actors there and want to expel ALL Palestinians! So if someone is hiding something here again, then mena-watch.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: But the Palestinians didn't do it either. That's why the Holocaust should get out of here. We cannot give lectures to the Palestinians about the person for whom we are solely responsible - to talk them out of their right to self-determination.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: In the USA and the European Union, self-imposed law stipulates that you are not allowed to speak to organizations listed as terrorist organizations, you do that through third parties. Of course, those involved need to know for themselves how useful this is. If it is unsuccessful, you should perhaps put it to the test. Russia, Norway and Switzerland, for example, although the USA or Israel have already exerted a lot of pressure, it is not forbidden to talk to Hamas and other such terrorist organizations / parties. After all, someone has to talk to them too. otherwise there would be no ceasefire, no agreements on nothing. UK and France (?) Separate the military resp. terrorist wing from the political to talk to the latter. So they did not give in to the pressure, unlike Germany, to break off contacts with Hezbollah (which is also a Lebanese ruling party (?). Politics and diplomacy do not work just by distributing bans and (contact) bans.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    To make it very short, Ms. Mertins: If the Israeli government were more credibly committed to peace and the solution of the conflict, the German government could also more credibly express its support for Israel and would not have to retreat to the raison d'être. There is nowhere unreserved support for any politics. But it is already clear why the unconditional supporters of Israel constantly demand in an obsessive-exorcistic manner from everyone to unconditionally and in everything to confess to Israel: because they are aware of their morally weak position, they have to constantly demand the same phrases from their supporters : "Only democracy in the NO, only democracy, only democracy", "Right to self-defense, right to self-defense" .Yes. And what about the rights of the Palestinians, with an end to the construction of settlements, with a state of their own, with the end of the occupation. Yes, uh, uh, right to self-defense, right to self-defense, only democracy, only democracy. - An independent, well thought-out, goal-oriented policy looks different.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "The Palestinians are the most heavily funded group in the world" I also consider that to be a milkmaid bill. Of course, if you destroy the established structures every few years, it costs again and again, etc. On the credit side it says about it of course not anymore, the bill is just bigger. Otherwise, the solution: Give the Palestinians Gaza and the WB including East Jerusalem to the Palestinians as a state, without blockades, without settlers and then everything will be fine. But you don't want to pull away the settlers at all, so you keep pointing your fingers at the Palestinians, who give no peace and are so terribly anti-Semitic and Islamist. So you don't have to do anything yourself and can continue to expand. And the Palis themselves are to blame. This strategy will not work forever, that's for sure. The only question is when the Israelis will come up with it themselves, the later they understand, the more the problem will fall on their feet. The mobs in the so-called mixed cities, when the word "civil war" suddenly appeared in the room, were a clear warning shot.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: I don't know what's so bad about Gysi's position. The arguments are very balanced. Just a few days ago in an interview on Spon.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Budzylein, true wisdom is able to admit when it has no idea about something. The way in which you dissolve the right to self-determination here is absolutely ridiculous. Zumach, by the way, does not place the existence of Israel under reserve, but only expresses a matter of course if he thinks that a state must also do something to preserve itself. If there are two roughly equal ethnic groups in the area controlled by said state, it is of course responsible for social cohesion and peace. Is Israel postulating an over-ethnic, non-denominational Israeli nationality / identity? Sure no. Explicitly it wants to be a "Jewish state", of course that is not possible if half of the population between Sea and Jordan is Arab-Palestinian. You can try to discuss it away, but that just ignores the historical experience. How many multiethnic states has it torn apart in your lifetime that wanted to ignore or actively violate the rights of a section of the population? And how many other states are still laboring with such problems and trying to solve them with massive repression (sometimes, after a few centuries, history is very merciful and an ethnic group vanishes into thin air - probably not by itself - or assimilates to its own ethnic group peace is established, but it takes a long time and costs a lot of blood. It can wait for the Arabs to do this favor to Jewish Israel until it turns black. One should be that realistic. There is no such thing as "democratic". All of these Dtl does not have any problems or no longer or only marginally. Here there is simply no serious movement for the independence of any part of the country. Where no one claims such a claim and there are no linguistic / ethnic minorities worth mentioning, it makes no sense to make a comparison here to employ.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "At the same time, the settlers do not hide that Sheikh Jarrah is only one battle for them. At the same time, the settlers do not hide that Sheikh Jarrah is only one battle in a bigger battle for them." We take over one house at a time. Our job is After this district we go to the next ", said Yonatan Yosef, a spokesman for a settler group in Sheikh Jarrah." Our dream is that all of East Jerusalem will become like West Jerusalem. The Jewish capital of Israel. " That this is at the expense of the Palestinians is not a problem for Yosef: "Our state was also created at the expense of the Arabs who lived here." Eight is in a bigger battle. "We are taking over one house after the other. Our work is not After this district we go to the next ", said Yonatan Yosef, a spokesman for a settler group in Sheikh Jarrah." Our dream is that all of East Jerusalem will become like West Jerusalem. The Jewish capital of Israel. " That this is at the expense of the Palestinians is not a problem for Yosef: «Our state was also created at the expense of the Arabs who lived here.» "NZZ. Page 1 of today. That is the spirit of the settlers.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Settler organizations out of East Jerusalem, end of settlements, end of ethnic cleansing. End of the occupation. Or the return of Arab property in the Israeli heartland, distribution of Israeli citizenship to all Arab residents between the sea and the Jordan, repeal of the national state law.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "I would like a more balanced critical analysis of the conflict"

    Well, thank God there are still those in this forum who can appreciate the mistakes on the Israeli side and the interests of the Palestinians. And if you can then find the errors on the other side and put their interests into perspective (à la 2000 years ago, all of this belonged to the Jews anyway), then at least a rhetorical balance would be established. Now reality just has to follow suit.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "The houses were owned by Jews until they were evicted from there in 1948" Can you see the papers? Do you trust the papers of right-wing extremist settler organizations that hold legal titles and terrorize Arab residents? Do you trust an Israeli constitutional state of the Palestinians (East Jerusalem!) And Israeli citizens treated according to 2 different legal systems?

