NationStates Jolt Archive

I hate how no one can talk about either terrorism or Israel without the God nonsense getting in the way.

I hate how you can't criticize Israel without being painted as anti-semitic.

I hate how you can't support Israel without being painted as a Jew.

I hate how you can't support Israel without being painted as an Arab hater.

I hate how you can't criticize Israel without being painted as an Arab. Or nazi.

I hate how the people who vote for cutting off Israel DO seem to be the scarily nationalist, religious types who seem to have ulterior motives when they bring the subject up - i.e, my God has a bigger dick than theirs.

Also, I hate how Israel is pretty much a fascist, theocratic state and no one seems to mind.

Then again, for those citing UN violations, how many did the US make? UN violations are like traffic laws, everyone breaks them at some point, and its rare to get punished much for it.

Anyway, I'm for slashing defense and military support. No need to prop them up when their own military is so effective. But not entirely; I mean we should give just enough to help our arms exports sectors, and just enough so they won't be forced to use nukes anytime soon. And in the meantime maintain economic ties so that area continues to be productive. But the politico-religio support has got to go; Sharon is not the kind of dictat- I mean leader we should be supporting.

We should really be working to move out of that whole region. Our involvement is not helping things.

To return to the original intent of this thread I'd just like to say I'd be immensely pleased if we pulled some of our funding of Israel, and devoted that to Palestine. Rather than pay to repair and try and stop the effects, we should be trying to fix the cause.

Its all in the matter of trust!

To return to the original intent of this thread I'd just like to say I'd be immensely pleased if we pulled some of our funding of Israel, and devoted that to Palestine. Rather than pay to repair and try and stop the effects, we should be trying to fix the cause.
Sorry to burst your bubble but could you please point out Palestine on a map?
Oh, thats right it doesn't exist. Think then post:)

Actually Russia and Israel have warm relations! :D
I have a feeling they are going to kick some A$$

Actually Russia and Israel have warm relations! :D
I have a feeling they are going to kick some A$$
EH? Did I just black out and miss half the thread:):):):):)

Just to start another discussion...this is FUN :D :D

Sorry to burst your bubble but could you please point out Palestine on a map?
Oh, thats right it doesn't exist. Think then post:)

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/maps/we-map.gif

Yeah, I know, it isn't called that. Guess what? Nobody who lives there cares, as well as nobody with any sense who doesn't have a Zionist axe to grind.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/maps/we-map.gif

Yeah, I know, it isn't called that. Guess what? Nobody who lives there cares, as well as nobody with any sense who doesn't have a Zionist axe to grind.
Where did the word "palestine" feature on that map?

Sorry to burst your bubble but could you please point out Palestine on a map?
Oh, thats right it doesn't exist. Think then post:)It does not exist any more, because the land has been stolen by those folks from Europe who think their ill-begotten god gives them the justification to do so. I mean, if the Jews were so peacefully coming to settle in Palestine in the first half of the 20th century, how did they manage to expand their territory beyond the land that was alotted to them in 1948?

It does not exist any more, because the land has been stolen by those folks from Europe who think their ill-begotten god gives them the justification to do so. I mean, if the Jews were so peacefully coming to settle in Palestine in the first half of the 20th century, how did they manage to expand their territory beyond the land that was alotted to them in 1948?
When Israel was declared, Egypt, Seria and Jordan attacked Israel the very next day! and Israel managed to defeat them with weapons dating back from the 19th century!!!!

It does not exist any more, because the land has been stolen by those folks from Europe who think their ill-begotten god gives them the justification to do so. I mean, if the Jews were so peacefully coming to settle in Palestine in the first half of the 20th century, how did they manage to expand their territory beyond the land that was alotted to them in 1948?
They took the land, as you know but won't admit, as a bargaining tool for peace after their enemies repeatedly (and badly) declared war on them!
I mean, the six day war. In the time it takes Bush to find Iraq on a map we've already beaten back Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Jordan and Iran!
In exchange for peace Israel gave back the ENTIRE Sinai desert, a territory over twice the size of Israel.
"ill-begotten god" HEEHEE, ill-begotten? did we cheat and lie to get him!:)
Ill-begotten: recieving something that you don't deserve because you obtained it through illegal or immoral means!

When Israel was declared, Egypt, Seria and Jordan attacked Israel the very next day! and Israel managed to defeat them with weapons dating back from the 19th century!!!!
Great minds think alike! I used the six day war though, slightly more embarrasing, though a close battle!

They took the land, as you know but won't admit, as a bargaining tool for peace after their enemies repeatedly (and badly) declared war on them!
I mean, the six day war. In the time it takes Bush to find Iraq on a map we've already beaten back Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Jordan and Iran!
In exchange for peace Israel gave back the ENTIRE Sinai desert, a territory over twice the size of Israel.
"ill-begotten god" HEEHEE, ill-begotten? did we cheat and lie to get him!:)
Ill-begotten: recieving something that you don't deserve because you obtained it through illegal or immoral means!
:) :) :) :) :) :)

It does not exist any more, because the land has been stolen by those folks from Europe who think their ill-begotten god gives them the justification to do so. I mean, if the Jews were so peacefully coming to settle in Palestine in the first half of the 20th century, how did they manage to expand their territory beyond the land that was alotted to them in 1948?

But those same folks from Europe created Palestine in the first place. You own what you create and cannot steal what you own. If you wanted to give the territory in question to a previous owner, I would suggest the Ottoman Turks. They have just as legal a claim to the area as anyone.

And in answer to the threads original question, my reaction would be "great! more money kept at home where WE can use it instead of wasting it on overseas welfare. We spend far too much money on foriegn aid, and far to little on our own domestic needs.

It does not exist any more, because the land has been stolen by those folks from Europe who think their ill-begotten god gives them the justification to do so. I mean, if the Jews were so peacefully coming to settle in Palestine in the first half of the 20th century, how did they manage to expand their territory beyond the land that was alotted to them in 1948?

It NEVER DID EXIST until now, and some would say that it still only exists as the goal of a process that is still underway. What is now Palestine (or soon will be) was previously part of Jordan. Yes the Romans called it "Philestinea" or something like that, but at the time it was the jewish nation and called by its natives "Israel" (or "Judea"?)

In 1948 the Jews were not "alloted" any land. Previously there had been talks of partitioning the Land between the Jews and Arabs who lived there, but the Arabs (including those who did not live there) would not allow Jews to control ANY of the land of the Middle East. Finally the Jews declared the state of Israel to be independent and took borders based on the latest, and most modest for them, partition plan. The next day every Arab nation around them attacked, and at the end of 2-3 years of war treaty assigned new borders, the Green Line, by mutual agreement.

They managed to expand their territory further by responding to further attacks.

Great minds think alike! I used the six day war though, slightly more embarrasing, though a close battle!


you got msn?

They managed to expand their territory further by responding to further attacks.
And gave a majority back in exchange for peace. You see, one day we will give back the Golan Heights for peace with Syria because we are looking for peace, not war. If a nation declares war on us then bring it on. We have NEVER declared war on anyone!

you got msn?
I have long considered it but alas no!
We can still use TG's on NS rather than MSN!
(hmmmmmmm, how can I shorten this further? lol, DOH:))

And gave a majority back in exchange for peace. You see, one day we will give back the Golan Heights for peace with Syria because we are looking for peace, not war. If a nation declares war on us then bring it on. We have NEVER declared war on anyone!

Advice: next time, do not occupy. Annex.

Advice: next time, do not occupy. Annex.
Sorry i'm confused, whose side are you on in this little flame-fest... uhhh debate?

I have long considered it but alas no!
We can still use TG's on NS rather than MSN!
(hmmmmmmm, how can I shorten this further? lol, DOH:))

TG's?

Have any of you heard of Nostradamus?

TG's?
Telegrams!!!
You have a nation I assume?

Have any of you heard of Nostradamus?
Please try and stay focused on the topic at hand!

Have any of you heard of Nostradamus?

Yes. Why?

Please try and stay focused on the topic at hand!


This is part of the topic....he predicted all major history events that have already happend and the future including
World War 3 which is now!!?!??!

Peace, I'm out for now!

This is part of the topic....he predicted all major history events that have already happend and the future including
World War 3 which is now!!?!??!

Peace, I'm out for now!
Oh yeah him,
OF course i've heard of him???

Sorry i'm confused, whose side are you on in this little flame-fest... uhhh debate?

Truth, Justice, and the Way of the G-d of Abraham.

I was fine with the whole thing (well... a lot of it happened before I existed, so let's say that looking back, I am fine with it) up until right after the Six Day War.

What happened then? Prior to that I would have been all for Israel. No reason to leave them out of the general partitioning and nation-building that followed, however slowly for their part, the turkish defeat. Iraq for the Arabs and Iran for the Persians? No problem for the muslim world. Only letting Jews have ANY of the land they could not put up with... their problem, and they can throw themselves against the Will of G-d for as long as it takes for them to learn. I would have supported Israel's right to enlarge her borders at the expence of her attackers, as I would for any nation. For ex: the U.S.A. could have simply declared Japan their own subject state forever, and (regardless of how unpopular that would have been in Japan) that would not have been unjust. So what happened?

