Isreal's right to exist?

[Vampyrelord]

Before we begin, I would just like to say that I am not anti-semitic.

I would like to question Isreal's right to exist. Isreal is a nation which was formed from the stolen lands of independant, soverign states. This was excused because it had an important function: to provide a safe homeland for the Jewish race.

However, I think it is clear that it has failed in this function rather spectacularly. Jews are safer almost anywhere else than in a militant state hated by just about the entire Muslim world (about 20% of the world's population is Muslim). Isreal's arrogant, aggressive attitude has lead to countless suicide bombings, kidnappings and rocket attacks (targeted at Isreali civilians), and has in fact caused a significant increase in anti Jewish sentiment on a worldwide scale.

Isreal was made by siezing lands and forcing them together into a nation. This was excused because of the important nature of it's function. However, now that it has failed in it's function, it is useless. Surely if it only has the right to exist to protect Jews, it should not exist if it in fact endangers them?

[Wolfman Walt]

Define stolen lands - if we wanna go with history, Egyptian tablets reveal that the area of Isreal was a Jewish kingdom. Evidence of such include the remains of the First and Second Temples of the Jewish King, Solomon. Even though Jewish history says that Isreal has been the Jewish promise for 3000 years, some of this stuff dates back to 1211 BCE. The jews were expelled however in 132 CE, mostly by the Roman Empire. As such, the land was infact stolen from them.

The Muslim world hates Isreal due to the fact that Isreal just doesn't cave in to every Muslim demand. It's not Isreal's "arrogant, aggressive attitude" (Which may I add is VERY subjective), it's due to the Muslim world never wanting to settle for any sort of compromise.

a significant increase in anti Jewish sentiment on a worldwide scale.
I'd like to see some sort of official statistic to that statement.

[Micker]

In your post vampire lord u just state how bad its hurt the jewish community to hold israel but that doesn't mean they no longer have the right to exist. to them it is now their home and they would wish to keep it against all those who would take it from them

[beatnikchicken]

note that most places were made of stolen lands
The united states was made by stealing land (a lot of it) and forcing the people there OUT!

If people are going to pretend this is a Religious thing I think Jerusalem should become it's own nation like the Vatican.
I know this isn't really the issue though, and i'll comment more on that later, but now it's DINNER TIME!!!

[fanad3su]

i think that israel shouldnt exist in this world....
they just brought disaster and did suicide to the sinless citizen.....
poor lebanon....
israel had been fight with Muslim since long long ago and it seem that this is not going to stop....
the war just give us vision that our world is reaching its dead....
Only God's knows why....

[_Ink]

your argument is rather factual, if not for the "function" you mentioned, I would not have doubted your argument, what makes you think that the function was to safeguard Jewish people?
As far as I know, the Jews needed a land of their own, ion this case, a small country was needed for their existence, and with that effort in mind, the Americans helped the single more economically successful, business= and enterpriese minded race to grow, which will also in later times, lead to the function you mentioned.

To me, Israel does indeed have the right to exist with or without a function (if in this case, so does the same reason can be applied to Hawaii, or Mongolia, as they have a leser noble reason than to harbor the citizen of that country said.)

Perhaps you may not understand, what I am saying is that Israel is actually like any country, a deserving nation, if you say that forbidding their existence and deny them (just as we are doing<certain asian countries>) we will be quite hypocrite, we are also denying ourselves.


i think that israel shouldnt exist in this world....
they just brought disaster and did suicide to the sinless citizen.....
poor lebanon....

an example of reason of mindless consideration, you do not think, before you speak.
Imagine, if that is the case, how about the Americans? How about Russia? How about Chevkoslovakia? How about Bosnia? There has been countless wars being fought way before, and this war is just any example of over reaction and disagreement.

Saying their nation should not exist because it does not serve a function worthy of its existence is simply... dumb.

[Undying]

If Israel has no right to exist because it stole lands (lands that were promised to Israel in the Bible... whether you believe it or not, it remains evidence), then what about... every single other country in the whole world? America, England, China, to mention but a few, all "stole" lands at some point during their history (America as a prime example - and I am not anti-American in any way - has murdered countless Indians when it just began. So now America has no right to exist either?)

Honestly... you should check how did the countru of Israel started. Most lands here were bought from the Arabs (often at HUGE sums of money), and hence it was not "stealing" but "buying".

Another point, the "function" of the country of Israel is NOT to provide a safe haven for the Jewish people, because if you know just a bit of Jewish history you would know that Jews are not safe anywhere. The function of the country of Israel is to be the home for the Jewish people. See, Jews needed their own land, their own home, as any nation must (I want to see you and your nation surviving through 2000 years of exile with always hostile welcome). Therfore, Israel is performing its function beautifuly - providing a home country, a motherland, to the Jewish people.

Lastly, I'd like to mention that your assentment, that "Jews are safer almost anywhere in the world than in Israel", is only true BECAUSE Israel exists. If it was not... you just have to go 60 years back and see the Nazi.

[mooks]

Israel's case of migration differs greatly from other colonized or formed countries... Does Israel have a right to exist? Definetely... But lets review the history...

The first historical record of the word "Israel" comes from an Egyptian stele documenting military campaigns in Canaan. Although this stele which referred to a people (the determinative for 'country' was absent) is dated to approximately 1211 BC era, Jewish tradition holds that the Land of Israel has been a Jewish Holy Land and Promised land for 3,000 years...

There have been numerous immigration attempts-the first modern immigration or aliyah's was by one of the Socialist founders Moses Hess (one of modern history's greatest, yet unknown). There have been atleast five or six attempts in modern history. starting in 1200 and ending in 1948

I would really not like to get into the details as of why they all resulted in major conflict- both sides have their stories, proof and records as of what happened. Although it's kinda evident that the jews were just simply not liked and persecuted by the arabs- whether it was retaliation for their 'defensive' ways in the 'second aliyah' in 1918-
Anyway the british didn't help much anyway by responding by using equal force instead of making arrests or cases... then again they turned on the jews when nazism began and many migrated to palestine and were deemed 'illegal immigrants'...

In 1922 the population of Palestine consisted of approximately 589,200 Muslims, 83,800 Jews, 71,500 Christians and 7,600 others (1922 census*). However, this area gradually saw a large influx of Jewish immigrants (most of whom were fleeing the increasing persecution in Europe). This immigration and accompanying call for a Jewish state in Palestine drew violent opposition from local Arabs, in part because of Zionism's stated goal of a Jewish state, which many Arabs believed would require the subjugation or the removal of the existing non-Jewish population

During this period from 1936–1939, known as the Great Arab Revolt or the "Great Uprising", British forces, supported by 6,000 armed Jewish auxiliary police, suppressed the widespread riots with overwhelming force. This resulted in the deaths of 5,000 Palestinians and the wounding of 10,000. In total 10 per cent of the adult male population was killed, wounded, imprisoned, or exiled. The Jewish population had 400 killed; the British 200. In another significant development during this time the British officer Charles Orde Wingate (who supported a Zionist revival for religious reasons) organized Special Night Squads composed of British soldiers and Haganah volunteers, which "scored significant successes against the Arab rebels in the lower Galilee and in the Jezreel valley" by conducting raids on Arab villages. The squads were rumored to have used an excessive and indiscriminate use of force, which has been cited by Israeli academic Anita Shapira. The Haganah mobilised up to 20,000 policemen, field troops and night squads; the latter included Yigal Allon and Moshe Dayan. Significantly, from 1936 to 1945, whilst establishing collaborative security arrangements with the Jewish Agency, the British confiscated 13,200 firearms from Arabs and 521 weapons from Jews.

In 1947, United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine or United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181, a plan to resolve the Arab-Jewish conflict in the British Mandate of Palestine, was approved by the United Nations General Assembly, at the UN World Headquarters in New York. The plan partitioned the territory of Western Palestine into Jewish and Arab states, with the Greater Jerusalem area, encompassing Bethlehem, coming under international control.

In conclusion... As long as Israel sticks to it's given borders by the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan, there would be considerably less problems-
However the common image and thought of Arabs by Israeli's...
And the same approach of Israelis by Arabs- is a gap too large and an image too strong-

Benny Morris(Israeli historian) has argued that although, by the end of 1947, the Palestinians "had a healthy and demoralising respect for the Yishuv's military power" they believed in decades or centuries "that the Jews, like the medieval crusader kingdoms, would ultimately be overcome by the Arab world".

Summarising the military assessments of the British, Jewish Agency and the Arabs, Morris writes, "all observers—Jewish, British, Palestinian Arab, and external Arab—agreed on the eve of the war that the Palestinians were incapable of beating the Zionists or of withstanding Zionist assault. The Palestinians were simply too weak




*Bickerton and Hill, 2003, p. 43. Cited from census figures quoted in Janowsky, 1975.

[Guy]

Historically, the land there belonged to the Jews (Judaism is one of the oldest religions in the world). However, later that land was conquered by several different empires (Arab, Roman, etc.). Israel has been ruled for so long by foreign nations that the original ppl have been forgotten.

Now, America and the UN later proposed a nation for the Jews. However, if that were the case, why didn't they carve a piece of their own land for the Jews? Instead, they stole Arab's land and call it a land for the Jews. I find that rather odd.

I don't know what to say on this issue, but it is whoever has more power that can control this world. Being right is not always successful. It isn't fair, but that's the truth. If the Muslims cannot defeat Israel, then Israel does have the right to exist, and the Palestinians' whinings mean nothing.

Also, to anyone who thinks Israel is evil for killing Lebanese, you think the Muslims didn't kill innocent Jews? That is a very narrow minded view. Now, I'm not saying Israelites have the right to kill innoncents, but I'm saying that it is unfair to demonize Israel while the Muslims have their own blame to share.

[chiking1]

Now, America and the UN later proposed a nation for the Jews. However, if that were the case, why didn't they carve a piece of their own land for the Jews? Instead, they stole Arab's land and call it a land for the Jews. I find that rather odd
They didn't use their own land because 1) it would costs too much to move millions of people over 2) The United States does not wish to allow other people into their country, however, they want to LOOK like they're nice, and took land from others to give to Jewish people.
I personally don't think that Isreal should exist. It was originally build to allow Jewish people to be safe, but as said above, it doesn't anymore. Also, the land was literally STOLEN from the neighboring countries.

[Undying]

Actually there was a suggestion, debuted in one of the Zionist Congreses, to settle Jews in Chile (oh, i can't remember how to spell that country's name. the one that's near to Argetina and speaks spanish), but was rejected by teh USA.

Oh btw, here in "Palestine", there was never a real country pre to the Jewish settlement ("Yishuv"). All that was here was the Beduin bandits and a few Jews.