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "There is a court that decides after 20 years of trial that a building belongs to Jewish property."

    Are you actually so familiar with the details that you can judge them? I don't see any individual, private homeowners who are claiming their right of ownership, but above all right-wing extremist settler organizations that terrorize and mob their Arab neighbors (including the use of police and soldiers for this) and come around the corner with questionable papers, which, incidentally, have not shied away Blackmailing members of the Greek Orthodox Church with private stories in order to get them to overwrite their houses.

    And are you so sure that the Israeli courts decide here according to law and justice and not what indulges the colonialist interests of the state? All colonial regimes have acted on flexing of the law, just look at GB's history in India. If necessary, you write the law yourself and if the Mughals did not have a cadastre with which the Indians could prove that a property belongs to them, then it does not belong to them under the wise, enlightened, constitutional leadership of GB. To cut it short: I question the basic assumptions that you see here as axiomatic, that Israel always judges according to the rule of law and that the settlers must have clean papers. And you don't know exactly either and you don't want to know exactly either. Next there is the point that the East Jerusalem Palestinians have a completely different legal status than Israeli citizens, sometimes even, just like that, lose their residence permit, e.g. if you study abroad for a few years. There are also other levers, e.g. you can refuse your partner who comes from outside a residence and work permit, all common practice, then the Arabs will be gone quickly. There is a blatantly asymmetrical relationship here.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Everything you know

    "Israel is not a religious state. For that, religious organizations would have to be integrated into the political organization, the executive and the judiciary - that is not the case." In Israel, a rabbinical commission in the Ministry of the Interior determines whether you are Jewish enough, that is, according to the right trend (and not reform) to immigrate. Otherwise you will have to convert to Orthodoxy again. Don't take a citizenship test and swear by the Constitution. No no. It doesn't get that cheap. Or you can return to your country of origin with the children born in Israel, even after a few decades of tolerance in the country, as is currently happening with the so-called Black Hebrews who are currently receiving their emigration notices. Not Jewish enough either. And the rabbis decide about it.

    If you want to get a divorce as an Orthodox woman and your husband is before you at the religious court, he will have the children and can put off the divorce for half a lifetime if the rabbi wants. If the woman gets to the secular state court faster, she has the better hand. If you are secular and want to get married in a civil ceremony, that is not possible. If you want to get married with the same sex, that is of course not possible, since only the rabbi is there.

    The CDU and others like to talk about the Christian West. But that's just folklore. If you are as turkish. or if you want to become a Syrian migrant citizen, you do not have to convert to Christianity and it is not noted in the passport that you are actually Muslim, Syrian, etc. No, with a passport you are German. In Israel it is different, it does not say that you are Israeli but either a Jew or an Arab. Even secular Jewish Israelis who have established that they are official by nationality as well as religious affiliate. being Jewish and complaining was ruled that simply being "Israeli" is not possible

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: and Israel is Zionist, colonialist, and wants the country to the Jordan for itself and all Arabs out, after all, it has always belonged to them. Now that all the Ischs are on the table, you can start talking. Otherwise it goes on as before: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. And every time the escalation spiral turns one level higher. What could be seen today in addition to the rockets and bombs on the streets in Israel, in Lod, Bad Jam, is new, I mean the lynch mobs, an interior minister Ohana who defends the mob and calls for them to take the law into their own hands. That was the final warning shot. This is exactly how civil wars started and states exploded in the past. If the mob rages on like this in the next few days, it will trigger a momentum of its own that will be difficult to stop. Nobody can really want to. So: talk. Now. Peace is only made with the enemy.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: actually I am in favor of Israel being allowed to be criticized ... but actually not either and actually the other side is always to blame. And don't forget, Hamas is evil incarnate, while the IDF is the most moral army in the world.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: how should one negotiate with each other? talk to each other first, directly. Pick up the phone and call Hamas. If you don't talk to each other and refuse to make direct contact, that's the consequence. The superpowers in the Cold War recognized that disasters can result if you don't have a direct telephone line to one another. Why shouldn't this work here? Just give it a try.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "None". but is also a bit unimaginative.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: steep thesis Budzylein, the EU and Germany imperial powers. At first I thought you'd come around the corner with Iran. But of course that's not bad either. So far, they haven't really tried to exert any influence on Israel, have they?

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    Everything is correct, Mr Hagmann, but at some point the Europeans, Washington, etc. may have to be asked whether they should perhaps change something in their crisis intervention and prevention strategy. You have correctly stated it, Mr Hagmann, it is surprising that it has not yet cracked. Then why wasn't it already quicker? If the Palestinians do nothing and keep still, the international crisis diplomacy unfortunately does not feel the need to wake up, even a few street battles in Jerusalem and settlers throw the Palestinians out of their houses elicit no more than a few tired condemnations. How about, for example, in the classic way and to start with, with the establishment of a red telephone with Gaza via Washington, Berlin etc. directly, not just talking to Hamas about third parties, if possible before rockets fly. A direct line between Jerusalem and Gaza would be even better. Would be a start. And then of course serious negotiations to end the occupation.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: And what was wrong with the Pussy Riot case? Locking up a punk band that sings a few heretical ugly ditties in church is okay, isn't it? You look deeply.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Denouncing corruption and getting Putin out of office. The right approach.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: good to mention that again. yesterday in clashes in jersusalem over 200 people were injured by police violence.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: I am not denying that Palestine has a problem with the treatment of homosexuals. But it is too obvious that Israel is trying to relativize the occupation and the human rights violations associated with it. And if you are not prepared to give asylum to Palestinians who are persecuted because of their homosexuality, but they also have to live in illegality, and you regularly deport them, you cannot book any credit for yourself in this area.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    the algorithm leaked to me today: why we are not really able to see the world through the eyes of others or why it is so difficult to see that one is wrong oneself. That means naive realism. Interesting, especially since the scientist has also collected his studies in the Middle East. www.nzz.ch/folio/w...ewtab-global-de-DE