After the Six Day War Israel declared certain areas that they had taken, such as Jerusalem (NEVER give that up!) to be annexed, the spoils of war. They also declared, perhaps tacitly, certain lands to be occupied, a security buffer. I would have supported their right to do this, or to do either for the totality of the lands they won in the defence of their own existence. So what?

They started to build jewish cities on the occupied parts of the land they had taken. That's called "having your cake and eating it too".

Imagine you're a kid in school and the teacher has caught you eating candy during class, so she takes it away from you. Suppose she says "say goodbye, it's my candy now". Fine. She can have it, since you shouldn't have had it in class. (I don't know how it is there but here teachers can confiscate things that you have in class when you shouldn't ... stuff like food you generally won't get back.) That's fair, right?

But suppose she says "you can have this back after school" ...and then sits down in front of you and eats it. What a bitch! Totally unfair!

Y'all should have just annexed everything in '67, Green Line style, old school! Then if you want to give back land for peace, fine... you've asserted that it is entirely yours, so why not? But don't say "I'm gonna hold this until you prove to me I can trust you with it" ...and then start making it yours totally. I still support you but Sharon, the War Criminal, has really fucked things up for you, giving your enemies a cloak of justification to rationalize their abominations with. You should do what the Q'ran tells them to do, and prove who truly serves Ha Shem: keep your word of treaty so long as the other party keeps theirs, for His honour, and do not shame Him by being trecherous with your word.

That's the side I am on.

It NEVER DID EXIST until now, and some would say that it still only exists as the goal of a process that is still underway. What is now Palestine (or soon will be) was previously part of Jordan. Yes the Romans called it "Philestinea" or something like that, but at the time it was the jewish nation and called by its natives "Israel" (or "Judea"?)That is a lie. Palaestina was a province of the Roman Empire as a part of the Diocesis Orientis. And since when does a name say anything about the people? Today's Palestinians are Arabs, and they have been living in the land for at least 1400 years. Do they not have the right to live there then?
BTW naming a person or state "Israel" is already pretty arrogant itself. How can anyone claim to have wrestled down a god? I find that a very strange concept.
In 1948 the Jews were not "alloted" any land. Previously there had been talks of partitioning the Land between the Jews and Arabs who lived there, but the Arabs (including those who did not live there) would not allow Jews to control ANY of the land of the Middle East. Finally the Jews declared the state of Israel to be independent and took borders based on the latest, and most modest for them, partition plan. The next day every Arab nation around them attacked, and at the end of 2-3 years of war treaty assigned new borders, the Green Line, by mutual agreement.The declaration of the state of Israel was not covered by any talks about the future of Palestine at the time, and it was a well-planned slap in the Arabs' face. But even if one would accept the Green Line as the partitioning line between Israel and Palestine, the Israelis are still not content with what they have. When last I looked the Westjordanland was still occupied and the nationalist Jewish settlers were still there.
They managed to expand their territory further by responding to further attacks.You mean Israel stroke preemptively against its neighbors?

To sum it up: the Palestinians today are paying the price for the Holocaust. Because the Jews had to suffer in Europe no-one in the West now dares to argument against the Jewish State officially.

That is a lie. Palaestina was a province of the Roman Empire as a part of the Diocesis Orientis. And since when does a name say anything about the people? Today's Palestinians are Arabs, and they have been living in the land for at least 1400 years. Do they not have the right to live there then?

The Romans, in a slap in the face of their own, named the Land after the philistine invaders that the Jews had driven out. So? Today's Palestinians have no connection to those who lived there back then. They were squatters that the Romans let in, and they lived alongside their jewish neighbours there for centuries under the Ottomons.

BTW naming a person or state "Israel" is already pretty arrogant itself. How can anyone claim to have wrestled down a god? I find that a very strange concept.

And yet, it remains a part of the official canon history of not only the Jews but the Christians and Muslims as well.

The declaration of the state of Israel was not covered by any talks about the future of Palestine at the time, and it was a well-planned slap in the Arabs' face. But even if one would accept the Green Line as the partitioning line between Israel and Palestine, the Israelis are still not content with what they have. When last I looked the Westjordanland was still occupied and the nationalist Jewish settlers were still there.

Oh yeah, the League of Nations was talking about partitioning the land between jewish and arab states, but they never discussed calling the jewish part "Israel". Boo the fucking hoo! What place did the L.o.N. have in telling the Jews what to call their part? None. And when the Arabs had established over and over again that they would not tolerate ANY jewish partition, those dirty cheating Jews "slapped them in the face" by not only declaring their portion of the Land theirs, but having the sheer audacity of naming it after the land of their forfathers! Cry me a river!

And yeah! They are not content to just have what they have and only protect and hold that when their neighbours come to "push them into the sea". Those dirty israeli aggresors! :(

Really, where is Westjordanland? If Jordan had not turned its back on the West Bank this problem would be a lot smaller by now.

You mean Israel stroke preemptively against its neighbors?

Refering to 1967 when egyptian, jordanian, lebonese and syrian troops and tanks were massing at their borders, those same enemies' ships were blockading their ports, missiles and sniper fire were raining down into their northern towns from the Golan Hights, and the arab nations' leaders were declaring the imminent end of Israel? How dare they strike first! Dirty Jews! :(

To sum it up: the Palestinians today are paying the price for the Holocaust. Because the Jews had to suffer in Europe no-one in the West now dares to argument against the Jewish State officially.

No, to sum it up: the Palestinians today are paying the price for their forefathers', and their own, hatred for the Jews, and for their forefathers' unwillingness to share the Land with their jewish neighbours.

Palestine was named after the Philistines? I doubt that.

What was wrong with the Arabs' position not to want a Jewish state to be created in Palestine? I would not want a Catholic state created right within my country either.

Palestine was named after the Philistines? I doubt that.

It's good to question authority, but I am, however, correct.

originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan inhabited by the
Philistines (Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel 3:4), and in this sense
exclusively the Hebrew name Pelesheth (rendered "Philistia" in Ps. 60:8; 83:7;
87:4; 108:9) occurs in the Old Testament.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=palestine

What was wrong with the Arabs' position not to want a Jewish state to be created in Palestine? I would not want a Catholic state created right within my country either.

What was wrong? 1) it wasn't anybody's country since the Turks were defeated, and 2) the Jews lived there too. Under the Ottomons the Jews lived all over the Middle East, but after WW I they were kicked out of the rest of the Middle East and bought land and settled in what is now Israel... where many of them had lived already, alongside their arab neighbours, for centuries under various empires. When the L.o.N. set up Iraq for the Arabs and Iran for the Persians, they might have grumbled but they did not declare unending war. Only Jews were not allowed to take part in the partitioning, and not for lack of established roots. Only for racism and religionism.

Sorry to burst your bubble but could you please point out Palestine on a map?
Oh, thats right it doesn't exist. Think then post:)

Yeah and Israel is a counterfeit Nation built on lies by a fake people

It's good to question authority, but I am, however, correct. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=palestine
You seem to be right in this point, but that does not make the case for the Jews though.
What was wrong? 1) it wasn't anybody's country since the Turks were defeated, and 2) the Jews lived there too. Under the Ottomons the Jews lived all over the Middle East, but after WW I they were kicked out of the rest of the Middle East and bought land and settled in what is now Israel... where many of them had lived already, alongside their arab neighbours, for centuries under various empires. When the L.o.N. set up Iraq for the Arabs and Iran for the Persians, they might have grumbled but they did not declare unending war. Only Jews were not allowed to take part in the partitioning, and not for lack of established roots. Only for racism and religionism.1) It was surely the country of those folks living in it? I.e. the Arabs and Jews living there for centuries, but not the emigrants out of Europe. Because the European Jews were for a large part followers of the ideology formulated by Herzl and had completely different views about Palestine. Or is it otherwise?
2) if Jews were kicked out of the countries now ruled by the colonial powers, maybe one should blame those instead of the Arabs. And for the Jews to get their own land in 1914 they were just not numerous enough. Or should the minority rule over the majority?
I find it somewhat strange that Jews would argument that racism and religionism was used against Jews, since that is exactly what the core lore of the Torah is. For the god of Moses the value of a human is depending on his descent and faith. That's racist and "religionist". And in the declaration of the state of Israel the authors take pride in the fact that the Jews have brought the Bible to the world, which I, on the contrary, find desasterous. But the teachings about this tailored god are the basis of all ideologies and policies regarding the ancient as well as modern Jewish claim for the Levant.
And as for your previous point: you find that Israel is right to occupy Palestine because it can? Then the killing of Millions of Jews in Europe by the Germans during WW2 was right too, because those who did that, were able to? Macciavelli is still alive, it seems.