[mooks]

Well, that's not entirely true... It was actually called British mandate of Palestine in 1920, before that- It was colonial dispute between Syria under French mandate, Iraq under British mandate, Arabia and Egypt, before that-

In European usage up to World War I, "Palestine" was used informally for a region that extended in the north-south direction typically from Raphia (south-east of Gaza) to the Litani River (now in Lebanon). The western boundary was the sea, and the eastern boundary was the place where the Syrian desert began. In various European sources, the eastern boundary was placed anywhere from the Jordan River to slightly east of Amman. The Negev Desert was not included... this was because they never really wanted to admit that they never got control of the lands, and before that-
Was the Ottoman period... The Ottoman Sultan discouraged all large-scale immigration to Palestine, replying to a request by Rabbi Joseph Nantonek for permission to settle Jews in 1876 that "almost all lands in Palestine were occupied, and that the autonomy sought by Nantonek was incompatible with the administrative principles of the state" and decrees against mass settlement were issued by the Ottoman government in 1884, 1887 and 1888...

Significant numbers of Jews began making Aliyah to the Holy Land in 1882 to build collective farms and eventually established the new city of Tel Aviv in 1909. Here they joined already existing Jewish communities that had survived the centuries in places like Jerusalem and Safed. However, during 1891-1900 the total number of Jews in Palestine was never more than 60,000 people out of a total population of 500,000, which demonstrated that "the Ottoman policy of allowing individuals to immigrate and to settle, but prohibiting large groups from doing the same, was successful". When Ottoman control came to an end, following World War I, the number of Jews in Palestine had declined to 55,000.... and before the Ottoman Empire, it was part of the vilayet (province) of Damascus-Syria until 1660, next of the vilayet of Saida (seat in Lebanon), shortly interrupted by the 7 March 1799 - July 1799 French occupation of Jaffa, Haifa, and Caesarea. On 10 May 1832 it was one of the Turkish provinces annexed by Muhammad Ali's shortly imperialistic Egypt (nominally still Ottoman), but in November 1840 direct Ottoman rule was restored. and before that- was the mamluk period... muslim control in the 12th and13th centuries... and before that it was the crusader period- which was when it truly never was a country or part of much...

[Undying]

Actualy, the Ottoman (or as I prefer to call it, the Turkish) empire encouraged the Jews, because they were a superb buffer against the very same Beduin bandits I mentioned before. I'm just saying this because people see to be convinced that the Jews stole lands, while those lands were given to them.

[mooks]

I'm just stating the facts as were recorded in history... Which suggests land was not stolen or given but disputed... It's not as simple as given or stolen. Israel has a definite right to exist- and it remains at that. The argument as of how it got that land should not be of revelance at all. If such an argument stands... Then the US has absolutely no right to exist, and neither should half of Brazil or south africa... BUT what should be revelant is the land it is slowly accumulating through occupation and withdrawl.

[SolBeowulf19]

Israel has the right to exist. Mainly because of, like Undying said, if you base the fact that they don't have the right to exist mainly because they built their place on stolen lands then you would be saying the same of other nations. Everyone has the right to exist, states, people, groups, hell, even millitary factions. Taking the Nazi's into example. Albeit this sounds weird and kind of wrong, but I believe everyone has a right to exist. No matter what they do, will do, or have done.

[StoneTitan]

It has the same rights as any nation in the world.

If we go as far to ask for the right of Israel to exsist... We could just aswell ask ourself: "What right does Humans have to exsist?"

Think of how much damadge we have done to nature... I can only hope that one day humans end up saving Life on Earth from the Sun.(or anything else of extreme size)
In other words im calling humans a gamble by Nature.

[mooks]

That's really stretching it... We're talking about the creation of a nation through a mandated resolution. Not the existence of human beings... I guess what people want to dispute about Israel was the 1945 UN Mandate that brought it into existence- albeit the disconcerting of the countries in the region- which has led to unresolved conflict ever since. Although, I believe that the existence of Israel is not really the source of the conflict... i believe that can be resolved. But rather Israel's determination to be the dominant factor despite being the minority in that region.

[sith29]

israel definitly has a right to exist. They didn't stole palestine. They were living in plaestine long ago before arabs. later they were exiled from there but it doesn' change the fact that they were the owner of this land before arabs. All Nations have right to have heir own country. Its not importatnt that judish arent safe in israel. Its their home. And they have the right to defend its indepandece.

[sherenetms]

Israel definitely has its right to exist as other nations in the world have theirs. If there is anyone who thinks that Israel has no right to exist, then let me ask you this simple question;

What right do you have, to say that Israel has no right to exist?


If Israel has no right to exist simply because they assumely 'stole' the land from other nations, then there would be many other nations that would have absolutely no right to exist either. Think about it; the 'stealing land from other nation' excuse sounds simply like another cover up to demonize Israel for the wars that are not entirely their fault.

[Delta]

When it comes to making a country, it almost always follows the reasoning of "might makes right". The world as you see it today is shaped mostly by lands that have changed hands dozens if not more times by wars and occasionally by the buying of lands. What country starts where is mostly decided by a powerful country or a powerful group of countries. Lands have been stolen, taken back, stolen again, burned to the ground, reinhabited, ect. for thousands if not more years. Israel has just as much right to exist as any other country that exists now.

[James Cizuz]

If your gunna have a argument over something like a humans right to exist, please leave out all this "god" stuff. Even if god existed, if they still exist now, then you have you answer.

Humans are biologic entities, and what right do we have to say another one shouldn't exist? The world is a cruel place, do you think if we "removed" isreal that their isn't going to be something worse, like America for example, we all know how "perfect" America is(same can be said for any country, i'm just using America because it's the stem of the world's problems thus far in our era).

[mooks]

If religion is irrelevant to this discussion.. then one can argue that Israel doesn't have a right to exist. The only reason Israel is where it is now is because of it's ties to religion. Israel's case of independance differs from those of other nations... and I have articulated why in post #9-



The first historical record of the word "Israel" comes from an Egyptian stele documenting military campaigns in Canaan. Although this stele which referred to a people; the determinative for 'country' was absent, and is dated to approximately 1211 BC era, Jewish tradition holds that the Land of Israel has been a Jewish Holy Land and Promised land for 3,000 years... that's purely a religious reason. If religion is really admissable, then it's possible to debate whether Israel should exist or not

[yamiX000]

OK.....I just learned more history than I wanted to, but anyways "Does Israel have a right to exist?"....Sure Just somewhere else...:) (Just Joking)...anyway now about a few things in that nice boring history lesson a bunch of you were yakkin about...when comes down to any "holy book" like the bible or whatever those other religions read...this is my opinion on them ("holy books")....To me they are just story books that some wise old people in the far off past created to set an example for humanity...(In other words a lost cause that was eventually turned into whats called religion)...Anyways as far the land Israel (Or more likely "IsraHell" in my opinion) belonging anyone becuase some old "religious" document says so...I say bologna it belongs to whoever can take it over/controll it and call it "their land"..................So sure Israel has a right to exist, but as far as ownership goes whoever is in control of it owns it....So I guess the jews own it right now and the only reason is becuase they control it.
End of story. :)

[kaede822]

if you are talking about the entire Israel nation of course it does!! every nation has the right to exist.. because if you condemn it to something like they dont have the right to exist because they're causing much havoc.. not ALL of them are causing havoc.. there are innocent people as well

[_mike_]

religiously and physically, Israel and the jews certainly have the right to exist. the jews, have come a long way over the past 2000 years, through persecution: pogroms, inquisition, the holocaust, and many others. seeing the 2000 years as blatant proof, to the kind of exile from israel the jews have been suffering they certainly deserve to return to a haven where they will be safe from all that which has endangered them over the years.
in the case of it being a military state....it has to be one since it is surrounded by those who seek her destruction. it had become one by default right from the state's creation back in 1948. after the UN's decision to grant the jews the land, there was an uproar in the arab world. they went all out against israel, on all sides. we are talking about a newly created state without an army yet, and despite all odds they overcame its immediate threat of destruction.
if you take a look in the bible(old testament/torah) u will certainly find places where there is direct referral to the land being given to the jews. e.g when G-d promised Abraham he will give the land to his children as an inheritance.. the bibles word may not be taken seriously by some, so just look at the archaeological finds in israel , egypt, rome (arc of triumph [judea capta]).
it is true that the land of israel was invaded by the romans, greeks, persians/ babylonians, turkish, british.....but yet the jewish presence remained. so then it proves that jews are the original owners of the land. and deserve to exist without a shadow of a doubt

[mooks]

religiously and physically, Israel and the jews certainly have the right to exist. the jews, have come a long way over the past 2000 years, through persecution: pogroms, inquisition, the holocaust, and many others. seeing the 2000 years as blatant proof, to the kind of exile from israel the jews have been suffering they certainly deserve to return to a haven where they will be safe from all that which has endangered them over the years.
in the case of it being a military state....it has to be one since it is surrounded by those who seek her destruction. it had become one by default right from the state's creation back in 1948. after the UN's decision to grant the jews the land, there was an uproar in the arab world. they went all out against israel, on all sides. we are talking about a newly created state without an army yet, and despite all odds they overcame its immediate threat of destruction.
if you take a look in the bible(old testament/torah) u will certainly find places where there is direct referral to the land being given to the jews. e.g when G-d promised Abraham he will give the land to his children as an inheritance.. the bibles word may not be taken seriously by some, so just look at the archaeological finds in israel , egypt, rome (arc of triumph [judea capta]).
it is true that the land of israel was invaded by the romans, greeks, persians/ babylonians, turkish, british.....but yet the jewish presence remained. so then it proves that jews are the original owners of the land. and deserve to exist without a shadow of a doubt

The point I'm trying to make is that without addressing the religious issue- it becomes harder to argue the right for Israel's right to exist in that area... Religion is an important factor to arguing their specific choice of demography- One of the main points in the argument is that an omnipotent being gave land to a specific people... If one doesn't believe in religion... then exactly what factors are in their favor. (This whole question is for the sake of debate).

And another thing... they had an army- well, an armed force that was more than adequate... The Great Arab Revolt(great uprising), happened before Israel became a recognized state...

During this period from 1936–1939, known as the Great Arab Revolt or the "Great Uprising", British forces, supported by 6,000 armed Jewish auxiliary police, suppressed the widespread riots with overwhelming force. This resulted in the deaths of 5,000 Palestinians and the wounding of 10,000. In total 10 per cent of the adult male population was killed, wounded, imprisoned, or exiled. The Jewish population had 400 killed; the British 200. In another significant development during this time the British officer Charles Orde Wingate (who supported a Zionist revival for religious reasons) organized Special Night Squads composed of British soldiers and Haganah volunteers, which "scored significant successes against the Arab rebels in the lower Galilee and in the Jezreel valley" by conducting raids on Arab villages. The squads were rumored to have used an excessive and indiscriminate use of force, which has been cited by Israeli academic Anita Shapira.