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: By the way, the story is not a glory for Israel either, because you cannot legally immigrate to Israel or get asylum there. That's how you live on the street. And even the man from the aid organization advises the Palestinian in history to leave the country. Doesn't sound like a save space. And: the presented Palestinian knows where in Jerusalem you can climb over the wall if you drop him off again in the West Bank or he goes through the desert to get back to Israel. And if he is picked up, he just shows the nice Israel. Police officers show their "gay club" ID (quote from Gil Yaron), they don't feel like doing any paperwork and let it go again quickly. Is that how permeable are the Israeli barriers? A most astonishing story if you include the Israelis' security splits, which are not unjustified. Well, the story is 9 years old and maybe everything was much more open back then. Let others judge how believable the story is. But here too: see last sentence, he still doesn't want to become an Israeli. A person does not only have a sexual identity (and being discriminated against and mistreated by one's own as a Palestinian gay person does not neutralize any Israeli discrimination, crimes against the Palestinians)

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: and how many ordinary other commonplace democracies are occupying and colonizing their neighbors? A little higher level of reflection should be possible. Yes, there is criticism from Israeli society, although here, too, a lot has been done to make life more difficult for organizations that work against the occupation, with measures that are more reminiscent of Russia. And one does not want to think it possible, even in Russia there are still media that report very critical of the regime, such as Novaja Gazeta, Doschd and Echo Moscow. Even if, of course, Putin cannot sue anyone. Back to Israel: As long as there is no majority in the electorate Israel. The population finds that the occupation ends, as long as these conditions continue in the WB (detention of minors without trials, expropriations and evictions for settlements according to taste, impunity for the murder of Palestinians (in case of doubt it was always self-defense against terrorists, if there is evidence for that On the contrary, a regrettable exception emerges), exploitation of natural resources of all kinds qua illegal appropriation ... all of this on a large scale) just continue. But since everything can be freely discussed democratically and discursively, everything is OK for you. Who's perfect, isn't it.

    On top of that, should Palestinian queers, in spite of the repressions of the daily occupation routine listed, which really do not fit with the word "rule of law" (not counting the ongoing investigations into war crimes such as the Gaza wars), should campaign hard for Israel? As if their identity and interests had to be completely one-dimensional. Incidentally, same-sex marriages are not possible in Israel either, since rabbis do not conduct such and since there are no civil marriages ...

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: If I remember correctly, Ehud Barak also rejected the Clinton administration's proposal at the time, before the negotiations had completely failed. Clinton had proposed that the border on Temple Mount be drawn on the Western Wall. The excuse at the time: the upcoming elections, which Sharon then won, because of which he could not make decisions of this magnitude. There are also documentaries that can still be found on Youtube with detailed interviews with Clinton, Albright etc. Why Arafat refused is not entirely clear to me. But Barak refused before he did. At the beginning of the negotiations he wanted to offer the Palestinians a few more suburbs of East Jerusalem as East Jerusalem. A Palestinian state could have become a reality, but there was also insufficient will on the Israeli side. Any sticking point at which the negotiations fail can always be found if you do not want a foreseeable unpopular negotiation result. Settlements in the WB were also expanded under the Barak government. Why do you build on territory that you are supposedly willing to give up for peace anyway? You know the answer.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "So I was looking for reports of human rights violations in the West Bank and Gaza. As expected: Nada. Rien. Nothing." You probably didn't really look for:

    www.amnesty.de/inf...rt/palaestina-2020

    To do this, you can also read the Israel bashing again, you can also:

    www.amnesty.de/inf...report/israel-2020

    In the HRW annual report, Israel and Palestine are still merged as before with AI, but something can still be found on both sides.

    www.hrw.org/world-...s/israel/palestine

    No trace of bashing, your contribution is more likely to be classified as NGO bashing. You can take a number and line up behind the usual allegations from Russia, China and Myanmar, they see it the same way.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: @hawkins, Jossi Blum. So you just need to say it again in nicer words. Although I can't see exactly where the nicer and more balanced should be. That's exactly what all the "Israel critics" say here in the reader comments with whom you argue. Summarized for you again: Apartheid South Africa and the Jewish State: Not the same but the same. And terrorism and anti-Semitism. There was also terrorism on the part of the black South Africans (or on the part of the Vietnamese vs. the French and Americans or the Congolese vs. the Belgians.) Of course, nothing was particularly delicate. No need to ask if the Belgians, French and Americans were so tender, we know the answer? If the Vietnamese, Congolese and South Africans had only taken to the streets with flowers, they would probably still be demonstrating today. About the difference between effective sanctions and Heiko Maas, if he is very concerned. Some call it terrorism, others call it resistance, and both are right. But if there were no more occupation and settlements and the Israelis would withdraw from the WB, and the Palestinians would have their state, all these discussions would quickly be smoke and mirrors. The Palestinians, apart from a few, like everywhere else, are certainly not anti-Semites and terrorists, they are a people under occupation and of course they are anti-Israeli. Again the reference to the concept of apartheid: just look again at the ethymology. Afrikaans is not so far removed from English, Dutch and German. In this respect, an outrageous discussion. When it comes to terms, it doesn't matter what associations someone has. Not to mention the deeds, but it depends on what someone does and not what he thinks, believes or feels.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: I do believe that she can and does distinguish between that very well. Request for reference