Like you said...it wouldn't happen because the US is a christian nation and Isreal is the US's little bitch in the middle east. It would be interesting to see what would happen though because Isreal is nothing without US support (well minus the nukes the US gave them). I wonder if once their arms ran out if the Palestinians would finally get their long awaited revenge...

of course we did: kingdom of david.


For the first question: vote for the party opposion the change.

Wrong, King David was not your King!

Like you said...it wouldn't happen because the US is a christian nation and Isreal is the US's little bitch in the middle east. It would be interesting to see what would happen though because Isreal is nothing without US support (well minus the nukes the US gave them). I wonder if once their arms ran out if the Palestinians would finally get their long awaited revenge...

Sadly it is more like the US is "Israels" bitch, the powerful Jewish lobby has so much power over the US government and financial trusts that if the "Israel" government were to click her fingers the US would jump.

Why are we funding Israel? They're not a third-world country. I wouldn't mind if we pulled our funding. After all, I don't think a country with nuclear capability really needs any extra support.

Wrong, King David was not your King!

Yeah, haven't you heard? David was the king of Europe, north-and-central North America, and Australia! :rolleyes:

And as for your previous point: you find that Israel is right to occupy Palestine because it can? Then the killing of Millions of Jews in Europe by the Germans during WW2 was right too, because those who did that, were able to? Exactamente

Point 1) I am tired of seeing these comments about a Jewish minority presiding over an Arab majority. No one is arguing that the current state of Israel is not occupying a piece of land that is majority Arab. However, it would be more accurate to state that a majority-Jewish area is occupying a majority-Arab area. People who state things so simplistically ignore the fact that the state of Israel has not always held its current borders, and that Israel has been compelled to assume these borders to protect itself from threats to its existence. Stating that occupation of a majority-Arab area deligitimizes the Israeli government and means that it should be destroyed ignores that fact that half of the area in question is a Jewish-majority. It doesn't make any sense to favor the creation of an Arab state in the entire area any more than it does to create a Jewish one in that area. The only real question is when the process can begin that will return the majority-Arab lands to popular sovereignty. The state of Israel rightfully belongs where it is, it just shouldn't have as much land as it does right now. Most Israelis realize this, and are striving to change this situation.

Point 2) I am tired of seeing these comments about Israel being a theocratic dictatorship. If you knew the first thing about Israeli politics you would understand why so many of its policies seem to have religious undertones/motivations. Israeli government is a proportionally elected parliamentary system (like many countries in Europe, for example). The majority of Israelis are secular, but a sizeable minority are very religious. There are two major parties in Israel, Likud (center-right) and Labor (center-left). These two parties mostly compete against each other, although once in awhile they could form a unity government if they were able to overcome their differences.

What happens is that, in the election, neither of these two center parties gains 50% of the vote, which means that they have to make a coalition government with other parties. There are a great many 3rd parties in Israel, but the most notable are the religious parties (far-right) and the pacifist/socialist parties (far-left). Likud allies with the far-right parties (they have to since the far-left parties certainly don't want them and they can't get along with Labor), while Labor allies with the far-left parties. In the last election, the coalition of Likud and the religious parties slightly outnumbered the coalition of Labor and the far-left parties. This mean that the Likud party was allowed to appoint the Prime Minister, and they chose Ariel Sharon.

Now, if at any time the coalition should fall apart and fail to keep at least 50% of parliament (in Israel called the Knesset), another round of elections would have to be called, in which case Labor would probably gain control of the government (something which Likud really wants to avoid). In order to keep its coalition together, Likud has to do more than pay lip service to the religious parties, they actually have to do some of the things that they want. This means that although Likud is not highly religious, they end up passing legislation that is (and this has resulted in sponsorship of Orthodox Judaism over Conservative or Reform Judaism). It also means that even if a majority of the population is for a policy, the religious parties can often veto that policy by threatening to withdraw from the government. A majority of Israelis are in favor of withdrawal from the Palestinian territories and the creation of a Palestinian state, but a handful of religious parties have been impeding any progress on that idea for some time. This is a flaw of this type of government, and this sort of thing could happen in any country. It just happens to be happening in Israel, so that the world only sees the worst of Israeli politics through the media, not the daily struggle that goes on between the secular and the relgious elements of society. I have yet so see a governmental system that is perfect, and Israel is a case-in-point as to how a proportional representation system can be less desirable than a first-past-the-post district system.

Point 3) I am tired of seeing these comments about how the "Jewish lobby" controls the US government. This is a conspiracy theory, pure and simple. It is true that there are a disproportionate number of Jews that make up the US government and many other prominent areas of society, but it is not due to any illicit influence, but comes from working just as hard (and sometimes harder) than everyone else to get there. If you had a segment of the population that is mostly well-educated and industrious, wouldn't you EXPECT them to have a disproportionate influence? However, since the Jewish population of the US is still extremely small (I think about 2%, but feel free to correct me by a percentage point or 2), influence based solely on religion could not account for the effectiveness of Jewish lobby groups.

The reason for their effectiveness? Being able to convince people in power that they are RIGHT. Furthermore, the policies of these Jewish groups go far beyond Israel, into virtually every aspect of society. Jewish groups have worked on the side of civil rights groups, labor unions, and many other movements that are important to a large portion of the US population. Also, Jewish lobby groups are not a monolithic entity, there are numerous rifts among the groups (as well as many rifts among Jews themselves), so sometimes you will find one group of Jews is actually working against another group on an issue. Kind of puts a dent in your conspiracy theory, doesn't it?

yes....there are a disproportionate number of Jews that make up the US government...thay are at the root of Pro-Israel UN vetoes...Pro-Israel foreign Policies....and outrageous Foreign Aid...

Also...there are a disproportionate number of Jews that controls the US media...they are at the root of Biased News and Biased Movies....

You say they are at the root. Okay then, how do they manage to turn a nation of 300 million to their whim with so few people? Someone along the line HAS to agree with them for that to work. Instead of criticizing US policy by blaming the Jews, blame American citizens. They are the major ifnluence for US policy, not a tiny minority that happens to be good at getting its voice heard.

Control of the media? Absurd. The Jews that are in the media didn't get there by being Jewish, they got there by being educated and hard-working. And they don't manage to stay there by turning the media into a mouthpiece for Jewish groups, they manage to stay where they are because their (non-religious) beliefs (wow isn't that amazing, Jews have non-religious beliefs..!?!?!) are an accurate reflection of those of most of the people in their company.

....Instead of criticizing US policy by blaming the Jews, blame American citizens....fair enough...I blame America...The Gov and the Voters...

Just the other day I saw a documentation about the Palestinian swimmer who took part in the Olympics. He told the camera team that he could not show them the way to the swimming pool where he was training because it was set up "illegally", since Israelis do not allow Palestinians to have or use swimming pools. This is just another stone in the mosaique showing how Israel seems to be treating Palestinians. So if you are working for a charity helping Palestinian children, does that make up for Apache helicopters firing missiles into buildings and streets to go after alleged terrorists and killing scores of civilians? I don't think so.

The two are unrelated. The point is that some Israelis are doing things to help Palestinians, even while the army and terrorists kill each other, and civilians.

When you say "How Israel seems to be treating Palestinians", you ignore the good that Israelis do with and for Palestinians, and focus exclusively on military operations, as if that's somehow representative of a people. This is just as unfair as alleging that Abu Graihb somehow "represents" all or most Americans, or that terrorism by Hamas represents all Palestinians.

hmm....Are you for or against the Jewish-Apharteid-Wall ?(Sharon calls it his security fence)

And as we all know, a wall is the same thing as an extermination camp, right?

... Hey, what do you know, I seem to be surrounded by 4 Auschwitzes right at this moment. :rolleyes:

...The Jews that are in the media didn't get there by being Jewish, they got there by being educated and hard-working. .....here...I have to give to the Credit of the "hollywood" Jews...They did wonders for the Movie Industries... im Proud of the Hollywood dominance...One of the few things we export...

Some here may wanna argue that...Hollywood was going to be Hollywood....with or without the Jews...

But I say we never know...give them credit when its due...

Mr George Lucas and Mr Steven Spielberg....keep them coming....

fair enough...I blame America...The Gov and the Voters...
but the voters vote for who the jewish controled media promotes to them and brain washes them to like

The Jews are not the problem, it is the little portion in that government holding the peace plan, ariel sharon is not the tough guys i expected him to be, he is always scared by his party members, and he is a flip flop just like John Kerry (even though am a democrat, who know if john kerry supports gay marraige or not) the Isreal must be allowed to vote in a refferandum on what they want to do.

When Germany had occupied the Netherlands in WW2 everybody would have found it to be alright if a dutchman were to kill (any) Germans. So what is different regarding the situation in Palestine/Israel? Occupation is occupation, and if the occupators would stop the occupation, everything would be just fine.