[Kzimask]

Well Isreal have rights to exist, I mean its not like Isreal is the only bad country, there lot more terrible countires out there. Also there are some unpleasent group/people everywhere on this planet such as communists, terrorists, and george bush :eek13:

[Lunatic]

Hmm...its actually topic. I myself am pro-Palestine.

The argument you say is that the land was "stolen" or "taken" from the Jews, by Romans, Muslims, etc. Who knows what happened before the Jews lived there. Who knows about the nomadic people who once lived their before. There is no proven record about that (if there is please tell me because I find it really interesting :)).

Israel was created as a nation to give a homeland to the Jews. Everyone says the land was always the Jews, who knows who or what lived their before them, what makes it theres in the first place, just cuz records saying that the Jews' homeland is the land where Israel is doesnt mean its theres lol? It's like me saying, the lands of US are just mine and no one elses. That's just plain and stupid, lol.

If people are so keen on bringing up facts like, "the US killed so many indians and took over land" and "Romans did this" and blah blah, then why do it again with the Palestinians? Isn't everyone just being hyprocritical then? Does it make things better by looking at history and the bads things then repeating them...thats just plain stupid once again.

As for people saying, that the Arabs and Muslims lost so many wars against the Isrealis, well there is a simple answer to that. Its easy to win a war when the worlds most powerful countries like the US and Britain are supporting Israel from the back for the past decades. When your getting the best weapons and best everything its hard no to lose.

Put yourself in this situation:

You are living in a nice subarban town, go to a phenomenal school. You have so many plans for your future and BAM!

All of a sudden you are kicked out of your home on the streets and you see Jews in your house, eating sleeping, having a good time while your whole life has crumbled. People say suicide bombers are crazy people but why not take a look at where this crazyness is coming from...losing everything in an instance can do that.

As for the zionist movement and British helping find a homeland for Jews. Why did they have to pick Israel, besides the fact that it has been a so called "Jewish homeland" even though Palestinians have been living there for so many centures but anyways. Why didn't they pick a place in Europe, why not America? Maybe because they didn't want them so they picked a place they could easily crush opposition.

Yea I admit my view is really biased but I try to look both sides but sometimes its agrivating when others dont and make stupid comments like lets just nuke them, and crazy Muslims and comments like those.

[Wolfman Walt]

If people are so keen on bringing up facts like, "the US killed so many indians and took over land" and "Romans did this" and blah blah, then why do it again with the Palestinians? Isn't everyone just being hyprocritical then? Does it make things better by looking at history and the bads things then repeating them...thats just plain stupid once again.
I think that's just to prove how the world works. The US is essentially built on Native American nations that we basically swindled from them. You say you're pro-palestine, but yet I don't see you giving your land back to the Indians.
Hypocricy is when you say something is wrong and then do it yourself. It's saying "HEY WE TOOK THE LAND AND YOU CAN'T!" It's showing that that's how life works.
What you're doing though could be considered hypocricy since you're saying Isreal should give the land back after it took it and you're still living on Indian land in good ole New York.
As for people saying, that the Arabs and Muslims lost so many wars against the Isrealis, well there is a simple answer to that. Its easy to win a war when the worlds most powerful countries like the US and Britain are supporting Israel from the back for the past decades. When your getting the best weapons and best everything its hard no to lose.
And to the victors go the spoils of war. You may view it as unfair or whatever, but let's put it this way, how many wars are? Can you even measure fairness in a war cause I mean if one side did NOT have an advantage, it'd just be a stalemate.
You are living in a nice subarban town, go to a phenomenal school. Cause you know every highschooler back in my day was dying to go to a school in a country whose name ends with 'Stan.'
All of a sudden you are kicked out of your home on the streets and you see Jews in your house, eating sleeping, having a good time while your whole life has crumbled
What does the fact that they're jews have anything to do with it? Keep in mind, my family WAS essentially kicked out and treated poorly after World War II by the Russians. I've yet to hear of one of my family members to decry the Kremlin's right to existance or attempt to suicide bomb them. It sucks, but that's life. You also make it sound like the area was some sort of bastion of light in the world. The arabs and the jews have been fighting in the region for much longer then the creation of Isreal just as Jews have been there much longer then Isreal's official creation.
People say suicide bombers are crazy people but why not take a look at where this crazyness is coming from...losing everything in an instance can do that.
http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8397/israeltinyjm1.th.jpg (http://img218.imageshack.us/my.php?image=israeltinyjm1.jpg)
Yep, they sure lost everything and they don't have a single place to go. The Jews just took the WHOLE area and these people lost everything 50+ years ago. Yet, most of the people who are suicide bombers are MUCH younger then that, so what have they lost? If we're gonna say thats reasoning enough for people to go crazy, then I'm waiting for every black and native american guy in the US to strap some dynamite to his back and blow me up, amongst many other people worldwide who have had the same done to them.
As for the zionist movement and British helping find a homeland for Jews. Why did they have to pick Israel, besides the fact that it has been a so called "Jewish homeland" even though Palestinians have been living there for so many centures but anyways.
Because that's were most jews went before the British even declared it as a Jewish Homeland. Starting in 1881, Jews fled to this area with the first Aliyah. By world war II, Jews composed a good portion of the population and owned 1/3rd of the land there. With such a high concentration of Jews, should it be suprising that they chose that area?

[Lunatic]

The picture you posted is actually funny and interesting. Take alook at it. A tiny Jewish country surrounding by all Muslim countries. It doesnt make sense and the Arab countries dont want it...

Lets take alook at Europe. Europe = Christianity dominated no matter how u look at it. YOu don't see any Muslim or Jewish country in the middle of Europe do you? Why do you think Turkey still hasnt been accepted into the EU. The Europeans are just making up bullshit like economy, size, blah blah, to hide the fact that they just don't want a huge muslim country in their Christian Europe. And many scholars agree with that (you can check GaleNet database for that, its used by high school students, libraries and colleges for research information).

So when you look at back when Israel was created or w/e, their was no Arab League or Arab Union or w/e (if there was please specify), so they had no authority or anything like the EU has over Europe.

I am not saying Israel should give the land back because:
It's impossible, although they just took the land from Palestinians, its plain impossible to just kick the entire countries Jews out and take over the land again, when countries like the U.S. are giving millions of dollars to support Israel.

You keep saying its just the way the world is or how the world works, that doesnt mean it cant be changed.

[Wolfman Walt]

The picture you posted is actually funny and interesting. Take alook at it. A tiny Jewish country surrounding by all Muslim countries. It doesnt make sense and the Arab countries dont want it...
That's strange, cause I mean I SWORE for a few moments that Egypt and afew others started the Yom Kippur war with the intention of conquering Israel, along with the other various Arab-Israeli Wars. That sure as hell means to me that they want it.

YOu don't see any Muslim or Jewish country in the middle of Europe do you?
What, did Turkey, Crimea, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Macedonia, and Montenegro stop existing while I wasn't looking?

Why do you think Turkey still hasnt been accepted into the EU.
Because they still have the death penalty. Not because they're muslim. There's also the economy they consider, and it's not bullshit, Turkey has a pretty terrible economy, so much so that I think Turkey's biggest export to Germany are Turks.

And many scholars agree with that And many scholars agreed the world was flat. The fact of the matter is, the official reason they're not getting in to my knowledge is because they won't take away the death penalty.

It's impossible, although they just took the land from Palestinians
Being that they owned 30%+ of Palestine before Isreal ever was formed, I wouldn't call it just "Taking" the land. They owned a good portion in just a short amount of time they lived there.

You keep saying its just the way the world is or how the world works, that doesnt mean it cant be changed.
You just contradicted yourself as you earlier said: "I am not saying Israel should give the land back because: It's impossible."

I keep saying that's how the world works, because until the Arab nations can somehow manage a military force large enough to conquer Israel, without Israel going crazy and turning the region into a glass parking lot or something. Palestine is SOL, and should try their best to either blend in with other countries (If it wasn't for the fact that most Arab nations hate them) or get used to their conditions.

That's the fact of the matter. It doesn't matter how many arab nations refuse to acknowledge Israel's existance, or how many arabs don't like them. They're there, and they have enough world support, mindset that Israel is their homeland, and military to defend themselves to stay there, and as of yet, there's nothing to change that.

[Vampyrelord]

Personally I find the Jewish racial claim to Israel to be unrealistic and impractical. If we follow that chain of thought to conclusion, we Americans should hand most of the southern states over to Mexico, and elect a Native American President...

[Wolfman Walt]

we Americans should hand most of the southern states over to Mexico

While I see your point, shouldn't that land go over to South American Indians? I mean....I don't remember Mexico being the ancestral home of Mexicans; I thought that belonged to Spain.

[mooks]

There is no problem with Israel as a nation...

The problem is calling it a jewish state... which implies that's its mainly for the jewish populace and not for any minority (or is it majority?).

It's also not really probable, practical or justifiable that the minority (Israel) should dictate policy to the majority (everyone else in that region) without any transparency or considerate dialogue...

[peacmaker]

I we go over this issues again, again, again, and again. This own miss started in the Bible and that their land. It just that the UN when it was form felt bad for the Jews, figure getting their land back help them feel like a people again. However, the UN at that time did not ask the other countries if they would like a new country formed around them. In turn started this whole miss, now look at the middle east in the big mess, not because of Isreal, it because oil and West (espeacily U.S.) thinking they are doing good deals by giving people back their land, but not understand their other people living on it before. This is another reason why the middle east is mad at the West, because they feel the West can do whatever it wants in their backyard. Also they feel that Isreal was just put there to be use as tool by the West to use the Middle east and keep the region in a mess.

Also over the years, the middle east cause it own problems and their leaders only care about themselves not the people. Whe use regilion as mean to control people,so they can remind in power.

[mind_fissure]

You guys should seriously stop thinking about isreal as a "land" or "nation". It is simply a people that are attempting to survive in a world where people hate them. why? because of what they believe in. its foolish it really is, but many people believe it is not (AKA muslims). there is a ton of political crap swimming around in the middle east right now, but when it comes down to it isreal has never been an agressor so long as it is able to survive. also right now isreal has a extremely good reason to exist. they are the common enemy for muslims and fighting them is the only reason they have not to kill each other. and if they fight each other or some one else its likely to be a much bigger mess then it is now.



as for the people that ***** about the war in middle east. war is invetible in the human race, we fight over the stupidest things and innocents die it is no different now then it was centurys ago. there is nothing we can do but try to live.