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Cherry picking 1. Ms. Wagenknecht herself has a migration background, her mother was an art dealer in the state (!) Art trade in the GDR. Not at Sotheby's. She was not allowed to study in the GDR because she was somehow too unadjusted and resistant, but she joined the SED at the age of 19 in order to change it from within. That is fighting spirit and truly political spirit and analytical intelligence trained in philosophy studies has more than most of the other politicians who are debating in public today. de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahra_Wagenknecht 2. Thierses papa was a lawyer, but they were displaced from Silesia to the GDR, certainly not wealthy, was also encouraged to sign against Biermann, which he did not do, whereupon he lost his job Has. Not everyone would have done either. Also read again about this wiki 3. Palmer's dad was a fruit grower, so what? de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmut_Palmer but definitely anything but "bourgeois" who are born with the golden spoon in their mouth, who have worked their way against resistance even in authoritarian systems.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "Trump was almost ready to wipe out the government buildings in Damascus with cruise missiles." Did I miss something. Trump once shot in briefly to show big balls. At that point the situation was already too far. OBama really still had the opportunity to make a difference when he already brought up the aircraft carriers off the Syrian coast. Unfortunately he called off the whole thing - fatal weakness in making decisions. well but americ. Invasions have not proven to be real successes in the last 20 years either. I am still of the opinion that there was a lack of rework afterwards, the word nationbuilding, one of the it-words at the beginning of the 2000s, is no longer used by anyone. Instead, there seems to be an absolute lack of ambition, some "mechanisms" and "formats" are "implemented" or written down. Probably roughly the equivalent of the "model experiments" in corona politics.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: The EU would be stupid if it throws 70 years of development on the rubbish heap because of a new wave of refugees, precisely because of the impending global political problems. Individuals could still disengage, such as Poland or Hungary. Maybe that would even be a better solution to save us the anti-democratic virus.

    - Europe's economy is down. Slightly exaggerated. And if so, we will hardly find a particularly large sales market for our products in Turkey. If the reports are correct, a large part of the Turkish population only lives from hand to mouth. However, I believe that the EU / USA will continue to seek to appease Erdogan and otherwise hope that Turkey will manage a soft landing with him at some point. A fall in Turkey into civil war and poverty or a switch to Russia (China, however, currently has the better arguments on its side) would definitely cost us more.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: I don't know, so that we can all become public persons, for a few comments under a newspaper article, like here, even if there are no insults etc? And everyone who writes something here or elsewhere in the readers' forum then has to expose themselves and then perhaps not only invite hateful comments but possibly even thugs on their own doorstep. Wouldn't be pleasant either and the authorities could possibly. even more overwhelming. Probably no one would write readers' comments anymore. The public discussion would be in the bucket or at least considerably restricted. Well, it didn't exist before the Internet either. Letters to the editor only. Maybe then there would be more time to think. No lo sé.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Dtl did not fight against 65 opponents of the war. Some have e.g. Latin American. States like Mexico or Uruguay still declared war at the last minute in Germany, but were never involved in combat operations and have not suffered any damage for which they could demand reparations. This is where the bill is driven up for the argument.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: But that's definitely too easy. Dtl is not a private company like GM. And as far as I know, GM did not commit any mass murders, let's just take it as a given, it just went bankrupt. If it had been involved in such things, it would also be suable for damages / pain and suffering payments, regardless of whether the current management was involved. Even if Dtl was very desolate after the war, this has not been the case for a long time. Germany is the legal successor of the 3rd Reich, which means that it is also responsible for any claims for damage caused by the same. For this there is this legal construction, here it is not about anyone's guilt (the perpetrators are liable for personal guilt, here the old FRG also had a long hard time delivering those involved and commander of massacres or judging them themselves). Incidentally, some, including private individuals, profited from the war, did business with it and, on top of that, took over Jewish property. Wherever possible, reimbursements, reparations and damages must of course be made here.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "But I also understand the problem that the police and judiciary have no capacity for this." Just like the healthcare system does not have enough nurses, financial regulators not enough people to watch out for tax evaders and banks, environmental authorities not enough staff to control agriculture and industry in compliance with environmental regulations ... Why not? It is easier to leave everything to the "personal responsibility" of private carriers who do not want to spend any money. Until, yes, until financial crises, corona and climate change catch up with us, then nobody could see it coming.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: The demands amount to 239 billion! The 2 + 4 contract also says nothing about reparations yes or no. Greece and Poland were also not involved in the treaties. By the way, Poland also claims there is no paper on which it says that it waives reparations. Perhaps Dtl should then come out with the document. Briefly, the story is as follows: America has urged its allies and also the SU their satellites to forego reparations (or at least to postpone them?), Because the two parts of Dtl, located directly on the Iron Curtain, were geostrategically too important to be nurtured So they didn't have to tip over to one side or the other, or perhaps back into their own totalitarian regime. Without this measure, the "economic miracle" would not have happened in Dtl-West anytime soon. Perhaps it would have been better if the responsible generation and, of necessity, their children had been presented with the bill in marks and pennies for their murders and destructions, then perhaps all fascism would have passed them even more thoroughly for all future.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "They also wanted and got a Wittelsbacher king" So? Do you want? We will probably not find out what they wanted at all, because of course there was no referendum at the time, but they might want to have a republic, but the Allies, GB, FR, RU etc. did not want that. That was the only way to get support for independence. The Wittelsbacher Otto did not want to know anything about a constitution, neither did the Greeks like it and later deposed him. No one needs romantic transfigurations. And the loss of Smyrna resp. The Greeks have to ascribe Izmirs to themselves @Rohm Dietmar, after the peace treaties at the end of the Balkan War (in the 20th century) they did not get fed up and wanted to march through to Central Anatolia, from which they prevented Ataturk. Probably better that way, not to imagine if the two countries still had a land border in Asia Minor today, then it might have been. crashed several times. So it separates, at least a little, the sea. And @ Herr Hötzendorfer: how resistant was Bavaria again 33-45? Bavaria certainly still has a bit of "table silver" left over, certainly not everything from entirely legal sources that it could bring into the reparation pot.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "The left is Darth Vader today" and Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump with their last peace plan are now Mahatma Ghandi and Nelson Mandela. How? If it weren't so serious, you could laugh tears. Furthermore, to chisel, so that you can also notice: Israel has never been at war with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco. We have done very good business with each other for a long time. The current normalization of relations, referred to as "peace treaties", was therefore nothing more than a PR stunt for Netanyahu and Trump. In return, the two emirates had access to weapons that they had not yet surfed at, e.g. the F35 fighter planes. Donni could then say at home that he has a lot of americans. Industrial products sold and americ. Jobs created. The blatant deficits in democracy and human rights v. UAE u Nobody wants to see Bahrain. Bibi even accepted her into the group of "Advanced Democracies". (But he does not want to give the Palestinians a state until they have not become democratic. Ha!). Oh yes, and Morocco in return received Western Sahara recognition as Moroccan. Trumpisch-Netanyahusha cow trade, which operates as serious foreign policy. Unfortunately, a lot of journalists weren't able to invest a bit of brainpower and question the whole presentation. Is actually a must for both of them. Wouldn't that be the case at Tönnies if he suddenly started talking about climate- and employee-friendly meat production. I hope I could do something to clear up their perplexity and turn the world upside down again. You could have figured it out yourself, right?