Bullshit. Hamas and company are not fighting against occupation, they're fighting against Israel's existence. Unlike Germany in the Netherlands, where the end-goal of the resistance was to simply get Germany OUT, Hamas' goal is to conquer all of "old Palestine". The combination of violence with a zero-sum attitude is a recipie for disaster, as there is basically no way to stop it once it starts. Hamas does not want to stop the occupation; its ideology, taken to its logical conclusion, REQUIRES that it become the occupier, once it steps over the Green Line.

What was wrong with the Arabs' position not to want a Jewish state to be created in Palestine? I would not want a Catholic state created right within my country either.

Well, first, it wasn't THEIR country (they didn't own the land, or have citizenship rights, they were basically serfs), so that's already starting from a pretty arrogant and condescending viewpoint. And secondly, what was wrong with the Zionists' position of wanting to establish a Jewish state in their ancestral home, particularly since the legitimate leadership SUPPORTED sharing the land with their Arab neighbors?

Hamas should be disbanded and joint Isreali Palestinian security council or something like that should be formed, these two states can have the kind of relationship canada and U.S have. see how rich they are with the free trade agreements. palestinian and isreali can work in each others territories

With the exception of the PA (which seems to be continually losing ground), Hamas is the most powerful, popular, and well-armed faction among Palestinian society. What are the odds that they will support being "disbanded" without a fight? :rolleyes:

More importantly, do you really think that, at this stage, the PA would be willing to do this, particularly without popular support?

This may be a case of U.N intervention, to ensure a cease fire is intact, and stop Isreali Bulldozers from chasing old palestines with no money out of their homes. there is hope for Africa,Asia and the middle East if only people could work together and not point fingers at one another, accept arabs and jews have done some wrongthings , now it is time to correct if for the sake of the next generation

I wonder if this thread idea came from Kerry's announcement about cutting funds to Isreal and helping Palestine form a Palestinian State. Can't find a link on it today but I saw it on various news programs on various cable news channels (no not just Fox news before anyone asks).

However I do agree that without the U.S.'s involvement Isreal would already own much of this so called "holy land." And with us out of the picture Isreal would become prime target number one in the Arab world. Lets not just demonize Israel here though. The surrounding countries have made it very clear what they would do to Isreal if allowed. It goes both ways.

I think we're flattering ourselves a little too much here.When Israel declared itself a state and layed claim to that little strip of land they weren't even getting sympathy from us,much less support.We didn't really start helping them until about the time Kennedy came into office and even then we wouldn't supply them with tanks so as not to offend the other Arabs.So for like the first 50 years of it's modern existance a half million Jews were holding off something like 6 million Arabs and during the last few wars really kicking their asses.Israel I salute you!

Okay I'm off to bed.

When Germany had occupied the Netherlands in WW2 everybody would have found it to be alright if a dutchman were to kill (any) Germans. So what is different regarding the situation in Palestine/Israel? Occupation is occupation, and if the occupators would stop the occupation, everything would be just fine.

"Would have" is what is different. If the resistance had followed a strategy of blowing up german civilians indescriminately, some people might very well have cheered them on. Those people would have been monsters as well. But you know what? It didn't happen. That's what is different.

The Jews are not the problem, it is the little portion in that government holding the peace plan, ariel sharon is not the tough guys i expected him to be, he is always scared by his party members, and he is a flip flop just like John Kerry (even though am a democrat, who know if john kerry supports gay marraige or not) the Isreal must be allowed to vote in a refferandum on what they want to do.

I wish it were that easy, I really do, but that's just not how a parliamentary system works. There is no real spirit of bipartisanship (and hence no reason to abide by a referendum) in a parliamentary system because what the majority party wants, it gets. Furthermore, a Prime Minister can be removed at any time if his party chooses to do so, so Sharon is treading a very fine line in proposing the Gaza pullout; he could lose his place in the party if enough members of Likud go against him. You call Sharon a flip-flopper, but really he is just trying to do as much as his party will let him; he can do nothing more since a Prime Minister lacks the authority and independence of a President.

Bullshit. Hamas and company are not fighting against occupation, they're fighting against Israel's existence. Unlike Germany in the Netherlands, where the end-goal of the resistance was to simply get Germany OUT, Hamas' goal is to conquer all of "old Palestine". The combination of violence with a zero-sum attitude is a recipie for disaster, as there is basically no way to stop it once it starts. Hamas does not want to stop the occupation; its ideology, taken to its logical conclusion, REQUIRES that it become the occupier, once it steps over the Green Line.
The existence of Israel is occupation in the understandable view of Arabs.Well, first, it wasn't THEIR country (they didn't own the land, or have citizenship rights, they were basically serfs), so that's already starting from a pretty arrogant and condescending viewpoint. And secondly, what was wrong with the Zionists' position of wanting to establish a Jewish state in their ancestral home, particularly since the legitimate leadership SUPPORTED sharing the land with their Arab neighbors?What was wrong with the Zionists' position is their complete ignoring that Palestine was already populated. They somehow had the strange perception that Palestine was an empty land after the downfall of Turkish rule there. And who do you call "legitimate leadership" here? Herzl?
And in what way is the land supposed to be the "ancestral home" of the Jews? Because the Israelite tribes took the land by force justifying the slaughter with the will of their god? What defines a Jew in that respect? being a worshipper of Yah or El? Others have been that, too. And prior to that? Jews being the descendants of a small group of Hebrews? But the Hebrews have originally come out of Mesopotamia. Setting a point in history to justify a present claim by referring to some long-past period in time is completely arbitrary. If the Jews are claiming the land they must use reasons out of the 19th and 20th centuries. After all, in very ancient times Egypt had always been the overlord of that region, so could claim it with the same argument.

The existence of Israel is occupation in the understandable view of Arabs.

Understandable perhaps, but ultimately unrealistic. And, as already noted, a main reason why your analogy fails. Where do you suggest these third and fourth generation Israelis go? Back to the former Soviet Union? Arab countries which de-facto refuse Jews citizenship?

What was wrong with the Zionists' position is their complete ignoring that Palestine was already populated.

An admitted low point in Zionism's ideological history. However this view was not uniform among Zionist ideology, and was replaced with a desire for peaceful coexistence- which seems to be more than the Zionists have gotten from most of their neighbors.

They somehow had the strange perception that Palestine was an empty land after the downfall of Turkish rule there. And who do you call "legitimate leadership" here? Herzl?

Herzl died in the 1890s, and never held any actual leadership position in Israel. I'm referring to the Labor Zionist-dominated World Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency, the Histradrut, in short, the recognized leaders of the Yishuv from the 1900s to the establishment of the state. Men like Ben Gurion and Weizmann, to name a few.

And in what way is the land supposed to be the "ancestral home" of the Jews? Because the Israelite tribes took the land by force justifying the slaughter with the will of their god? What defines a Jew in that respect? being a worshipper of Yah or El? Others have been that, too. And prior to that? Jews being the descendants of a small group of Hebrews? But the Hebrews have originally come out of Mesopotamia. Setting a point in history to justify a present claim by referring to some long-past period in time is completely arbitrary.

Israel has been a central and dominant component of and in Judaism for the past 2,000 years. Israel is constantly referred to in Jewish liturgy, as is the stated desire for God to end the Jews' exile and "send them home". The great Judaism scholar Franz Rosenszweig defined Judaism as consisting of three things:

- God
- Torah
- Israel

I'm not saying this in of itself constitutes justification of the claim, or makes the claim more valid than that of Arabs that actually lived there, but it's absurd to imply, as you are, that there is no connection between Jews, Judaism and the land of Israel.

If the Jews are claiming the land they must use reasons out of the 19th and 20th centuries. After all, in very ancient times Egypt had always been the overlord of that region, so could claim it with the same argument.

No, one could not, because, as far as I know, Israel does not feature prominently in the Egyptian conception of self, the world, or history, whereas it does in Judaism.

We know it won't happen, say though it did, what would you say?

Because I don't approve Israel's current course of action (e.g. settlements, destroying refugeecamps and so on) I would be very happy about that...

Originally Posted by Druthulhu
Unfortunately for you He has promised that it will be theirs forever.