[Guy]

I just think that if the strong countries such as America pity the Jews so much, why don't they carve a land of their own to the Jews, and not Arab's land?

[koreasamurai]

of course they deserve to exist. They made there own country and u need 2 remember nothing in this world was not stolen ( as in land). Someone always claimed a land, but another person took it and made it into something bigger.

[_mike_]

I just think that if the strong countries such as America pity the Jews so much, why don't they carve a land of their own to the Jews, and not Arab's land?
ARAB LAND?! DONT MAKE ME LAUGH THERE IS ALOT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROOF AND HISTORICAL PROOF THAT THE LAND DOES INDEED RIGHTFULLY BELONG TO THE JEWS. y dont all the other arab countries give some of their land to the palestinians

[Guy]

And there is historical proof that America should not belong to the white ppl, but instead, to several different Native American tribes. So I guess America should give up some lands to the Navajos, the Cherokees, the Sioux, just to name a few?

[mooks]

ARAB LAND?! DONT MAKE ME LAUGH THERE IS ALOT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROOF AND HISTORICAL PROOF THAT THE LAND DOES INDEED RIGHTFULLY BELONG TO THE JEWS. y dont all the other arab countries give some of their land to the palestinians


Actually there isn't any proof that says the land belongs to the jews... there's only an implication... as numerous people have stated through out this post-

"The first historical record of the word "Israel" comes from an Egyptian stele documenting military campaigns in Canaan. Although this stele which referred to a people (the determinative for 'country' was absent) is dated to approximately 1211 BC era, Jewish tradition holds that the Land of Israel has been a Jewish Holy Land and Promised land for 3,000 years..."

[mind_fissure]

the past ownership of the land under their feet is not important.... saying "this was our land give it back!" is like walking in a house you just sold and saying "this was my house give it back!"

[mooks]

Umm... that's quite different- a house that is just sold means you got something in exchange for giving the house away.

Although i do agree that it is irrelevant to contemplate about who owned the land hundreds or thousands of years before.

Although, the thought I want to provoke- or debate- is somewhat along those lines- If one is not religious then what reason could be argued that the land is rightfully theirs...?

[Guy]

Hard to say. Past ownership does not mean you will always own it. One could argue that much of Europe and North Africa belonged to Rome. Should it all still belong to Rome? That's what Mussolini thought. The entire east Asia belonged to Japan during WWII. Does that mean all of east asians are Japanese? I don't think so.

I believe whoever has power decides everything. Yes, I do think that's barbaric and cruel, but it's the truth. Even if you can prove everything, as long as you can't win the fight, it doesn't matter.

[_mike_]

past ownership? the jews have always lived in the land. it is true that most of them left the land due to the exile. but the jewish presence has always remained . and has also witnessed the land shift between hands of different nations, up until 1948 when the land was finally returned to them. and we are debating whether it has a right to exist. well what better land to exist in than your own.

[Vampyrelord]

The question is whether it still belongs to them after all this time.

[Wolfman Walt]

I'd say the ability to turn the region into a giant glass parking lot is enough justification for existance if we want to go that route. As Guy said, it's might in this case and Israel has the most amount of might and the better allies in this instance. It doesn't matter if we think it should or shouldn't exist, and while historical roots do help support the argument that Israel belongs there, the fact of the matter is that so long as they have the power, weapons, and allies - it doesn't matter if they belong there or not. They're there.

[Guy]

Yup, exactly what Wolfman Walt said. I hate the fact that whatever the strong one does is the only way that will happen, but it's true. Whether your pro-Palestine or pro-Israel, Israel just keeps defeating Muslim invaders, so they are gonna exist. Nothing you can do about it.

The Chinese Communists defeated the Americans from advancing into China during the Korean War, but what do Americans do? They pretend there is no Communist China. But did that solve anything? Nope, the CCP won, and they exist, whether Americans like it or not.

And Israel wasn't ALWAYS own by the Jews. Yes, the Jews always LIVED there, but not necessarily OWN that land as the rulers.

[chipp zanuff]

I think that the one who controls the media, also controls minds and beliefs, he can spreads the facts that he wants people to believe on, that’s obvious in the US and other European countries and most of people believe these rubbish even though they're lies, they don’t try to find the truth.
Some of you said “it’s their land” and”they come back to their country “ there’re many evidence that emphasize that Palestine is an Arabian land and Jews don’t have any roots their, in Torah, in genesis, chapter 12 “As the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell on Abram; and lo, a dread and great darkness fell upon him. 13 Then the LORD said to Abram, "Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs” it doesn’t need any comment, by the way Arabs are the descendants of Ishmael who is also Abraham’s son so Arabs are Abraham’s descendants.
Also in genesis, chapter 24” 3 and I will make you swear by the LORD, the God of heaven and of the earth, that you will not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell, 4 but will go to my country and to my kindred, and take a wife for my son Isaac." “, it means that Palestine’s land wasn’t his land and Palestine’s people weren’t his people. This also proved that the Semitic tribes who settled Palestine in the 2000B.C weren’t Hebrew tribes as they said, because Jacob wasn’t born at that time (since they’re his descendants) the only people who entered Palestine that time: Abraham, his wife Sarah, his nephew Lot and his father Tarah, Are those 4 people the Semitic tribes who settled Palestine in the 2000 B.C? Anyway Abraham was Unitarian, neither Jew nor Christian. The Semitic tribes were Canaan’s trips and other Arabian tribes.
I like this time line because it talks about the important events in Palestine’s history:
3'RD MILLENNIUM BC
3'rd millennium BC: The Canaanites were the earliest known inhabitants of Palestine. They became urbanized and lived in city-states, one of which was Jericho. They developed an alphabet. Palestine's location at the center of routes linking three continents made it the meeting place for religious and cultural influences from Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Asia Minor. It was also the natural battleground for the great powers of the region and subject to domination by adjacent empires, beginning with Egypt in the 3d millennium BC.
2'ND MILLENNIUM BC
2'rd millennium BC: Egyptian hegemony and Canaanite autonomy were constantly challenged by such ethnically diverse invaders as the Amorites, Hittites, and Hurrians. These invaders, however, were defeated by the Egyptians and absorbed by the Canaanites, who at that time may have numbered about 200000.
14th century BC : Egyptian power began to weaken, new invaders appeared: the Hebrews, a group of Semitic tribes from Mesopotamia, and the Philistines (after whom the country was later named), an Aegean people of Indo-European stock.
1230 BC : Joshua conquered parts of Palestine. The conquerors settled in the hill country, but they were unable to conquer all of Palestine.
1125 BC : The Israelites, a confederation of Hebrew tribes, finally defeated the Canaanites but found the struggle with the Philistines more difficult . Philistines had established an independent state on the southern coast of Palestine and controlled the Canaanite town of Jerusalem.
1050 BC: Philistines with there superior in military organization and using iron weapons, they severely defeated the Israelites about 1050 BC .
1'ST MILLENNIUM BC
1000 BC : David, Israel's great king, finally defeated the Philistines, and they eventually assimilated with the Canaanites . The unity of Israel and the feebleness of adjacent empires enabled David to establish a large independent state, with its capital at Jerusalem.
922 BC : Under David's son and successor, Solomon, Israel enjoyed peace and prosperity , but at his death in 922 BC the kingdom was divided into Israel in the north and Judah in the south .
722-721 BC : When nearby empires resumed their expansion, the divided Israelites could no longer maintain their independence . Israel fell to Assyria.
586 BC : Judah was conquered by Babylonia, which destroyed Jerusalem and exiled most of the Jews living there. Nebuchadnezzar entered Jerusalem. The Temple was sacked and set fire to, and razed to the ground. The Royal Palace and all the great houses were destroyed, the population carried off in chains to Babylon. And they lamented on their long march into exile.
539 BC : Cyrus the Great of Persia conquered Babylonia and he permitted the Jews to return to Judea, a district of Palestine. Under Persian rule the Jews were allowed considerable autonomy. They rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem and codified the Mosaic law, the Torah, which became the code of social life and religious observance. The Jews were bound to a universal God.
333 BC : Persian domination of Palestine was replaced by Greek rule when Alexander the Great of Macedonia took the region. Alexander's successors, the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucids of Syria, continued to rule the country . The Seleucids tried to impose Hellenistic (Greek) culture and religion on the population.
141-63 BC: Jews revolted under the Maccabees and set up an independent state.
132-35 BC: Jews revolts erupted, numerous Jews were killed, many were sold into slavery, and the rest were not allowed to visit Jerusalem. Judea was renamed Syria Palaistina.
63 BC : Jerusalem was overrun by Rome. Herod was appointed King of Judea. He slaughtered the last of the Hasmoneans and ordered a lavish restoration and extension of the Second Temple. A period of great civil disorder followed with strife between pacifists and Zealots, and riots against the Roman authorities.
37-4 BC: During the rule of King Herod the Great Jesus of Nazareth, peace be upon him was born. And years after, he began his teaching mission. His attempts to call people back to the pure teachings of Abraham and Moses were judged subversive by the authorities. He was tried and sentenced to death; "yet they did not slay him but only a likeness that was shown to them."
70 AD: Titus of Rome laid siege to Jerusalem. The fiercely defended Temple eventually fell, and with it the whole city. Seeking a complete and enduring victory, Titus ordered the total destruction of the Herodian Temple. A new city named Aelia was built by the Romans on the ruins of Jerusalem, and a temple dedicated to Jupitor raised up.
313 AD: Palestine received special attention when the Roman emperor Constantine I legalized Christianity. His mother, Helena, visited Jerusalem, and Palestine, as the Holy Land, became a focus of Christian pilgrimage. A golden age of prosperity, security, and culture followed. Most of the population became Hellenized and Christianized.
324 AD: Constantine of Byzantium marched on Aelia. He rebuilt the city walls and commissioned the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, and opened the city for Christian pilgrimage.
29-614 AD : Byzantine (Roman) rule was interrupted , however , by a brief Persian occupation and ended altogether when Muslim Arab armies invaded Palestine and captured Jerusalem in AD 638 .
638 AD : The Arab conquest began 1300 years of Muslim presence in what then became known as Filastin. Eager to be rid of their Byzantine overlords and aware of their shared heritage with the Arabs, the descendants of Ishmael, as well as the Muslims reputation for mercy and compassion in victory, the people of Jerusalem handed over the city after a brief siege. They made only one condition, That the terms of their surrender be negotiated directly with the Khalif 'Umar in person. 'Umar entered Jerusalem on foot. There was no bloodshed. There were no massacres. Those who wanted to leave were allowed to, with all their goods. Those who wanted to stay were guarantee protection for their lives, their property and places of worship.
Palestine was holy to Muslims because the Prophet Muhammad had designated Jerusalem as the first qibla (the direction Muslims face when praying) and because he was believed to have ascended on a night journey to heaven from the old city of Jerusalem (al-Aqsa Mosque today) , where the Dome of the Rock was later built. Jerusalem became the third holiest city of Islam. The Muslim rulers did not force their religion on the Palestinians, and more than a century passed before the majority converted to Islam. The remaining Christians and Jews were considered People of the Book. They were allowed autonomous control in their communities and guaranteed security and freedom of worship. Such tolerance was rare in the history of religion. Most Palestinians also adopted Arabic and Islamic culture. Palestine benefited from the empires trade and from its religious significance during the first Muslim dynasty, the Umayyads of Damascus.
750 AD: The power shifted to Baghdad with the Abbasids, Palestine became neglected. It suffered unrest and successive domination by Seljuks, Fatimids, and European Crusaders. It shared, however, in the glory of Muslim civilization, when the Muslim world enjoyed a golden age of science, art, philosophy, and literature. Muslims preserved Greek learning and broke new ground in several fields, all of which later contributed to the Renaissance in Europe. Like the rest of the empire, however, Palestine under the Mamelukes gradually stagnated and declined.
Now, Israel exists for colonial goals, for the oil and for Suez Canal, and for protestant religious goals for the Happy Millennium (millions of people believe that the gathering of the Jews in Palestine is the initially for Christ return‘s)
Israel can’t exist without the supporting from the Major Powers, it born under the British protection, after World War 2, France supplied them with weapons and Germany gave them the money, and after 1967, the US did the job as good as the previous countries and they still supporting them .
I’ll end with Ben Gurion’s words “if Israel defeated once, it will be Israel’s end’
I really hope that you got it, ‘cause I’m not good in English