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    everything would come too late again if it came. A delivery stop will be imposed right on time for the end of the delivery agreements, I guess.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Yes, and the Chinese would have to boycott China and Iranians Iranians. 2.) Can you boycott Gaza more than the Israelis are already doing? 3.) Especially as an ardent German defender of Israel, one shouldn't be so careless about building other "concentration camps" and thus bringing them semantically on a level with the local ones. That a critic of Israel should point out to you, ts, ts, ts. Otherwise I am of course fully with you what the criticism of the chines. Warehouse is concerned. And if you let me know in good time, I'll be happy to be at your next protest in front of the chines. Message included. And who can tell you if there isn't one or the other BDSler who also demonstrates / protests / boycotts against China or Iran - but neatly separates them? Perhaps Israel should seek advice from China and introduce social credit accounts in which, after a few anti-Semitism tests, a decision will be made who may democratically boycott Israel. I also think your assessment of the FFF people misses the point of reality. And whether Israeli torture prisons for Palestinians, in which a large number of minors are incarcerated without trial (just consult the Amnesty databases), are so much better than Chinese ones, I'm not so sure either. The Israelis certainly do not pursue the chines either. Approach to re-education, as it is probably given to the Uyghurs in the camps. At least another. Both institutions are certainly not Montessori schools. Worse, less bad, who will decide now? A lot happens in the dark. And we depend on faith. If Myanmar becomes the worst system tomorrow, will the Chinese, Iranians and Israelis get bonuses? And the Palestinians and Israelis in a democracy. Country, plus Dtl! not being allowed to turn against the politics of your government or your occupiers is not possible! And people who sympathize with them want to read them out? not quite כשר either, right?

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Why should you? BDS people just take care of Israel / Palestine and others take care of the sanctioning of Iran, Russia and China. Why is FFF only hacking into our poor auto industry, energy companies and meat producers? Why don't you demonstrate against arms producers and against the military dictatorship in Myanmar ("why always gg us" they will now shout, "they are allowed in Thailand and Egypt too") and why should the Palestinians also support the boycott of Iran deploy? Very simple: self-restraint. Life is too short and the world too big to take care of everyone. What's so hard to understand? The ladies and gentlemen Israel defenders may please get out of their victim attitude. Israel is not a victim, it is on the winning side, but at the expense of the Palestinians.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    "" Since the 18th century one finds in the sources again and again the idea of ​​... German cultural bearers' who would bring the light of culture into the 'dark east' ", he says. "How uncivilized and backward everything is" there in the East. A colonialist view of the East can be seen in it. " I think there is still a decisive factor missing here to get the whole picture: namely Russia as an expanding colonialist empire in precisely that 18th century (and beyond) in the east to the Sea of ​​Japan in the south to Iran and Romania. In some regions hunter and gatherer cultures were encountered in others with Muslims (Sumarian Tatars) and everywhere systematic settlement belts were created with Russians but also with settlers from Germany; Settlers were needed to keep these regions occupied for the Russian Empire, for example on the Crimea, on the Volga, etc. Incidentally, in Russia at that time, and often up to the present day, people looked down from above at all the peoples they were has incorporated itself into the Reich, has subjected it to russification and all sorts of "civilization campaigns", sometimes with an Orthodox-Christian impetus, sometimes in the spirit of socialist, all-Soviet, leveling (even if you neatly noted in your passport which ethnic group you were), you got under the Upper class of the official nobility, at the court in St. Petersburg and Moscow also large parts of the ethnically Russian population were regarded as uneducated and "uncivilized", one must not forget, after all, they themselves were kept in serfdom and illiteracy. There were no schools for the majority of the population, Peter traveled through Europe to recruit know-how and settlers-craftsmen, engineers, architects and the military to reform his own country and to colonize the conquered areas. Mixing everything with the Nazi era is not a source of knowledge.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: "In fact, this type of protest is (currently) only directed against the Jewish state with the aim of isolating it politically, economically and culturally." But there are still a number of other states that are repeatedly subject to sanctions including Iran, Russia ... with some justification, I think. Why should Israel be treated differently (and it is treated differently, there is no state here that sanctions Israel because of its occupation policy), here only part of the public calls for the lack of state sanctions to be taken into their own hands, that has nothing to do with the third Reich, just as little as sanctions against Russia because of the Crimea anything with anti-Russian. Attitude, sanctions against China because of their policy against the Uyghurs has something to do with the opium war, western imperialist arrogance, etc. (although they also want to have it portrayed that way) (oh, everyone feels innocently persecuted)