With that "bible and god promised everything would be mine" blablah there's the next problem, he also told one of the israelic tribe "THOU HAST TAKEN LAND WHICH IS NOT YOURS! FOR THAT I SHALL DESTROY YOU!" point here is, most of todays jews (israelics?) claim to be descendants of that tribe :eek:

Understandable perhaps, but ultimately unrealistic. And, as already noted, a main reason why your analogy fails. Where do you suggest these third and fourth generation Israelis go? Back to the former Soviet Union? Arab countries which de-facto refuse Jews citizenship?These third and fourth generation Israelis should indeed go back to where their grandparents or great-grandparents once came from. I do not see a problem with that. Jewish communities are thriving all over Europe anyways.An admitted low point in Zionism's ideological history. However this view was not uniform among Zionist ideology, and was replaced with a desire for peaceful coexistence- which seems to be more than the Zionists have gotten from most of their neighbors. A desire for peaceful coexistence must have passed me by, and I have seen quite some Zionist websites still wanting Arabs out of Palestine AND Jordan. And why do you constantly expect such a desire for peaceful coexistence from the "neighbors"? The neighbors have every right to want the situation as it had been prior to 1947 when there was no artificial Jewish state in the region.Herzl died in the 1890s, and never held any actual leadership position in Israel. I'm referring to the Labor Zionist-dominated World Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency, the Histradrut, in short, the recognized leaders of the Yishuv from the 1900s to the establishment of the state. Men like Ben Gurion and Weizmann, to name a few.But didn't Herzl lay the ideological groundwork for Zionism with "Der Judenstaat" (which I am currently reading)? And wasn't he the often referred-to spiritual leader of the movement, even after his death (in 1904)?
Israel has been a central and dominant component of and in Judaism for the past 2,000 years. Israel is constantly referred to in Jewish liturgy, as is the stated desire for God to end the Jews' exile and "send them home". The great Judaism scholar Franz Rosenszweig defined Judaism as consisting of three things:
- God
- Torah
- Israel
I'm not saying this in of itself constitutes justification of the claim, or makes the claim more valid than that of Arabs that actually lived there, but it's absurd to imply, as you are, that there is no connection between Jews, Judaism and the land of Israel.I am not saying that there is no connection between Jews, Judaism and the land of Israel. What I am saying ist that the term "ancestral home" is misleading, and even if true does not constitute any reasonable justification of the claim for the land. And what I am saying additionally ist hat the god referred to here is only an invention, merged out of numerous other deities of the time and region (El, Yah).
No, one could not, because, as far as I know, Israel does not feature prominently in the Egyptian conception of self, the world, or history, whereas it does in Judaism.What do you mean? Except for the reigns of Saul and David (when the Levant was neglected by the Egyptian royal court then at Akhetaten), and Solomon (during the kingship of Horemheb, the only king ever to accept a Levantine ruler as a real partner, even giving him one of his daughters for marriage), the land that could be referred to as ancient Israel had always been depending on the goodwill of others, so I consider the local rulers more to have been tribal chieftains and not kings of a great nation. And most of the time, especially prior to the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt, the kings of Egypt were the highest authorities in the Levant.

These third and fourth generation Israelis should indeed go back to where their grandparents or great-grandparents once came from. I do not see a problem with that.

That's your perrogative. I disagree with you as to whether this happens to be a practical or "moral" suggestion, particularly in cases of countries which treat Jews like second-class citizens (i.e., many Arab states), or would be unlikely to let them return. I'm also curious about your position on Israelis who can trace some ancestry back to the region pre-modern Israel.

Jewish communities are thriving all over Europe anyways.

Not all Jews are from Europe, and that statement isn't quite accurate, anyway. Furthermore, you are ignoring that many of the Jewish communities that European Israelis are from were utterly annihilated during the Holocaust. (Whereas the communities that are undergoing some revitalization- thriving is hardly accurate- tend to be more in Western Europe, particularly in larger cities.) You are basically suggesting that they pack up and return to their ancestral shtetl, in a foreign community, foreign country, where they don't speak the language, feel any connection to the culture, and oh yeah, where the last time their relatives were there, they ended up being murdered. I can't imagine why Jews wouldn't be jumping at the prospect of this plan.

These people identify no more with Poland or being Polish than I do. Were anyone to suggest to me that I should "go back to Poland", my response would be a prompt, "Fuck you, too."

A desire for peaceful coexistence must have passed me by, and I have seen quite some Zionist websites still wanting Arabs out of Palestine AND Jordan.

The fact that you are ignorant of one end of the spectrum and focus exclusively on the other, trying to create the impresison that that one extremity constitutes the spectrum in its entirety is not my problem.

And why do you constantly expect such a desire for peaceful coexistence from the "neighbors"?

I don't expect a "desire" from them. I do think their lack of pragmatism is rather interesting, though.

The neighbors have every right to want the situation as it had been prior to 1947 when there was no artificial Jewish state in the region.

Or Palestinian state.

But didn't Herzl lay the ideological groundwork for Zionism with "Der Judenstaat" (which I am currently reading)? And wasn't he the often referred-to spiritual leader of the movement, even after his death (in 1904)?

Yes, but that is irrelevant to what I was talking about, which were leaders who made political and ideological decisions in the 50 years leading up and including the founding of the actual state. The fact that people looked up to Herzl doesn't negate the all-important fact of him being dead and thus incapable of making decisions. That would be like trying to argue the legitimate leader of the United States in WWII was not FDR, but rather George Washington and Benjamin Franklin.

I am not saying that there is no connection between Jews, Judaism and the land of Israel. What I am saying ist that the term "ancestral home" is misleading, and even if true does not constitute any reasonable justification of the claim for the land. And what I am saying additionally ist hat the god referred to here is only an invention, merged out of numerous other deities of the time and region (El, Yah).

Your personal opinions about the Jewish conception of God seem largely irrelevant to the discussion. I'm personally more interested in you expanding on the "justification of the claim for the land" thing you mentioned, as well as your first comment in your last post regarding what present-day Israelis should do.

I`ve not read any of this thread , but cutting to the chase , SOmeone should fund Israel , and someone should tell the arabs to stop whinging. THe palestinian people had a country of equal size to Israel but on the first day the UN declared the country`s sovereign 5 large Arab nation`s attacked them. Maybe if they hadn`t started TWO major wars with Israel they wouldn`t be in hovels atm ?

With that "bible and god promised everything would be mine" blablah there's the next problem, he also told one of the israelic tribe "THOU HAST TAKEN LAND WHICH IS NOT YOURS! FOR THAT I SHALL DESTROY YOU!" point here is, most of todays jews (israelics?) claim to be descendants of that tribe :eek:


What tribe, Dan? Are you saying that most Jews today claim to be Danites?

Is there source for any of what you just said? Even a chaper and verse for the part you seem to claim is biblical?

every body would show you a verse in the Koran or Bible that they own this strip of land. but the thing is this quarrel has been on since the bible.and it would be solved by a joint committe of Isreal and Palestine without the help of the Pope,U.S, an ayatollah, or Arab League. no need for foreighn intervention

every body would show you a verse in the Koran or Bible that they own this strip of land. but the thing is this quarrel has been on since the bible.and it would be solved by a joint committe of Isreal and Palestine without the help of the Pope,U.S, an ayatollah, or Arab League. no need for foreighn intervention

If they were capable of solving the problem on their own, they probably would have done so by now. The fact is, removing all foreign intervention would probably make the problem worse not better, since even though a majority of Israelis favor a pullout, some might be tempted to stay in due to the overwhelming military might of Israel and the uncertainty surrounding what a Palestinian state might become (I don't imagine Israel would be all that comfortable with an Iranian-style theocratic state led by Hamas or by a terrorist-sponsoring state, since both would still try to destroy Israel given the chance).

ok so what do you think can be done to solve this problem. A un peace keep force or a land sharing treating brokered by NATO and the Arab League. Isreal has forgotten Pakistan has nuclear weapons and Iran has nuclear capabilities.

That's your prerogative. I disagree with you as to whether this happens to be a practical or "moral" suggestion, particularly in cases of countries which treat Jews like second-class citizens (i.e., many Arab states), or would be unlikely to let them return. I'm also curious about your position on Israelis who can trace some ancestry back to the region pre-modern Israel.
What it comes down to is the fact that the mistake that was made in creating Israel cannot be unmade without further violence and loss of life. The mistake remains though. And although I do not actually think that sending these third and fourth generation Israelis would be practical, I would find that just fair in moral terms. Israelis who can trace ancestry back to the region of pre-modern Israel have never been an issue of my critique of the statehood of Israel.

Not all Jews are from Europe, and that statement isn't quite accurate, anyway. Furthermore, you are ignoring that many of the Jewish communities that European Israelis are from were utterly annihilated during the Holocaust. (Whereas the communities that are undergoing some revitalization- thriving is hardly accurate- tend to be more in Western Europe, particularly in larger cities.) You are basically suggesting that they pack up and return to their ancestral shtetl, in a foreign community, foreign country, where they don't speak the language, feel any connection to the culture, and oh yeah, where the last time their relatives were there, they ended up being murdered. I can't imagine why Jews wouldn't be jumping at the prospect of this plan.
These people identify no more with Poland or being Polish than I do. Were anyone to suggest to me that I should "go back to Poland", my response would be a prompt, "Fuck you, too." The vast majority are Jews of European descent though. And three million foreigners entering a tiny land is pretty unfair towards those who have already lived there. After all Israel is not the result of a natural social development but of immigration and the artificial implantation of a country into the region based on erroneous beliefs.