[Guy]

Basically, whoever has power owns all...

[chipp zanuff]

We can say this if we are animals, not human have brains, for what did we create laws?

[Wolfman Walt]

If you believe in the "Natural Laws" theory, we didn't, they were always there.

[Neve]

A lot of one-liners here - I'd like to see more actual debating.

[chipp zanuff]

If you believe in the "Natural Laws" theory, we didn't, they were always there.
i'm not the one who said that, you should ask guyklc about the "Natural Laws" ‘cause he said" whoever has power owns all" please concentrate.
by the way, did you read my post? just tell me. ‘cause I’ll not repeat what I said before .

[Wolfman Walt]

That's ugh great, and while I sincerely doubt you wrote all that. Yea. Unfortunetly, the fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter how many laws (natural or otherwise) there are if you can't enforce them. If you have no power, you can't enforce what you say is true, hence it doesn't matter if Israel belongs there or not. I'm sorry, but Guy is right on this one from THAT perspective.

[Guy]

I'm sorry, but did you read my post about America after Communists took over China? The Americans even tried to defeat the PLA during the Korean War, but they failed. So what did Truman do? He pretended that Communist China never existed. Fat lot of help that did, eh? If you have power, NOTHING can stop you. Right or wrong, it doesn't matter. You can use your power for good or bad, but as long as you have absolute power, who cares what other ppl think, since you can't please everyone anyways?

[Vampyrelord]

I'm sorry, but did you read my post about America after Communists took over China? The Americans even tried to defeat the PLA during the Korean War, but they failed. So what did Truman do? He pretended that Communist China never existed. Fat lot of help that did, eh? If you have power, NOTHING can stop you. Right or wrong, it doesn't matter. You can use your power for good or bad, but as long as you have absolute power, who cares what other ppl think, since you can't please everyone anyways?

Be that as it may, I think we are all agreed that might does NOT make right.

[Wolfman Walt]

Yea it does, might made Russia right for about three quarters of a century and the life times of atleast 2 different leaders. Sure we could judge them otherwise, but the truth is that both Lenin and Stalin got away scott free essentially because they possessed might.

[Guy]

I agree that might does NOT make right. Therefore, if you know of a land where an evil dictator rules, you have to be strong yourself so that you can overthrow him. Just sitting there whining and protesting won't do anything. And I've stated this too: We can use our powers to do good or evil.

[chipp zanuff]

That's ugh great, and while I sincerely doubt you wrote all that. Yea. Unfortunetly, the fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter how many laws (natural or otherwise) there are if you can't enforce them. If you have no power, you can't enforce what you say is true, hence it doesn't matter if Israel belongs there or not. I'm sorry, but Guy is right on this one from THAT perspective.


It’s really bad that we don’t trust each other, I wrote everything in my post except the part that talks about the real history of Palestine, but I read it before so I put, I don’t post anything without reading it before.

Unfortunately all of you believe only in power, countries gain power and loss it, who was thinking that the Roman Empire or the Persian Empire will be defeated , or the united kingdom, it was the country that the sun didn’t set on its lands, I won’t go far, The Soviet Union disappeared, what about Israel or The USA? You should believe in truth which will appear at the end, and believe in right which will return to its real people no matter what happen.

[crash5s]

It’s really bad that we don’t trust each other, I wrote everything in my post except the part that talks about the real history of Palestine, but I read it before so I put, I don’t post anything without reading it before.
Unfortunately all of you believe only on power, countries gain power and loss it, who was thinking that the Roman Empire or the Persian Empire will be defeated , or the united kingdom, it was the country that the sun didn’t set on its lands, I won’t go far, The Soviet Union disappeared, what about Israel or The USA? You should believe on truth no matter what happen.

The USA will go down to China, this is a known fact in our government. The average American worker gets paid to much to make us competitive now. China has a great competitive wage, great brain power, and the market to do it.

After China, who knows, but odds are latin America is next.

None of that changes the fact that in our world might = able to exist.

[Guy]

Unfortunately all of you believe only on power

Yeah... so what's your point? If you're weak, you can't do anything. There is no right and wrong with power, but you can use your power for good or for evil (that is the THIRD time I've said that, btw, PLEASE DO NOT make me repeat that again)

The USA will go down to China, this is a known fact in our government

Well, I'm Chinese, and I'm proud of the fact that China might one day become world power again. However, logically speaking, I don't think China will overpower America for a long time. Yes, China can overpower America in a lot of areas, but not in all. But please, this is about Israel and palestine. Let's not get too offtopic, shall we?

[mooks]

I'm wondering where any of the historical documents or accounts that support the presence of Israel... the first historical account of the word Israel refers to a people, not land. The determinative for for 'country' was absent from the Egyptian stele marking the first ever record of Israel.

Regardless, I don't think it's necessary to the argument of Israel's existence- it's just that people have assumed the latter, and i haven't seen any reason why. I think it's a bit late to rebuke the existence of Israel, it's already been formed, and has been deemed a sovereign nation. One could argue about America's systematic genocide of the native americans, and their convergance of property and land within their own 'people' and so forth... If Israel has no right to exist, then neither does America. Or even Brazil, and the portuguese-lead anihilation of the semi-nomadic populace to the brink of actual extinction... The examples are numerous, equally unsettling and can be debated to no end....

What I would be really interested to hear, is any defense of Israel's systematic expansion of their land, which obviously, does not have any right to exist... A deaf ear is definetely turned towards their lack of restriction within their given borders... for those in unreserved favor for Israel's actions, whatever they may be, how is this justified? Do they have a right to expand over their given territory? Or does it not apply to Israel?

Or better yet, Israel's annexation program, what's euphamistically called "convergance" and described here often as a "withdrawal" but in fact it's a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the west bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, and the proclaimed future plans for Israel to take over Jordan Valley. Are these merely exagerrated factions, Israel's right, or just mere speculation to those who are pro-Israel??

[chipp zanuff]

Hey guyklcI’m talking about my opinion, the power is nothing without truth, and the man of right has the upper hand, as I said before countries gain and loss power. You should read the history of nations and empires, you will learn that faith may move a mountain, and time is not merciful towards tyrants. In proverbs they said ‘ no power, no respect” but they didn’t say” no power, no right” I’m not trying to convince you, it’s just my opinion.

if it’s useless to argue about Israel’s existence, and it’s better to argue about America's systematic genocide of the native Americans (which happened before 200 years) I think it’s better to argue about crimes and mascara that have been done by Israel, or about people who were kicked out of their houses, or about the uprooting of the olive’s farms in its harvest time (since western people preferred animals and plants to people).

I liked mook’s point about Israel's expansion; I think the latest war against Lebanon was for this goal somehow. The country that they want is from the Nile River till the Euphrates River. Maybe the US is fulfilling Israel’s dreams now.

[Guy]

Well, OK. But just so there's no misunderstandings, I meant that if you want to change the world, the only way to do that would be strong yourself and conquer your enemies. I do not mean that powerful ppl should abuse their positions.

[mooks]

I didn't mean to imply that... or rather i didn't imply at all that it's better to discuss america's genocide of native americans, or those of other nations with historys which are just as bad... I said that there are lots of other nations who have done things which are just as bad or even worse...

But actions such as the so called "convergance" and the formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, and resources... as well as their already supposed plan to take over the Jordan valley, and their blatant refusal to stick to their given borders from 1947...

I'm very eager to hear how such actions are defended by pro-Israeli supporters, or anyone willing to play devil's advocate to these events

[Guy]

Well, OK, but I'm not exactly pro-Israel. I'm just saying that as long as Israel has power and that the Islamic countries can't beat Israel, there's nothing you can do about it.

[Vampyrelord]

We are all agreed that terrorist nations should not be tolerated, yes? Israel is a terrorist state. They launch huge military campaigns and massive attacks on civilians over the slightest short-term provocation. It is obvious that they do not care about defence, they want vengance.

If they just wanted to defend themselves, why did they bomb schools, ambulances and bridges and airports? Why did they drop cluster bombs on settlements, meaning that when people return they could get killed in an instant?

We Americans suffered one day of terror. The innocent people of Lebanon suffered 4 weeks. The innocent people of Iraq suffered 3 years.

[Wolfman Walt]

We are all agreed that terrorist nations should not be tolerated, yes? Israel is a terrorist state.
Where the hell does your logic come from? Seriousily. Terrorism is generally defined as a violent act from an unrecognized armed force with the end of acheiving political goals and who don't adhere to the laws of war. Since Israel is a recognized armed force, they're not using the threat of violence to acheive any political change, and due to the fact that (by your own admission) it's reactive instead of proactive.

why did they bomb schools
Because terrorists never hide in schools, right?

and bridges and airports?
Now I know for sure that you have no military sense. It's called interdiction, the U.S. did the same thing during WWII.

We Americans suffered one day of terror. The innocent people of Lebanon suffered 4 weeks. The innocent people of Iraq suffered 3 years.

And Israel has been experiencing it for the last 50 or so years. What about their suffering?