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    "And no, I personally do not support any calls to boycott Israeli goods and products ..." Why not? Just like there are good reasons, for example chines. Goods to be boycotted (could come from the slave labor of Uighur camp inmates); The profits from Burmese, Egyptian, Thai goods are pushed into their pockets by military officers of these countries and possibly buy them. nor weapons to oppress their population and goods from Israeli settlements in the West Bank promote settlements there, oppression, expropriation of Palestinians, etc., including the illegal economic exploitation of occupied land. Do you have to apologize, re-manufacture and morally condemn not wanting to buy such goods and not wanting to support the policy behind them? If even people are in favor of such a policy that violates human rights, adopting arguments of the other side, which are only intended as levers to continue their politics and their business, then that has to be put right. Not?

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    to risk a prediction that is not that daring: in the end N wins again. And this time there will be no long poker either. Naftali Bennet, who is being traded as a tip on the scales or a potential spoilsport, will not have any problems joining N if he gets the Ministry of Defense or Finance, like the last time he was there. And where do Bennet and N. have differences? at most about who has the biggest ego. But Bennet doesn't weigh enough to hope for more. N. will simply promise him more than the other side. Then there is the split from the Joint List, the UAL, which seems to be safely included at the moment, which, as known, seems to be very open to joining N., N is very flexible there, except when the other one Side wants to form a coalition with the "Arabs", no matter how stupid, to exclude any coalition or even just toleration through the Joint List (Sa'ar and Liberman would never want to anyway), they forget about the basic mathematics, because like that they definitely don't have a majority to depose Netanyahu. But they have shown everyone that they are real Zionists. And in the end, not unlikely, even very likely, some of the great Netanyahu critics will return to the government for a ministerial post, no matter how often they stressed beforehand that they really would not do that this time. Actually, you could skip a few elections, like in Singapore, if nothing is going to change in the foreseeable future, you just decide to skip a ballot. Maybe Yesh Atid, Meretz, Avoda etc will eventually lose the penny that it is not enough to just be gg Netanyahu, but that they actually have to offer a different policy. But you are already overjoyed when you just make it over the 3.25% hurdle!