The fact that you are ignorant of one end of the spectrum and focus exclusively on the other, trying to create the impresison that that one extremity constitutes the spectrum in its entirety is not my problem. How do I know that this is just one end the spectrum instead of the expressed thoughts of the Israeli majority? What you now state as the mindset of the Israeli majority has no echo in the media, does it? And after all, Israel is judged on who is elected into government, which pretty clearly states what Israelis are up to.

I don't expect a "desire" from them. I do think their lack of pragmatism is rather interesting, though. Is there more pragmatism on the Israeli side then? Israel will never gain the respect from its neighbors if it does not accept the fact that they still feel betrayed by the world, especially by the West.

Or Palestinian state.That is not the same. The Palestinians are those Arabs who have made up the majority of the population for a very long time and there was no reason to remove them from their land. Even when the UN partition plan was set up in 1947 the Jews did not provide the majority in any of the territories. How could anybody possibly say this was a fair suggestion? Even more so when the Jews were not coming out of the region but were coming from outside and imported their European notion of superiority toward the people of the Middle East. And you seem to forget that the Palestinians were not just people but consisting of individual families who had already suffered foreign rule for centuries.

Yes, but that is irrelevant to what I was talking about, which were leaders who made political and ideological decisions in the 50 years leading up and including the founding of the actual state. The fact that people looked up to Herzl doesn't negate the all-important fact of him being dead and thus incapable of making decisions. That would be like trying to argue the legitimate leader of the United States in WWII was not FDR, but rather George Washington and Benjamin Franklin. Zionism as formulated by Herzl was the driving force behind the immigration into and claim of the land. Ideas live much longer than their inventors. So Herzl was the one who led the way for the complete denial that there were already people living in the land the Jews were about to conquer by their sheer number of immigrants.

Your personal opinions about the Jewish conception of God seem largely irrelevant to the discussion. I'm personally more interested in you expanding on the "justification of the claim for the land" thing you mentioned, as well as your first comment in your last post regarding what present-day Israelis should do.That's not a "personal opinion". And if a group of people bases any claims in the real world on beliefs that were formulated by the (alleged?) ancestors of the selfsame people a very long time ago, then there is something going wrong. Even more so when those beliefs are rooted in a god as discriminating as the god of the Israelites whose descendents the Jews until today assume to be. Every issue regarding modern Israel also has a religious side to it, especially when it comes to the stubbornness of the settlers in the West Bank.

What present-day Israelis should do? First of all, elect a new PM who is trustworthy and who does not play tricks and who has no history as a military slaughterer. Get out of the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan and accept that Jews living there might be expelled due to the hatred that has been building for so long. Stop bombing targets in Lebanon and thus violating the territorial integrity of another country. Give up all nuclear weapons programs, that only justify others to start such programs too. Internationalize Jerusalem. Tear down the wall. Help the Palestinians to educate their youth and share what they have got for political, moral, financial, and material aid from the West in the past 50 years. Help the Palestinians to stop feeling worthless. That's a lot but I am sure it would pay off.

i would probably yawn, it would be early morning news

I really both sides should get rid of Ariel Sharon and yasser Arafat for it to be fair. The New palestinian Prime Minister must be the commander of the new PA security force, hamas must redeploy its millitary wing into a new palestinian force, all teenage fight must be sent to rehabilitation centers. A U.N peace keeping force must be in West Bank and Gaza Strip. Elections must be held in Palestine by 2007. And Iran and Isreal must stop their nuclear program. hamas must change its ideaology, a couple of sucide bombers would only worsen the situation.i am not a muslim but the radicalists among make them look bad

Israelis who can trace ancestry back to the region of pre-modern Israel have never been an issue of my critique of the statehood of Israel.

Where do you draw the line? What about an Israeli who is 1/16th Palestinian Jew, do they get to stay?

The vast majority are Jews of European descent though.

I'm actually not sure if that's true- there is a substantial population of Sephardic, Yemenite, and Ethiopian Jews, too. According to this source: http://www.israelseed.com/press/pressroom_detail.asp?id=58, Ashkenazi Jews only make up 2.8 million of Israel's population. That's over 2.5 million Jews from mostly Arab countries. Are you saying a Jew from, say, Morocco, should be forbidden from living in Palestine? Should Iranian Jews be sent back to Iran to be persecuted? Is that "moral"?

After all Israel is not the result of a natural social development but of immigration and the artificial implantation of a country into the region based on erroneous beliefs.

Immigration isn't a "natural social development"? According to whom?

How do I know that this is just one end the spectrum instead of the expressed thoughts of the Israeli majority?

Well you could do some research on the wide variety existing in Zionist thought... :rolleyes:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/zion.html

Note just a few of the different movements:

-General Zionism
- Political Zionism
- Practical Zionism
- Radical Messianic Zionism
- Religious Zionism
- Revisionist Zionism
- Socialist Zionism
- Spiritual Zionism (also called "Cultural" Zionism)
- Synthetic Zionism

There were also other variants not mentioned in the list, such as the movement led by Martin Buber (also possibly Judah Magnes?), which sought to create a joint- Zionist-Arab bi-national state. Or the doctrine of "Canaanism", whereby all people from the Arab peninsula (including Jews) would join to create a "new Canaanite Empire". Ironically, when that idea was rejected by Arab disinterest, hostility and anti-semitism, its ideological proponents went on to become established right-wing thinkers.

What you now state as the mindset of the Israeli majority has no echo in the media, does it?

What media are you talking about?

And after all, Israel is judged on who is elected into government, which pretty clearly states what Israelis are up to.

The Likud won more seats, but many moderate Likud supporters have said they support the disengagement plan.

Here is a poll that seems to more or less support my contention. I will concede he number is lower than I thought it was, and in other polls it seems to be even lower. There does seem, however, to be a pattern of a majority of support. http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=22114 Israeli support: 59 %

This poll, which seems more comprehensive (and also dates from a few months ago) seems to indicate higher support: http://micro5.mscc.huji.ac.il/~truman/poll-jul2004.htm

Two thirds of the Israeli public (66%) support and 31% oppose Sharon's modified disengagement plan. Moreover, 68% of the Israeli public support and 31% oppose dismantling most of the settlements in the territories as part of a peace agreement with the Palestinians. Among Palestinians, support for Sharon's disengagement plan does not exceed 34% while 65% oppose it. In March 2004, 73% of the Palestinians and 64% of the Israelis welcomed the original plan when it was first announced. This marks a meaningful drop in Palestinians' support for the plan and a small increase in Israelis' support since its announcement.

Is there more pragmatism on the Israeli side then? Israel will never gain the respect from its neighbors if it does not accept the fact that they still feel betrayed by the world, especially by the West.

The most Israel can do is give back as much of the West Bank and Gaza as possible, try to compensate Palestinian refugees, permit some refugees to return in the interests of family reconciliation, admit it made mistakes, and try to create a better future with its neighbors. It cannot, however, simply disappear, which seems to be the only thing that will satisfy some of its neighbors.

That is not the same. The Palestinians are those Arabs who have made up the majority of the population for a very long time and there was no reason to remove them from their land. Even when the UN partition plan was set up in 1947 the Jews did not provide the majority in any of the territories.

That's not true. The UN partition plan was specifically set up to reflect demographic concentrations. The two states were created in areas where each side was the majority, as part of an effort to minimize relocation.

How could anybody possibly say this was a fair suggestion? Even more so when the Jews were not coming out of the region but were coming from outside and imported their European notion of superiority toward the people of the Middle East.

Because there was no notion of Muslim superiority towards the 'infidels'. I forgot. :rolleyes:

And you seem to forget that the Palestinians were not just people

"not just people"? What?

but consisting of individual families who had already suffered foreign rule for centuries.

The Jews did not want to rule over the Palestinians. They wanted their own state. And it's not like the Jews didn't have families, or hadn't suffered, either. The first major immigration happened in the 1880s, and was composed almost entirely of people fleeing the pogroms in Russia.

Zionism as formulated by Herzl was the driving force behind the immigration into and claim of the land. Ideas live much longer than their inventors. So Herzl was the one who led the way for the complete denial that there were already people living in the land the Jews were about to conquer by their sheer number of immigrants.

And yet, this still has no relevance to my original point, which was about who the ACTUAL leaders were at the time. I refer you back to my FDR/Washington comparison. Enjoy.

That's not a "personal opinion".

Let's review:

And what I am saying additionally ist hat the god referred to here is only an invention

It sounds like a personal opinion to me. Also, as I mentioned earlier, largely irrelvant to the discussion.

And if a group of people bases any claims in the real world on beliefs that were formulated by the (alleged?) ancestors of the selfsame people a very long time ago, then there is something going wrong.

So, on those grounds, should the Palestinian Muslims' claims on the Temple Mount be dropped? After all, their alleged proprietary rights there are entirely contingent on beliefs formulated by their "alleged" ancestors. There is something going wrong, clearly.