Also - You saying America only suffered one day of terrorism is bull. America has been suffering terrorism since the 1900's. What was the U.S.S. Cole attack? Terrorism. First WTC Bombing? Terrorism. What caused the Iran Contra Scandal? Terrorism. In short - I don't wanna hear it from you.

[Vampyrelord]

Woah.

Are you seriously saying that "acts of terror" can only be committed by an unrecognised military force?! So if 9/11 was attacked by the army of Syria using intercontinental missiles it would not be an act of terrorism?

Don't be silly. "Terrorism" is exactly that - the use of terror tactics. Bombing a civilian target is an act of terrorism, regardless of who does it. What you are saying is this:

Kill thousands of people with hi-tech missiles and cluster bombs in strategic attacks on civilian targets, and you're a hero in the war on terror.

Kill 50 people on a train carriage with an improvised bomb, and you're a terrorist.

Lunacy.

And now I would like you to explain the bombing of the airport in particular a little more. All it did was slow down the humanitarian effort, damage the Lebanese economy and cost innocent lives. Perhaps you could tell me how it harmed Hezbollah? I am, of course, taking the liberty of assuming that Hezbollah was not expecting a large delivery of Ak-47s via airmail...

[Wolfman Walt]

Are you seriously saying that "acts of terror" can only be committed by an unrecognised military force?! So if 9/11 was attacked by the army of Syria using intercontinental missiles it would not be an act of terrorism?
That'd be an act of war, duh. There's a difference between it.

"Terrorism" is exactly that - the use of terror tactics.
So the Son of Sam was a terrorist? He used Terror tactics. Zodiac Killer? He used terrorist tactics. Hell, technically every war in the history of mankind, both sides were terrorists since their tactics generally caused *Gasp* terror. Get real, no one in a proffesion that handles terrorism limits themselves to such a stupid definition of terror.


Kill thousands of people with hi-tech missiles and cluster bombs in strategic attacks on civilian targets, and you're a hero in the war on terror.
The British did much worse in WWII and they're still considered the heroes. Plus, I'd like to see all these "thousands of people" who are dead. I bet with a very healthy amount of money a good majority of those folks deserved it and weren't civilians or that they weren't even dead. How many examples are there in Lebannon of fake news reporting? Tons. Even so, that's an act of war, it's slightly different.

Kill 50 people on a train carriage with an improvised bomb, and you're a terrorist.
Duh, cause you're using terrorist tactics to acheive a political goal.

Lunacy.
Oh get over yourself

And now I would like you to explain the bombing of the airport in particular a little more.... Perhaps you could tell me how it harmed Hezbollah?
You're also assuming that it didn't limit their methods of travel. Interdiction campaigns also slow down enemy troops methods of travel. No airports - no air travel for hezbollah units or supplies. No bridges mean that their chances of escape have been reduced and that there is also a reduced capacity for Hezbollah to reinforce itself or consolidate. This is basic war 101.

[Vampyrelord]

That'd be an act of war, duh. There's a difference between it.

but as you so cleverly pointed out, acts of war are often acts of terrorism.

So the Son of Sam was a terrorist? He used Terror tactics. Zodiac Killer? He used terrorist tactics. Hell, technically every war in the history of mankind, both sides were terrorists since their tactics generally caused *Gasp* terror. Get real, no one in a proffesion that handles terrorism limits themselves to such a stupid definition of terror.
The British did much worse in WWII and they're still considered the heroes. Plus, I'd like to see all these "thousands of people" who are dead. I bet with a very healthy amount of money a good majority of those folks deserved it and weren't civilians or that they weren't even dead. How many examples are there in Lebannon of fake news reporting? Tons. Even so, that's an act of war, it's slightly different.

Indeed, the British did do much worse, and there is controvery over it to this day. However, the British government at the time originally rejected the proposal to launch a strategic bombing campaign (targeted at civilians), describing it as "mere terrorism". This attitude only changed when "Bomber" Harris was put in charge of bomber command...

And as for the old "fake news" excuse, don't you think that's wearing a bit thin? You sound like Pat Robertson, moaning about the liberal commie media...

I was on holiday in the middle of the campaign, and the only news channel available was Sky - owned by Rupert Murdoch (who also owns Fox News) and is about as right wing as you get these days. Though they were fairly 'pro Israel" they still reported everything I have mentioned about the campaign here (it's where I got all my information from). Lebanon had very little media at the time, because Israel hit their radio towers and such.

Duh, cause you're using terrorist tactics to acheive a political goal.

And that's any different to the Israeli government doing it to boost popularity? In 4 weeks of fighting, Hezbollah killed about 50 Israeli civilians (this is when they are firing hundreds of World War II grade rockets) compared to about 3,000 Lebanese civilian deaths and massive collateral damage. That is more than just self defense. That's revenge, if not a blatant attempt to look tough for the voters.

You're also assuming that it didn't limit their methods of travel. Interdiction campaigns also slow down enemy troops methods of travel. No airports - no air travel for hezbollah units or supplies. No bridges mean that their chances of escape have been reduced and that there is also a reduced capacity for Hezbollah to reinforce itself or consolidate. This is basic war 101.

Yeah, Hezbollah can't escape, great!

Neither can all the civilians who were caught in the middle and killed. Good job.

[Wolfman Walt]

but as you so cleverly pointed out, acts of war are often acts of terrorism.
Where did I point that out exactly? Oh wait, no where. Acts of war are completely different from a terrorist action because it isn't used to pressure a government into submitting to your demands, it's used to....declare war and invade a country. Clear difference.


Indeed, the British did do much worse, and there is controvery over it to this day. However, the British government at the time originally rejected the proposal to launch a strategic bombing campaign (targeted at civilians), describing it as "mere terrorism". This attitude only changed when "Bomber" Harris was put in charge of bomber command...
And it still doesn't change the fact that Britian is considered one of the heroes of WWII. It also doesn't change the fact that it is not written down in the history books as terrorism, but as apart of the war.

And as for the old "fake news" excuse, don't you think that's wearing a bit thin?
What, so if I use something that's been brought up multiple times, it becomes thin, but when you use something like "BUSH IS JUST AFTER OIL" or something of that nature in other threads, that's alright? Come on, I've even posted videos of how fake some of this stuff is.

And that's any different to the Israeli government doing it to boost popularity?
Yea actually, it's very different. Let me explain this again - Hezbollah is being proactive. They're just cleverly disguissed Iranian soldiers who move into Lebannon to strike out at Israel hoping to get Israel to remove themselves by bending to their will. Israel is reacting to this by saying "We've had enough" and getting them OUT of Lebannon. Wether or not this worked is aside the point (I could have told you it wouldn't work, but lets not get into what would have worked) but there's a clear difference between one being terrorism and one NOT being terrorism.


Neither can all the civilians who were caught in the middle and killed.
You mean those same civilians who had days of warning before hand and had ample opportunity to escape but decided to remain there? Trust me, I assure you that if Israel wasn't as careful as they were, there would be ALOT more people dead then those (most likely) inflated numbers.

[Delta]

And as for the old "fake news" excuse, don't you think that's wearing a bit thin?

Accually there has been and still is some extensive debate about if the supposed rocket attack that hit an ambulance in Lebanon (http://www.zombietime.com/fraud/ambulance/), really happened. Personally that really seems to call into question alot of the reporting going on durring the war, dont get me wrong, I'm sure there were people killed that werent targeted, but to say a country is going out of it's way to kill non-combatants seems a bit over the top.

[mooks]

OK, first of all... Hezbollah are not known for hiding among civilians. Hamas was known for that and that is why they got betrayed and infiltrated. Hezbollah do not mix with the civilians to the extent that Israel claims. And this is why they have not been infiltrated or betrayed- because that's what happens when they mix with civilians... that is how they inflitrated the PLO in the 1980's and Hamas in the mid 90's. But this is not Palestine, and it is not Hamas or PLO. Israel knows that, but the rest of the world doesn't- they will just take Israel's word for it. Remember, this is the same Intelligence that bombed a UN outpost despite hours of protest by them, and later claimed they were within Hezbollah range as an excuse.

In all that is logical reason, how would Israel differentiate the difference regardless of whether they hid among civilians or not? Or better yet exactly how concrete are Israel's claims when they don't even have that much intelligence about them? Despite they're claims- they haven't weakened Hezbollah, it's now stronger than ever with even more supporters than they had before- remember, Sunni's are now supporting Hezbollah...

The civilian warnings of bombings by Israel was the sickest joke yet. Exactly how is a whole town expected to evacuate? Is anybody seriously thinking about this? They should jump into cars, right? the majority of them are impoverished- they were given a few days warning. Is that enough time to pack up your life? and move where? with what money? with what means of transport? And with all the bridges bombed? That is some seriously twisted logic. 'It's their fault because they were warned before hand' ...seriously!!

It's still a very poor excuse for the collateral damage and civilian death toll.

Even if we entertain the idea and say they're were two Hezbollah fighters or whatever hiding in a school or a hospital- that doesn't give any reason to anihiliate the whole building with everyone in it.
AND all of this is put into question because of a reuters' journalist fabrication of photo's? Does that completely negate the extent of the civilian death toll? or that they bombed infrastructure completely unrelated to the incident?
If your only response is that they were harboring terrorists- there is really not much evidence but speculation, or not much reason except WWII examples, 9/11 references and suicide bombings- which ofcourse, have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

It doesn't even matter that much... i'm much more interested in what anyone has got to say about Israel's expansion outside it's given territory and annexing of resources... if there EVEN is an explanation or reason.

[Jack Van Burace]

You guys should mind the paragraph of Israel state existence, which states Israel has the right to expand. I saw a documentary made by Israelis themselves, where it shows the birth of the estate of Israel, and it's clearly stated that they were planning on growing their dimensions. So, just to remind everyone, this isn't a one way conflict. Two are there to fight, and that's why it never ends. King Abdulah wanted Israel to be under his government, and wanted to pressure them to cave. But Israel is no saint either, they had dreams of growing larger and taking over the neighbouring areas all along.

[Guy]

Well, since the Islamic countries are all teaming up to beat Israel's ass... it's pretty hard for Israel to remain calm. However, I do admit that Israel is being a a bit evil for invading Lebanon.

[mooks]

You guys should mind the paragraph of Israel state existence, which states Israel has the right to expand. I saw a documentary made by Israelis themselves, where it shows the birth of the estate of Israel, and it's clearly stated that they were planning on growing their dimensions. So, just to remind everyone, this isn't a one way conflict. Two are there to fight, and that's why it never ends. King Abdulah wanted Israel to be under his government, and wanted to pressure them to cave. But Israel is no saint either, they had dreams of growing larger and taking over the neighbouring areas all along.