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Have you ever had the idea of ​​asking why migrants are concentrated in certain areas? Is this because they do not want to integrate and stay among themselves or is it perhaps because, thanks to a failed housing policy with the active help of real estate sharks, other areas were no longer affordable. What do you think it would be better for the government to change its housing policy or streamline migrants.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    The big elephant in the room regarding the prehistory of the Kosovo election remains unmentioned again although it was in the newspapers everywhere from nytimes, guardian to faz - the quid pro quo politics of Trump and Netanyahu. Trump and his Adlatus and Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell had chosen the small Kosovo of all places in order to let it participate in its foreign policy charity. Peace with Serbia was the starting point. But what was it actually about? Donald was on his way for his bosom buddy Benjamin Netanyahu to collect for him states, no matter which ones, that recognize Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel and move them there with their embassies. But since the then new Kosovar reform government did not want to participate in the proposed deal, the consideration with which Serbia was also to be won: cession of the ethnically Serbian areas of Kosovo around Mitrovica, Grenell arranged for Trump to overthrow Kurtis. The new government then went along with the deal, although the peace with Serbia and the cession of territory did not come about because the EU objected. After all, Israel and Kosovo have recognized each other. This is what Trump and Netanyahu's buddy policy looked like, and it was similar in Morocco, principles that had been in force for decades with regard to Western Sahara were thrown overboard, Western Sahara was recognized by the USA as belonging to Morocco in exchange for the formal admission of a diplomat . Relations between Morocco and Israel (?), And another "peace treaty" (although there had never been a war between M and I), it worked so well, with a photo op in the rose garden of the White House, it didn't work here either, the people of Western Sahara were nevertheless sold and further disenfranchised for an extremely dubious short-term, purely symbolic gain of Trump and Netanyahu. Note: Palestinians, Western Saharans and Kosovars are purely at disposal.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: everyone arranges things the way he needs them. You have certainly not escaped the fact that Biden is now withdrawing the entire Middle East policy around the complex of Iran, nuclear agreements, Yemen, Hutis, weapons to the Saudis and the UAE (the promised F35 for the "peace agreement" have now been withdrawn). That certainly has nothing to do with the Biden Democrat u Trump Republican, but the insight that the whole policy of the last few years was fundamentally wrong and catastrophic. The last time it wreaked havoc in Yemen was unprecedented destruction and a humanitarian catastrophe in decades, which is indisputable, the Saudis bombed everything to a lump, also continued hospitals, although every pilot knows the coordinates and the Americans and the British still have the weapons delivered. If it weren't for the US and its allies, they would be political and military. Decision maker crystal clear cases for The Hague. The fact that Biden is now revising this policy is the consequence and the political declaration of bankruptcy. Trump was always only about to present himself as the greatest dealmaker and he always needed someone to caress his ego, Netanyahu and all the other droolers and egomaniacs have clearly recognized this and used their chance to get all wishes fulfilled, and when the world closes Basically, it doesn't matter, the main thing is that we get our party now. This is nothing else about this egomaniac brood, filling their pockets and confirming to each other how great they are among male friends.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: there were times when Israel, USA, UK had the best relations with Iran. For their interests, primarily oil, but certainly also geostrategic ones, which are always easy to construct - beware the commies and such, they were also ready for the Iranians' desire for freedom and a democracy. Actively preventing the government (see coup against Mossadegh) And that the mullahs could establish themselves with the revolution was definitely not in the interests of the Iranians, Khomeini was the strategically better and more determined head who seized power and established a violent regime. As is well known, the Iran-Iran war instigated by America contributed decisively to the fact that it was able to consolidate. All reasons that America have entered the declared opposition to Iran. Otherwise the USA would have hardly any problems with Iran - you also have none with the hardly more democratic and less religiously fundamentalist Saudi. The iran. Hostility to Israel only stands here as a placeholder in the region for America, which, however, also supported the Shah regime with the training of security forces, secret services and the technology of the time. Just like Israel is doing today, only in other but similarly authoritarian countries. In principle, a rapprochement between all sides is possible, the mullahs are not stupid either, the Wahabites are definitely no less anti-Semitic than the mullahs, only they have an unbroken good relationship with the Americans - and a great (oil-supplying) ally on the Arab-Muslim side The Americans need the region there too, but Israel alone is not enough. Of course, Saudi tries to capitalize on this special position and participates in the game of isolating Netanyahu and Trump's Iran, for that there are weapons, looking the other way at murdered journalists, the latest espionage technology against opposition support in the war against Yemen, etc., that's why people like to hug Israel. Trump and N. do good business.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: I happened to have the opportunity these days to speak to protesting farmers who say exactly the same thing, without artificial fertilizers it would not work either, the new ordinances to leave more space for insects / birds / wild plants would also go against them economically Dash. As a city dweller, I simply lack the basis to argue with me. I could read a lot more, but without looking directly at it, without talking to the farmers, it's like the blind talking about the colors. FFF etc others urgently need to talk to the farmers for problem solutions so that things can go ahead.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: it depends on all of us, the time is too short to play responsibility ping-pong. What is served in the cafeteria at the UN in NY or with the few thousand UN soldiers is likely to be only a tiny fraction of humanity. There is an urgent need for more to act now. Just read the Safran Foer "We are the climate". Even if I have already perceived climate change as a problem, the book gives another panorama and illustrates, understandably also for laypeople, the enormous urgency of the problem - and above all it shows what every person can do individually . I fear that it will be too late until the politicians come up with decisive measures and no longer give in to the pressure of the agricultural, energy and car lobby. The poop has to be really steaming for that, but as long as most people haven't yet, as the flames hit the window in California or Australia, the problem is still too abstract, too far away, too invisible for most of them. It is perhaps a fundamental problem of the human constitution, knowledge and belief, as long as one does not see the problem, one can still deny it, see corona deniers. Maybe like with the living frog that you cook very slowly and that doesn't flee. Therefore, everyone who is convinced of climate change must now start to act and, for example, start a conversation with the farmers, who are also caught in existential dependencies - fixed subsidy amounts per cultivated area, which X grain has to throw off so that it is worthwhile and therefore with such and as much artificial nitrogenous fertilizer (very harmful to the climate) has to be treated, subsidy payments that are only aimed at factory farming, ever-decreasing price targets in supermarkets, loans that have to be serviced, loans that are not granted in order to enable farmers to change the system. Demo is no longer enough.