Even more so when those beliefs are rooted in a god as discriminating as the god of the Israelites whose descendents the Jews until today assume to be.

How dare Jews assume that they are who they believe they are! Those BASTARDS!

Every issue regarding modern Israel also has a religious side to it, especially when it comes to the stubbornness of the settlers in the West Bank.

It depends on the settlers. About half are non-ideological.

What present-day Israelis should do? First of all, elect a new PM who is trustworthy and who does not play tricks and who has no history as a military slaughterer.

In other words, someone who has never been in the army? In a country with a mandatory draft? Yeah, that'll happen.

Get out of the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan and accept that Jews living there might be expelled due to the hatred that has been building for so long.

Will never happen. The only way Israel will consent to leaving Israelis to be integrated as citizens is if their protection is insured. The alternative is to have settlement enclaves existing in perpetuity, or to forcibly remove every settler. On a related note, adopting the position that it's fine if a state gives in to popular hatred and expels people they dislike is hardly a "moral" position. Does that argument justify lynching, too? Should blacks just have "accepted" that some might be killed due to the hatred that had been building for so long against them in the South?

Give up all nuclear weapons programs, that only justify others to start such programs too.

What about the fact that some of its neighbors already HAVE weapons programs?

Internationalize Jerusalem.

This I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with.

Tear down the wall.

Depends on conditions. If there's a peace deal, obviously, no wall should be necessary. Until there is one, I think it's foolish to remove it- although I would personally much prefer that it actually be built on Israeli soil, since right now it isn't really "defending" Israel so much as encroaching on Palestinian land and protecting settlements.

Help the Palestinians to educate their youth and share what they have got for political, moral, financial, and material aid from the West in the past 50 years. Help the Palestinians to stop feeling worthless.

A lovely idea. Too bad it will never work until both groups are much closer in terms of a peace deal, and also simply in terms of mutual respect. In the 90s, this was possible- and did occur. At this point, bridges have been so badly burned it will take several years at least for those lines of trust and communication to be re-established, and that's assuming efforts aren't further stymied by Palestinian radicals.

Like you said...it wouldn't happen because the US is a christian nation and Isreal is the US's little bitch in the middle east. It would be interesting to see what would happen though because Isreal is nothing without US support (well minus the nukes the US gave them). I wonder if once their arms ran out if the Palestinians would finally get their long awaited revenge...


US never gave Israel Nukes!!!!....and anyways US doesn't give real money to Israel, they give fighter planes, ammo
.....ect. BTW Russia is starting to support Israel. :D

Palestine was named after the Philistines? I doubt that.

What was wrong with the Arabs' position not to want a Jewish state to be created in Palestine? I would not want a Catholic state created right within my country either.


I have a question to you..I hope when you get back online, you will answer!

Does you muslim religion teach you to hate on Jews, Christians and basically everyone else except yourselfes?

A palestinian State with a Jewish State is possible

I have a question to you..I hope when you get back online, you will answer!
Does you muslim religion teach you to hate on Jews, Christians and basically everyone else except yourselfes?What? I am not a Muslim. In fact I was once a Catholic, but only because I was baptized so when I was a tiny kid and not because I ever believed in it. Although I accept the existence of a god to be possible I maintain the position that the existence does not automatically constitute any authority.
And I hate no Jews, no Christians, and no Muslims. What I hate though is unjust and inhuman treatment based on ideologies (e.g. religions). And I despise some of the concepts in the religions named here (e.g. the inheritability of guilt and that the worth of a person depends on descent and amount of faith).

PS: I will answer to QahJoh when I have more time.

Forgive me for saying that you DO seem to harbor some hatred for the Jews. Otherwise why would you condemn them without knowing whats really going on in Israel?

Forgive me for saying that you DO seem to harbor some hatred for the Jews. Otherwise why would you condemn them without knowing whats really going on in Israel?Indeed I do despise people who really (often literally) believe in what is in Genesis/Exodus/etc without looking further into the matter than just relying on the text, but that also includes Christians and Muslims.
I differentiate between Jews as a religious group present in almost all countries, and those folks (and their offspring) who came to Palestine in the first half of the 20th century with the typical European attitude that they could do with the land and its people just what they please.
It is the news every day what is really going on in Israel.

Ten days of festivities, plus the establishment of a personal national holiday each year.

It is the news every day what is really going on in Israel.
And since when have the media become known for reporting whats REALLY going on in Israel. Sorry but you can't comment until you've lived here!

I would love it, then I would hope that Isreal blew up all of the Arab nations and took them over. Since the US was not funding or supporting Isreal, I would expect them to shut up about it too.

Go go Isreal nukes!!!


an IQ of .5 - neat.

And since when have the media become known for reporting whats REALLY going on in Israel. Sorry but you can't comment until you've lived here!So do the pictures deceive me? And the speeches of the protagonists? Unfortunately I don't speek or understand Hebrew or Arabic (although I try to learn both) I do undertstand what Israelis and Palestinians are saying in English.

Unfortunately for you He has promised that it will be theirs forever.

Thiers? Who exactly are "They"

those who listen to his voice - and the one whom he sent forth, the word, The one that told them to LOVE. If Israel had listened and were obedient to the one who promissed the reward they would have it - Peace & Restoration to the original condition. But they rejected truth - fortified themselves and rebeled against the law of the land - and above all else have failed as Gods Witnesses. As a nation. As a people with a deep and beautiflu culture we have much to be greatful to them for and much to apreciate about them and thier role in the history of humanity.

I am not anti-semitic just incase you were wondering - Im just antiethnocentric and my faith in YHWH doesnot allow me to involve god in these political discussion except to defend that God has nothing to do with the current state of the middle east or the suffering of man anywhere else in the world under the rule of incompitent administrations. God has nothing to do with it.

Of course not. Because YHWH is an invented god.

Of course not. Because YHWH is an invented god.
Well you claim that our G-D is invented, prove that yours exists!

So do the pictures deceive me? And the speeches of the protagonists? Unfortunately I don't speek or understand Hebrew or Arabic (although I try to learn both) I do undertstand what Israelis and Palestinians are saying in English.
No but the news channels can decide what to air.
When was the last time that the BBC showed injured Israelis after a bombing? Right, and Palestinians injured in attacks on "freedom fighters"? You see? Just because they don't show it doesn't mean it didn't happen!

We must also cease all financial assistance to the Arab nations.

How do you figure that this is possible - Israel has no Oil we can buy from them - stop sending aid to Israel, in order to even things up the world would have to stop buying Arabian Oil - kinda difficult at the moment no?

Well you claim that our G-D is invented, prove that yours exists!1. YHWH is supposed to be a god, not your god. Or do you possess this god?
2. There is no my god.
3. You claim god to be existing, so is your task to prove it, not mine to prove the contrary. There is no trace of a monotheistic concept of god to be found in the whole region prior to the time of the Exodus (around 1450 BCE). Instead there are distinct gods carrying the characteristics that are combined into the deity later worshipped by the Hebrews who had come out of Egypt, i.e. the Israelites. What I am saying is, that the god of Moses (who is still worshipped by Jews and Christians today) is not necessarily the same as the god of Abraham.

Thiers? Who exactly are "They"

those who listen to his voice - and the one whom he sent forth, the word, The one that told them to LOVE. If Israel had listened and were obedient to the one who promissed the reward they would have it - Peace & Restoration to the original condition. But they rejected truth - fortified themselves and rebeled against the law of the land - and above all else have failed as Gods Witnesses. As a nation. As a people with a deep and beautiflu culture we have much to be greatful to them for and much to apreciate about them and thier role in the history of humanity.

I am not anti-semitic just incase you were wondering - Im just antiethnocentric and my faith in YHWH doesnot allow me to involve god in these political discussion except to defend that God has nothing to do with the current state of the middle east or the suffering of man anywhere else in the world under the rule of incompitent administrations. God has nothing to do with it.

Close... "they" are the descendents of Jacob who have kept His laws. Biblically speaking, He will cast them out when they go against Him, but will always keep a "remnant" alive who will return to Him one day, and He will return them to the Land that He has made their eternal inheritence.

That is what the Bible says. As a Gnostic I tend to question things there, but the NT moreso than the OT.

As far as ethnocentrism goes, look at my posts (this thread? or another...) regarding the history of modern Israel. Arab ethnocentrism has been the cause of all the wars against Israel and of the loss of arab lands to Israel and to israeli control. Sharon is a war criminal and the settlements were and are an illegal immoral and unethical violation of their stated purpose of occupation without annexation.

However until the Palestinians are willing to put aside their rhetoric of destroying Israel and to publically acknowledge, in Arabic as well as in the English they use when talking to the world, Israel's right to exist, I will continue to support Israel.

"No weapon forged against you will prosper" - Y'h'w'h.