Lemme see if i'm getting this right... You're saying... that Israel has a right to expand it's borders? I don't really understand, the Israeli's are saying that they have a right to expand their borders? Into which countries? And what do they do about the people they kick out (besides the obvious). So they have plans to take over their neighbouring areas..? And they can justify this???

Wow.. I've never really heard of a state with the right to expand before... If there is any context refering to this... i would be really interested in seeing it, really.

[Jack Van Burace]

It's the Israel's constitution, and it is valid because it was supported by the current US president at the time. And also, I believe, why the neighbouring countries refuse so hardly to accept Israel as a nation, lol! I will look for the text Mooks! But they said clearly that Ben Gurion included this paragraph when created the State of Israel.

EDIT: Ok, just looked it up. It seems that he actually didn't include, but excluded any referral about their border line intentionally. They were about to go to war, so supported by Reagan (I guess, don't remember this well which one was) they didn't mention any country limits.

[Guy]

Lemme see if i'm getting this right... You're saying... that Israel has a right to expand it's borders? I don't really understand, the Israeli's are saying that they have a right to expand their borders? Into which countries? And what do they do about the people they kick out (besides the obvious). So they have plans to take over their neighbouring areas..? And they can justify this???
Wow.. I've never really heard of a state with the right to expand before... If there is any context refering to this... i would be really interested in seeing it, really.

I'm not pro-Israeli, but I'm just saying, if nobody has the power to stop Israel, there is nothing you can do. Besides, it isn't just a black-and-white hatred here. The Muslims and Jews have NEVER gotten along. What makes you think it's OK for Iran to say they wanna nuke Israel out of existence? Sure, Israel tried to conquer other ppl's land, but her neighbors... they wanna nuke Israel into oblivion!

[mooks]

Ummm... I'm not searching for anything to do, just looking for some justification from somebody who supports them unilaterally, and I'm very aware that the hatred between the Jews and Muslims is not just skin-deep. I never implied anything about Iran saying they want to nuke Israel...


Sure, Israel tried to conquer other ppl's land, but her neighbors... they wanna nuke Israel into oblivion!"


Don't you see the double standard in that phrase?



And for the record I'm not a supporter of the Iranian Ayatollah or the council of guardians (I'm against shar'ia law). But i'm a big fan of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his movement towards eradicating mullah's from being involved in political and educational matters.

[animalistic]

I am a muslim, just wanted you guyz to know that muslims do not want to terminate jews or destroy isreal, we just want them to leave us the hell alone, you say that the muslims have also killed innocent jews, was that before or after they started invading our countries? some muslims did attack innocent ppl but it was out of desperation, now dont get me wrong im not saying that thats an excuse for killing innocent ppl, but do you really think that the muslims wouldve done it if isreal didnt invade them. Id also like to add that we arent happy about the muslims that keep blowing themselves up to kill innocents, those ppl are confused by the meaning of jihaad but its not like the confusion started on its own.
Let me put it this way, if a country invaded your homeland and started killing the citizens for the sake of expanding wut would you do, wut would your feelings towards them be?

[chipp zanuff]

I’m very happy, there’s another muslim here (I hope you are Arabic too), I think that the terrorist distorted the real meaning of Islam and jihad, and it’s hard to change this idea (Islam encourages violent).

Palatine suffered from the occupation too much and I think it’s time to bring it back to the real owners.

I’m surprised, Israel has no right in Palestine, how it has the right in the other lands!!
Just because the US support them!

[Guy]

Animalistic: I'm sorry, I did not meant that all Muslims wanted Israel's extermination. I apologize if I had offended any Muslims out there. What I meant was that the Iranian president wanted to nuke Israel into oblivion. I mean, yeah, Israel had no right to invade Lebanon. But is it OK for Iranian president to promote his own people to nuke Israel? The Israelites killed many innocent Muslims, but by NUKING Israel, they would kill even more innocents AND IN ADDITION make that land worthless because of all that radiation. I just want to point out again that I'm not pro-Israel, but I just think that countries such as Iran are being very unfair and cruel to Israel right now.

[Jack Van Burace]

I'm not pro-Israeli, but I'm just saying, if nobody has the power to stop Israel, there is nothing you can do.
I totally agree we should stay out of other people's matters. But the point is that Israel gets a lot of support from the States, and it is the main reason it continues.

Ok, let's move the location just a bit (only to get my point across). Africa is now the place we will discuss, for the sake of the fenomenon (territorial dispute and civil war), and which is not a privilege of the middle east.

Africa is a very wide continent, with a huge plurality of tribes (many of them rival to each others), and no central power. Once the colonization occurred, these african lands were cut down like a cake, between the european colonizers who had conquered these areas. And when the colonization finnally ended, the europeans just re-sliced the continent into countries they thought were the right. They put in charge the leader of a tribe they thought was right. The result? Africa is still today in heavy civil war, tribal conflicts, and territorial dispute. The african people never sorted it out themselves, it was a fake sorting made by europe. Noone can ever tell a person what's best for her, better than she can tell herself, that's what I always say.

Now, Israel is the exact same thing. GB put them there, but their presence was only permited because GB allowed, not because they or the neighbouring countries had settled as, had agreed into. So, conflict arises. In order to decide, we shouldn't decide. Or interfere. I don't know what the jews are doing right in the middle of a place where nobody wants them, but if that's where they wanna be, then let them fight for it. And the others who don't want them there have also the right to try and expell them. What's wrong is for other countries to take a side in this story. It's none of our businesses.

Buuut, I do believe there could be ways of helping the african disputes to end. And I think there could be ways of helping the conflict there in Israel ending too. Reaching peacefull agreements is very diferent from fighting, and for this, I don't think it's wrong to take party, once you're not choosing a side for starters. And they would be doing peace by themselves still.

[Guy]

I think Europeans should help Africa, because they created that mess in the first place. Israel, on the other hand, they are doing very well in fighting off the Arabs. I don't think we should interferr. Hey, we ain't gonna help the muslims, so why should we help the Jews?

[mooks]

I don't recall a time when the Iranian president said that they wanted to nuke Israel... It never happened (If it did, i would really like to know)

Ahmadinejad quoted the previous Ayatollah, Khomeini saying that 'Israel should be wiped out from the map'. There was no reference whatsoever to any nuking or anything to that matter. It was during the time when they refused to stop any nuclear enrichment and was implied that he wanted a nuclear war with Israel by media outlets, politicians and the like...

Anyone who knows Ahmedinejad's political history knows that he's pretty smart, he's not the ignorant, over-religious zealot that cnn makes him out to be... besides it was a response in a cnn interview where he stated that

"Israel is a long-standing member of the United Nations with the same rights and obligations as every other member."
and added that "under the United Nations Charter, all members have undertaken to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state." and that's when he said that Israel refuses to respect this most basic of charters, and that's when he quoted Khomeini. That's when the vice president (who was Shimon Peres at the time) of Israel called for the expulsion of Tehran from the UN...
His plea was a live coverage news event at the UN council in New York, following a heart-felt speech protesting Israel's 'victimization' and fear of Iran's nuclear proliferation and the consequences of his comments.

It's amazing what spins out of control and what doesn't...

[animalistic]

Animalistic: I'm sorry, I did not meant that all Muslims wanted Israel's extermination. I apologize if I had offended any Muslims out there. What I meant was that the Iranian president wanted to nuke Israel into oblivion. I mean, yeah, Israel had no right to invade Lebanon. But is it OK for Iranian president to promote his own people to nuke Israel? The Israelites killed many innocent Muslims, but by NUKING Israel, they would kill even more innocents AND IN ADDITION make that land worthless because of all that radiation. I just want to point out again that I'm not pro-Israel, but I just think that countries such as Iran are being very unfair and cruel to Israel right now.
dont worry im not offended, and no its not ok for iran to nuke them cuz it would be against islam, but why do you think they wanna do that? to protect the other arab countries not to invade them or any crap like that, again im not sayin its ok but compared to isreal's reason it sounds noble(the reason not the act), even if they did nuke isreal the number of innocents they kill wont be as much as the no. of ppl isreal killed.

[Jack Van Burace]

dont worry im not offended, and no its not ok for iran to nuke them cuz it would be against islam, but why do you think they wanna do that? to protect the other arab countries not to invade them or any crap like that, again im not sayin its ok but compared to isreal's reason it sounds noble(the reason not the act), even if they did nuke isreal the number of innocents they kill wont be as much as the no. of ppl isreal killed.
But I'm with mooks here, noone ever said they were gona nuke Israel. And specially if you count religious extremists: Jerusalem has very important muslim sites they want to keep safe too. This nuke thing has no basis, it's just another Bush-type excuse to go to war.

[Guy]

I know Iran isn't stupid enough to do something like that. However, there are some things you NEVER joke about. How about North Korea? Kim Jong Il said he wanted to nuke Japan. We all know North Korea does not have the technologies to do so, but we still take it seriously.

[mooks]

yeah, the so called 'axis of evil' that was so adamently proclaimed by Bush was not taken seriously... BUT the ripples are beginning to show... Iraq has been taken care of... Now attention is being turned to Iran and North Korea. Although the two are completely unrelated, I'm sure there will be connections and urgencies that will be stressed and become either accepted or ignored rhetoric that will give the US a green light again, to further continue there 'freedom' campaign.

But hey, that's just me...

[xtrashock]

Although Israel have a strong recognation from America and have an occupied place and all about this for "Bait-ul-muqadis" as it is holy place for muslims as well as "christians".Many muslim Countries even dont recognize Israel as a separate country .So i think there is no existance for Israel !

[Delta]

Although Israel have a strong recognation from America and have an occupied place and all about this for "Bait-ul-muqadis" as it is holy place for muslims as well as "christians".Many muslim Countries even dont recognize Israel as a separate country .So i think there is no existance for Israel !

By your logic the holocaust didnt happen because some people deny it. Israel used force in it's creation and uses force to continue it's existance, how has any other country throughout history done things differently? Lands are divided, annexed, ect. by the people who have more power then the people that dont.

[Guy]

Hey, I thought I settled this already. Whoever has power owns all. There is nothing you can do if none of the Islamic nations can beat down Israel.


Many muslim Countries even dont recognize Israel as a separate country .So i think there is no existance for Israel !

Wow, you are very anti-Israel. Just because some people don't agree on a subject means that it's false? What are you going to do about it, just sit there and whine? Please use actual facts for why Israel shouldn't exist, not because some anti-Jewish people say they shouldn't exist.

[mooks]

Saying 'whoever has power owns it all' doesn't really settle anything... It's just a saying that reflects the actions of whoever makes them. It doesn't objecitfy or intellectualy break down the reasons/actions or explains the situation for whoever or whatever is involved. That line can be used in 80% of the debates that are posted here- in other words, it's a statement, not an arguement.

I can understand what xtrashock is getting at...