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: In principle, I agree with you.Iran is a brutal dictatorship, ideologically blinded, etc., but somehow, it still seems to me, still a rationally acting state. And I trust them to be so rational that they are not after suicide. The perspective is clear: atomic bombs on Tel Aviv will be answered with those on Tehran, if necessary from a submarine. The same is true between Iran and the West. When the "balance of horror" is established, one could approach one another in the certainty that one would not be attacked / conquered by the other side. Perhaps it would also be a good idea to completely abolish nuclear weapons if the big players took part or even went ahead, if other states would not need to be forced to procure such weapons (to protect themselves from invasions). Maybe a little naive, I know. But alas, the technology is in the world and is being used. It also contains a logical error because if the Americans, Russians, Chinese, FR and UK renounced nuclear weapons, that would not mean that Iran could feel safe from invasions. But it would no doubt be more than a "sign" to the world that they are serious about their peaceful intentions. Maybe then even Iran or North Korea would be able to take some ideological boards off their heads. But until then there are a whole host of other measures that could be used to try to win Iran's trust. With the Trump method, however, you will certainly not win anyone but your own clientele. Seen in the light, it is probably not that different from the Putin method. Only that the first one still has a few checks and balances against him, but these are not irrevocable either, as has recently shown, there is no need for an armed mob or synchronization of parliament and the media to undermine a democracy.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: So Putin intervened in Syria to protect Syria from Islamist barbarian hordes (among whom a large number of Chechens fight (d), whose leader Kadyrov installed Putin himself / still supports / is now or afraid of him (?)) or because he wanted to support a partner in the league of dictators and did not want any color revolutions and springs to continue and eventually reach Moscow. It is perfectly understandable that, from Putin's perspective, something had to be done about it, that's true. That is why you don't need to carelessly let go of the moral criticism, which is Putin and Assad, also suppress MBS (Friend of the West), in an emergency they slaughter their population in order to have full power and to be able to fill their pockets unhindered. Sure, everyone has interests (to which they have a "legitimate right", as the term apparently implies, they just have to formulate it correctly, then they can get a part of the neighboring country under the nail) and sometimes you can Satisfying nothing other than robbery and murder, of course, has nothing to do with morality, so you shouldn't take it personally (isn't that what the phrase means?) the others do too. But at least those affected should have the right to take the attacks personally and complain, right? In any case, Russia is not persecuted innocence and Russia does not have a legitimate claim to a cordon sanitaire of subordinate satellite states either, and if there were recognized world justice whose judgment all states would actually obey, all of them, especially the large ones, then maybe even exist a real chance that overreached states could complain and they would get right, yes even a real chance for something like world peace, if only the "interests" weren't there.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: and because one says he is the supporter of Mohammed's uncle and the other of Mohammed's cousin or something like that and both derive the sole right to the post of caliph from this, one is Sunnis today and the other Shiites, of course, they have also woven a bit of mythological and ritual fuss, but let's be honest: that should play a role today where there are no more caliphs anyway, and none of the recognized minds make such a claim, should a conflict arise from it derive? Even the original conflict was not about questions of faith in the religious sense, but about questions of power: Who gets enough recognition for his claim to be allowed to become a caliph? And today it is primarily about two conflicting camps, Saudi Arabia on the one hand and Iran on the other, both of which claim hegemony. But it is not about questions of faith nor about who can legitimately claim to be a descendant / successor of Mohammed, that is what some kings from Jordan to Morocco claim of themselves. And maybe all these kings are actually descendants of Mohammed, so what? The two largest countries in the region are in a competitive relationship with each other and both compete for the favor of the other great powers, Russia, USA, possibly China, whose interests also play a significant role and whose diplomatic or military intervention has an enormous influence on events . There were times when both Iran and Saudi Arabia were on the side of the Americans (!), But here the americ. Politics avenged for a share of the oil cake also dictators support Shah, and even against the people wanted to put on democratic politicians, so one has invited the opposition of the Iranians. The conflict is also induced from outside, as one could see under Trump.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Perhaps there are East German elites, provincial lawyers or people who have immigrated from West Germany (the East Germans are known to have received West Germany's second set at the turn of the century, which today still make up the majority in the top positions in parties, industrial and trade associations, in factories .) in their circles all knitted similarly to the Merz. There is often more appearance than reality, so it's easy to mistake a talker for a doer.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: I also did not request any new evidence for anything, but I just repeated what, free of all interpretations, actually is in the messages you linked. No reason to send the same from ToI again. Yes, Israel, or a non-governmental Israel. The company, confirms the PA, has delivered (dozen (Kan), 20 (Wafa) vaccine doses (1 or 2 vials?). Nobody denied it, but of course it is even less than crumbs when you have 4 million to vaccinate , and if you said beforehand that you don't have the capacity to cool the biontec vaccine to the required 70 degrees below zero, then it will be ineffective after a few hours. And why does Qatar have to be used for everything? The key point is: the pattern of declaring yourself not responsible, although you are an occupying power, have obligations under the Geneva Convention, levy taxes in the WB and return this money to the PA in a budget, or parts of it at will holds back, so somehow is already very responsible, one asserts the opposite and calls on the Qataris or others to jump in there (for the israel. responsibility) and post it afterwards I still pretend it is their responsibility anyway and not theirs, so I am shifting my own responsibility.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: I've read both reports and that doesn't quite fit with your interpretation. The wafa writes that the PA says they were offered 20 doses of vaccines for experimental purposes, which the PA has refused - because they have already contacted various companies in order to be supplied with tested vaccines. Kan's report specifies that it was 2 million vaccine doses from Astra Zeneca, for whose transfer (from the port to the territories) the PA has already applied to the Israeli government, but Israel has not yet responded and is still examining it. A donation is also expected from the WHO program, which is still in the process of adopting / certifying vaccines from Astra Zeneca and Moderna. As far as what is in it. Perhaps, my interpretation, the P.A. Yes, it is also easily fooled if you send her a few test cans from Israel, while at the same time you expect the 2 million cans ordered from the companies by the PA to pass through, which is certainly also the case. Population as a whole would be of greater benefit? Letting the delivery through would not be an act of generosity on the part of Israel, but rather its duty and the products do not come from the "Zionist state of oppression" (quote from Sven Günther, not Wafa or PA). Translator, used correctly, does a pretty good job by now.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: You don't seem to have read the Guardian article. Of course, the P.A. responsible for health care. But for the money Jerusalem. After all, it collects taxes from the Palestinians. The P.A., I suspect, cannot afford to raise $ 62 per vaccination dose (the ZDF article speaks of $ 28), like Israel. The article says that there have also been talks with Israel, but that no agreements have been made so far. The territories occupied by Israel have to wait for a WHO vaccination program for poor countries, which has not yet managed to get an emergency approval for the vaccines. It goes without saying that the richer states bought the market empty anyway, not just Israel. It's not just the Palestinians who have to stand in line for now. This also applies to antibiotics, which are also important for the treatment of cancer. Some states are currently on dry land. So it's not just the stupid, stupid Palestinians to blame. Israel may consider giving up surplus doses of vaccines, but as always stresses that it is not responsible for WB and Gaza. Then why doesn't it withdraw from the Palestinian Territories? Then the eternal story of non-jurisdiction would also have credibility. Screaming "lie" right here again is really weeping. As long as Israel is not interested in an end to the occupation, it can continue to listen when it is made aware of its responsibility. As far as can be expected.

    to the post
  • ingrid werner

    [Re]: Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year.