Close... "they" are the descendents of Jacob who have kept His laws. Biblically speaking, He will cast them out when they go against Him, but will always keep a "remnant" alive who will return to Him one day, and He will return them to the Land that He has made their eternal inheritence.

That is what the Bible says. As a Gnostic I tend to question things there, but the NT moreso than the OT.

As far as ethnocentrism goes, look at my posts (this thread? or another...) regarding the history of modern Israel. Arab ethnocentrism has been the cause of all the wars against Israel and of the loss of arab lands to Israel and to israeli control. Sharon is a war criminal and the settlements were and are an illegal immoral and unethical violation of their stated purpose of occupation without annexation.

However until the Palestinians are willing to put aside their rhetoric of destroying Israel and to publically acknowledge, in Arabic as well as in the English they use when talking to the world, Israel's right to exist, I will continue to support Israel.

"No weapon forged against you will prosper" - Y'h'w'h.

YHWH is not you God, no matter how much you pay lip service to him, nor is the land of Israel yours!

No but the news channels can decide what to air.
When was the last time that the BBC showed injured Israelis after a bombing? Right, and Palestinians injured in attacks on "freedom fighters"? You see? Just because they don't show it doesn't mean it didn't happen!

Have you ever watched the BBC's News? This leads me to believe you haven't.

YHWH is not you God, no matter how much you pay lip service to him, nor is the land of Israel yours!

I am now jewish and never said that the Land of Israel was mine. It's not your either btw. But Y'h'w'h is the only real God that there is, and the only one that I believe in. However since you seem to believe that He has abandoned the jewish people, and thus broken His eternal covenent, He is not your God. You hate the jewish people and/or the jewish state, His chosen people, and therefor your "God" is Satan.

Have you ever watched the BBC's News? This leads me to believe you haven't.
read the Truth about Israel and Palestine thread and see the links I posted there. BTW I won't be posting here anymore as one thread is more than enough for debating on. Therefore I have chosen the other one. Austrealite, please, please find something new to say, you've been repeating the same BS for... a long time. They are the same G-D!!!

I'll take that as a 'no'.

The BBC's coverage of Israel/Palestine always tries hard to look as if they aren't leaning to one side. I know, because I watch it. Everyday.

I'll take that as a 'no'.

The BBC's coverage of Israel/Palestine always tries hard to look as if they aren't leaning to one side. I know, because I watch it. Everyday.
And your views reflect that perfectly, coincidence?
Look the bottom line is that if you haven't been there you can't comment. One way or the other the media are biased so you never get the full story.

Depends on why they did it. If they did it because the Arab world gave us an ultimatum--stop funding Israel or you'll never get another drop of our oil--then I'd be upset. It actually surprises me that that hasn't happened yet.


Everybody knows what happens to countries that don't want to give the US the principal deals on their oil. First they are accused of having WMD and then they are being invaded and a new US friendly government is being installed... So everybody gives the US what it wants or it will be invaded.

And your views reflect that perfectly, coincidence?
Look the bottom line is that if you haven't been there you can't comment. One way or the other the media are biased so you never get the full story.

If you think my sole source of information is the BBC then you are sorely mistaken, and an idiot. My view is that both sides are aggravating the situation. Yours seems to be that Israel = 100% innocent and Palestine = 100% guilty. Who is showing bias?

The "chosen people" are those who followed Moses out of Egypt when Moses left to create a religion of One God, as opposed to the multideism of Egypt.

Interesting note: those same people murdered Moses for not letting them worship idols.

Hence the Jewish Guilt. So then the Christian line of thought became popular to those who didn't want to carry that guilt around. The thought of 'absolution' sounded pretty good to them. And the new christians resented the Jews for denying that absolution as legitimate, thus evolving anti-Semitism.

NOt that that has anything to do with the topic, i just wanted to set the historical record straight.

And to those of you who started/responded to the "whose god is GOD" bait, i can only say that it's this kind of childish attitude that has people killing each other all over the world.

The "chosen people" are those who followed Moses out of Egypt when Moses left to create a religion of One God, as opposed to the multideism of Egypt.

Interesting note: those same people murdered Moses for not letting them worship idols.

Hence the Jewish Guilt. So then the Christian line of thought became popular to those who didn't want to carry that guilt around. The thought of 'absolution' sounded pretty good to them. And the new christians resented the Jews for denying that absolution as legitimate, thus evolving anti-Semitism.

NOt that that has anything to do with the topic, i just wanted to set the historical record straight.

And to those of you who started/responded to the "whose god is GOD" bait, i can only say that it's this kind of childish attitude that has people killing each other all over the world.What?

The "chosen people" are those who followed Moses out of Egypt when Moses left to create a religion of One God, as opposed to the multideism of Egypt.

Interesting note: those same people murdered Moses for not letting them worship idols.

Source? Besides something you found scrawled on a sandwich someone stuck to a bathroom wall, perhaps?

Hence the Jewish Guilt.

Wow, I didn't even realize my Jewish neuroticness was due to my ancestors killing someone I'm doubtful ever even existed. That's psychology for you.

So then the Christian line of thought became popular to those who didn't want to carry that guilt around. The thought of 'absolution' sounded pretty good to them. And the new christians resented the Jews for denying that absolution as legitimate, thus evolving anti-Semitism.

Even though rabbinical Judaism has traditionally maintained that absolution can be achieved through prayer and repentance, while some versions of Christianity STILL believe that only belief in Christ can "save" you. Interesting.

NOt that that has anything to do with the topic, i just wanted to set the historical record straight.

And thanks so much for that. I look forward to reading your upcoming article in "Internet Crackpot Journal".

I am now jewish and never said that the Land of Israel was mine. It's not your either btw. But Y'h'w'h is the only real God that there is, and the only one that I believe in. However since you seem to believe that He has abandoned the jewish people, and thus broken His eternal covenent, He is not your God. You hate the jewish people and/or the jewish state, His chosen people, and therefor your "God" is Satan.

YHWH never had a covenent with the Jewish people, he had one with the Israelites - who are not the same as the Jewish people.

The only one true Religion is and always will be Christianity!

Yeah, but which form of Christianity? I grew up Roman Catholic. I'm not anymore, chiefly because I was always taught that Roman Catholicism was the only true faith AND (drum roll, please) that all other religions recognize this and look up to Roman Catholics.

I work with several people who belong to the Church of G*d in Christ. They are convinced that they are the only ones bound for the Kingdom of Heaven and everyone else (Including other Christians) are participating in a false faith and are passengers on a fast train to hell.

Another co-worker is Southern Baptist. He was raised to believe that people of his faith were put here to convert all people to the One, True Faith (Southern Baptism, of course) & everyone else (including those who belong to American and other Baptist sects) have reservations for Satan's midnight show.

I am constantly finding leaflets around my workplace, written by a co-worker who is a Fellowship Christian, explaining that every one in every other religion is 'worshiping falsly' and are doomed. I have no idea what his brand of Christianity is about, except that punctuation, grammar, and spelling aren't nearly as important as telling people what they believe in is so much b.s.

Again I ask, if Christianity is the one true faith, which form of Christianity? Sheesh, Christians can't agree on what Christianity really is.

And as to the original question, if the U.S. stops funding Israel, I, like many or most Jews will scrape together all we can to support Israel. I support Jewish and Israeli causes, and I'd be willing to sacrifice to try to make sure that Israel isn't used as a punching bag by surrounding nations.

YHWH never had a covenent with the Jewish people, he had one with the Israelites - who are not the same as the Jewish people.

But you're tired of being asked to prove that, right? ;)

Yeah, but which form of Christianity? I grew up Roman Catholic. I'm not anymore, chiefly because I was always taught that Roman Catholicism was the only true faith AND (drum roll, please) that all other religions recognize this and look up to Roman Catholics.
[snip other idiots]
Again I ask, if Christianity is the one true faith, which form of Christianity? Sheesh, Christians can't agree on what Christianity really is.

The short simple answer to your question is simple - Jesus Christ decides that.
I realise that this sounds like a cop out, but it's not - the smug self-righteous people you've had to deal with will sooner or later die and have to face Jesus (unless, shock horror, they're wrong[!]) and belonging to a specific group won't help them when they're called on the carpet to account for their lives.

And most Christians realise that. It's worth noting that most denominations of Christianity acknowledge each other's claim to be Christian. Some are actually in communion with other. Others (such as the Lutherans and Orthodox) are only split on national lines because it makes for easy organisation. Others, such as Calvinism, are actually collections of independant movements (both the Hussites and Waldensians predate Calvin by several centuries).

In all things, it's the loud obnoxious idiots who get most attention - and as always, they're the ones who most need to be ignored.

It's not going to happen, but I'd be thrilled. How can they expect peace when the US is funding one side to help them kill the other?

And on the issue of Israel, I think the creation of the state (particularly since it involved the eviction of Palestinians) was a mistake, but it's here to stay now- so we just need a resolution.