The fact that once the word holocaust is used- any means of criticizing the jews is immediately haulted and any direct criticism of 'the' holocaust results in being branded anti-jewish, anti-semitic or a holocaust-denier...

I don't deny the holocaust, however i do feel as if it is used as a scapegoat for them to do certain things that are otherwise unforgivable in essence. I feel as if it is used greatly out of context, that people forget that they were not the only victims in the holocaust.
The estimated figure for the deaths of the jewish people is about 6million (although depending on the historian, it ranges from 5 to 7 million)- however the estimated figure of the total holocaust is around 20 million(again, depending on the hostorian in question some say 26 million). What about the other 14 million? who were they? and why isn't it discussed or referred to as much? The other groups deemed 'racially inferior' or 'undesirable' by the nazi's were Poles(jewish and christian, out of the 6million poles, 3million were christians), eastern slavs, communists, homosexuals, blacks, catholic and protestant clergy, and gypsies who were virtually anihilated.

This doesn't negate the horror of the holocaust, infact it should be more atrocious and shocking to those who think it only involved people of jewish origin...

Anytime the jews feel as if they are in hot water, for example their defensive ways, or tactics, etc. they refer back to the holocaust and how terrible it is and how they will never allow such a thing to happen again. It's the same with Americans and 9/11... or African Americans and the slavery/Jim Crow eras, or Tutsi's and the Rwandan genocide(ofcourse, the world is STILL unaware of the situation and events happening today)... it's their trump card in justifying an action that may or may not have anything to do with the subject at hand.

[Guy]

Hmm... mooks, I like what you are saying about the Holocaust (not that I'm saying the Holocaust was good, but ur ideas are interesting).

OK, ur right, being powerful doesn't justify ur actions, but there's nothing u can do about it if you are not powerful. Some ruler said (and I can't find out who it is, but someone said this before), "You cannot please everyone, but if you control the trade routes and have the world by its throat, it matters less." Right now, Israel is strong, and America, the strongest guy, is supporting Israel. There is nothing the Palestine can do except becoming stronger themselves and not sending suicide bombers to Israel all the time.

[Jack Van Burace]

There is nothing the Palestine can do except becoming stronger themselves and not sending suicide bombers to Israel all the time.
Nope, under some other government's rule, you don't get to have a chance in life do you? Pushed down to guettos, squeezed with tons of other ppl (60% of the population living in 40% of the area), I don't believe palestinians have much oportunity b4 they get a state runned by themselves, just like what Israel has fought for all these years for (and had to be supported by Britain and US to get through). I'm not saying they should commit terrorist suicidal acts until they get what they want, but actually saying they should have a better policy, other than living under the rule of the ppl who wrecked your home in the past. Israel isn't doing great there, and palestinians aren't getting the same chances the sionists were given. I think there wouldn't be anything better than palestine becoming stronger themselves and not sending suicide bombers to Israel all the time. But unlike you said, that's not something they can even afford to do.

[Guy]

Oh? Then pray tell, what do YOU suppose they should do? If they don't rectify their own government, then they will continue to send in suicide bombers. You sound like those ignorant people during the rise of Nazism. The Nazis will be cruel to me if I rebel, so I won't do anything.

[Jack Van Burace]

Oh? Then pray tell, what do YOU suppose they should do? If they don't rectify their own government, then they will continue to send in suicide bombers. You sound like those ignorant people during the rise of Nazism. The Nazis will be cruel to me if I rebel, so I won't do anything.

That was what the jews in Germany and Poland did. And yet they were slaughtered. I suppose they should try and fight for a palestinian state, which they were about to get before Israel's ex-prime minister was assassinated by Likoud (current political party in power on Israel right now, if you missed this one).

[Guy]

Fight for a palestinian state? That's gonna be hard if their government exercises such a strict control over them... isn't that what you said? A country cannot become strong if it does not learn from other countries, and frankly, as far as I'm concerned, the Palestinians aren't rectifying themselves, and if they don't rectify themselves, they will never defeat Israel. Israel is defeating them because America and some European nations are rather sympathetic towards Israel.

[xtrashock]

Define stolen lands - if we wanna go with history, Egyptian tablets reveal that the area of Isreal was a Jewish kingdom. Evidence of such include the remains of the First and Second Temples of the Jewish King, Solomon. Even though Jewish history says that Isreal has been the Jewish promise for 3000 years, some of this stuff dates back to 1211 BCE. The jews were expelled however in 132 CE, mostly by the Roman Empire. As such, the land was infact stolen from them.
The Muslim world hates Isreal due to the fact that Isreal just doesn't cave in to every Muslim demand. It's not Isreal's "arrogant, aggressive attitude" (Which may I add is VERY subjective), it's due to the Muslim world never wanting to settle for any sort of compromise.
I'd like to see some sort of official statistic to that statement.
I dont think so there some problem with muslims to have Israel as they are living in palestine ther is some boundry walls between but both living in same places so i thin kif Israel take interest in peace keeping then this problem may be solved !

[Jack Van Burace]

Fight for a palestinian state? That's gonna be hard if their government exercises such a strict control over them... isn't that what you said? A country cannot become strong if it does not learn from other countries, and frankly, as far as I'm concerned, the Palestinians aren't rectifying themselves, and if they don't rectify themselves, they will never defeat Israel. Israel is defeating them because America and some European nations are rather sympathetic towards Israel.
I have no idea of what you just said here. What I was saying is there's no use expecting them to fight another way when they live under Israel's tight leash, without any support from whomever may be.

[Guy]

That's why they have to rectify themselves... what about capitalism in China? During the original Cultural Revolution, no way can China ever allow capitalism. Then, later, Deng Xiaoping of China supported trade with other countries and soon China had capitalism. China didn't have any help from foreign countries. From what you're saying, a country can never improve itself because of its government. If that's the case, then the government must be rectified, or in extreme cases, overthrown.

[athenaofstarlite]

You're crazy.

Israel's purpose is to provide a homeland for the Jewish people, and as a way to justify/let the West repent for the slaughter of millions of European Jews. You say it no longer serves a purpose - if you read a history book, or a novel about this topic/era (The Chosen by Chaim Potok - read it) you might understand the topic better, and therefore be better informed before creating another poorly thought-through thread like this one.

[Jack Van Burace]

You're crazy.
Israel's purpose is to provide a homeland for the Jewish people, and as a way to justify/let the West repent for the slaughter of millions of European Jews. You say it no longer serves a purpose - if you read a history book, or a novel about this topic/era (The Chosen by Chaim Potok - read it) you might understand the topic better, and therefore be better informed before creating another poorly thought-through thread like this one.

The west did not slaughter millions of European Jews. I know I didn't do, or even supported such things. In fact, my country was also there on "D" day, helping by invading Italy, sending ppl to die when it could remain where it was peacefully. And nazis were also after gypsies, homossexuals, and non-arian folks, which includes all the africans, asians, and so on (in their conception, since scientifically there are no diferent races in mankind and I'm with it). England created Israel as a home for the jews there, because it was no man's land, unlike any place you may want to pick in Europe. And also because of religious relations of the jews with that location. They meant (probably) to give jews their own government.

That's why they have to rectify themselves... what about capitalism in China? During the original Cultural Revolution, no way can China ever allow capitalism. Then, later, Deng Xiaoping of China supported trade with other countries and soon China had capitalism. China didn't have any help from foreign countries. From what you're saying, a country can never improve itself because of its government. If that's the case, then the government must be rectified, or in extreme cases, overthrown.

And who said it is necessarily an improvement? Capitalism is one of the political views I support, but many disagree. Rectifying isn't becoming what you wnat them to become, or is it? My point is: Israel has a right to a State, and had to be helped by foreign countries for it. Why expecting Palestine not to have a State aswell, or expect them to have to do it on their own?

And since you mentioned it, China isn't much of a good example. I bet you would dislike very much to live in that place. The Chinese leader only changed to capitalistic because it was on his best interest. It's still a terrible dishuman country, that does things to commoners much worse than Saddan could ever have done. Things that only CIA can compete with.

[Guy]

And since you mentioned it, China isn't much of a good example. I bet you would dislike very much to live in that place. The Chinese leader only changed to capitalistic because it was on his best interest. It's still a terrible dishuman country, that does things to commoners much worse than Saddan could ever have done. Things that only CIA can compete with.

Hm... actually, I WANT to live there. I've actually LIVED THERE BEFORE!! Isn't that surprising? My question is: HAVE YOU ACTUALLY LIVED THERE???!! I am Chinese myself, and I find that comment about how "dishumane" China is very insulting. The Chinese Communist Party have done much for the people of China these last decades. And you think the Cultural Revolution is the same as China is nowadays? Boy, you need to open your eyes and stop reading anti-China propaganda. In fact, compare to other communist nations, I would say China is the most improved country of them all.

Palestinians can create their own state if they want, but it would be difficult to last long if they don't rectify themselves. For starters, the Sunnis and Shiite could maybe use talk to settle their differences instead of bombing each other's mosques.

[Jack Van Burace]

Hm... actually, I WANT to live there. I've actually LIVED THERE BEFORE!! Isn't that surprising? My question is: HAVE YOU ACTUALLY LIVED THERE???!! I am Chinese myself, and I find that comment about how "dishumane" China is very insulting. The Chinese Communist Party have done much for the people of China these last decades. And you think the Cultural Revolution is the same as China is nowadays? Boy, you need to open your eyes and stop reading anti-China propaganda. In fact, compare to other communist nations, I would say China is the most improved country of them all.
Palestinians can create their own state if they want, but it would be difficult to last long if they don't rectify themselves. For starters, the Sunnis and Shiite could maybe use talk to settle their differences instead of bombing each other's mosques.

Ok then, I will take your word for it. Even though China's cultural revolution was very similar to the Cuban one, and Cuba today is terrible. That's why I really have a hard time believing in China's redemption. I don't see much anti-China propaganda, actually. What makes me wonder is the good propaganda and the huge effort everyone takes to try and say China isn't like that anymore. Maybe it is really true like you say. But when someone tries to give you an impression and tries too hard, I bet you get suspicious too, don't you? Not really a prejuice from my side, believe me.

Brazil put down their military dictatorship on their own too. I was already born when that happened, and I kind of remember it. I was just comparing Israel and Palestine's rights, which seem very diferent to me lately.

But a little off topic, I really would be interested in hearing more about what's with China from a real chinese who lived there. Unlike what you said, I'm really not about listening to propaganda :D

[Guy]

Ok then, I will take your word for it. Even though China's cultural revolution was very similar to the Cuban one, and Cuba today is terrible. That's why I really have a hard time believing in China's redemption. I don't see much anti-China propaganda, actually. What makes me wonder is the good propag