Israel

[Tetro Kornbluth]

To be honest, I can't think of a good reason, it's just the far-right pushing their imperialist goals.

And what has made you come to that conclusion?

The boundaries of Isreal are nowhere near where they were originally supposed to be.

As Tory said that could mean anything. The original Zionists actually wanted a state which would iirc stretch as far as the Euphrates - In modern day Iraq.

Why? Jews are no longer persecuted anywhere in the West.

In fact, that brings up an interesting question: why would anyone want to move to Israel?

We are talking about the Early Zionists here. And the area stretching from the Euphrates is the historic "Abrahamic" Israel or Canaan iirc. Abraham coming from Ur in Mesopotamia itself iirc.

[dead0man]

In fact, that brings up an interesting question: why would anyone want to move to Israel?

Because they know they won't be persecuted there in the future (assuming we allow them opportunity to hold on long enough).  Like the Roma(Gypsies), the Irish, Ukrainians, Kurds, etc, they just want a place to call there own where they know they can go when/if the persecutions start again.  A home land to live in, love, and defend.  Some groups have been successful(Ukrainians, Georgians), some sort of (Irish, Jews) and some are still looking for the brass ring(Kurds, Roma).  You can disagree with the Nationalistic nature of it, but that's not going to stop them from existing.

[dead0man]

To be honest, I can't think of a good reason, it's just the far-right pushing their imperialist goals.

And what has made you come to that conclusion?

The boundaries of Isreal are nowhere near where they were originally supposed to be.

As Tory said that could mean anything. The original Zionists actually wanted a state which would iirc stretch as far as the Euphrates - In modern day Iraq.

Why? Jews are no longer persecuted anywhere in the West.

In fact, that brings up an interesting question: why would anyone want to move to Israel?

We are talking about the Early Zionists here. And the area stretching from the Euphrates is the historic "Abrahamic" Israel or Canaan iirc. Abraham coming from Ur in Mesopotamia itself iirc.

Nobody (in any position of power) is calling for that today though.  On the other hand, there are still world leaders calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.

[Tory]

To be honest, I can't think of a good reason, it's just the far-right pushing their imperialist goals.

And what has made you come to that conclusion?

The boundaries of Isreal are nowhere near where they were originally supposed to be.

What is "supposed to be"? The original state in 1948 or the pre-67 state? Their official boundaries are those of the pre-67 state. The rest of the land is occupied due to the fact that to withdraw from it would mean the destruction of Israel

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png

Those are the borders that Israel originally agreed to; it was the Arabs who disagreed.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Those are the borders that Israel originally agreed to; it was the Arabs who disagreed.

Here's the point: two peoples, a land, each one want all the land for him. What's original in this story?

Here is how the things seem to have happened:

One people, Jews, came back after haven't been there for a long time, and saying: "Hey, we got problems, we were highly persecuted in other countries (what I highly recognize, not as some others in different parts of the world), we want our own land now, to no more be persecuted and, look at the History book, our culture is born here and we lived here until Adrian Roman Emperor (100 after J.C.), so it's our land". The other people, Arabs, to say: "Okay, but you know during these about 2000 years we took the ground and established our civilization on it too, why should we give you this?!? You come here if you want, but it's our ground". Jews to say: "Now I want the land, we really want a own land to no more be persecuted and this one is our! That's all!". Arabs to answer: "Okay, we want the same land, let's fight!". Jews won.

Well, what seems to be original in this classical "two peoples for a land", it is, first, the 2000, and more, years ago arguments, then, the fact that being persecuted somewhere would give the right to invade any other country, no matter if the country invaded had nothing to see with the persecutions, and, more of all, the fact that the whole world supports this invading (UNO).

You can ad on this the fact that the land is where the monotheism, Judaism, and one of its universalist heritage, Christianity, are born and is also a very important place for an other universalist heritage of Judaism, Islam. And, to finish the addition, you can ad that these three religions have a very long past of enemy between each of them and the fact that the peoples who are issued from them compose about at least the half of the current world population.

Here we are, here seem to be the originality of this conflict and here is THE big problem of the last 60 years and, to me, still for years to come.

To me, the question would be, do we have to take in count all these originalities or do we have to resume this affair by "2 peoples for a land"?

If we do the first thing, it would be a never ending problem, which could only be ruled, to me, by an enormous blast of forces around the world or by deep changes in minds and psychologies of the peoples around the world, especially on the religious question.

If we do the 2nd thing... Is it possible to do the 2nd thing?

[Tory]

Those are the borders that Israel originally agreed to; it was the Arabs who disagreed.

The other people, Arabs, to say: "Okay, but you know during these about 2000 years we took the ground and established our civilization on it too, why should we give you this?!? You come here if you want, but it's our ground". Jews to say: "Now I want the land, we really want a own land to no more be persecuted and this one is our! That's all!". Arabs to answer: "Okay, we want the same land, let's fight!". Jews won.

The problem is that the Arabs didn't really establish their civilization on the land considered Israel-proper. The vast majority of Arabs that call themselves "Palestinians" were fairly recent immigrants to the land, mostly from the area now known as Jordan(although because Transjordan was a part of the Palestinian mandate, they were technically "Palestinians"). Jews had also been in that particular area of the Ottoman Empire that Israel was carved out of since at least the late 1400's(in Jerusalem, Hebron, and particularly in Tsfat). It's a myth that this area was some sort of vibrant civilization, because up until the late 1800's there weren't many Jews or Arabs there.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Those are the borders that Israel originally agreed to; it was the Arabs who disagreed.

The other people, Arabs, to say: "Okay, but you know during these about 2000 years we took the ground and established our civilization on it too, why should we give you this?!? You come here if you want, but it's our ground". Jews to say: "Now I want the land, we really want a own land to no more be persecuted and this one is our! That's all!". Arabs to answer: "Okay, we want the same land, let's fight!". Jews won.

The problem is that the Arabs didn't really establish their civilization on the land considered Israel-proper. The vast majority of Arabs that call themselves "Palestinians" were fairly recent immigrants to the land, mostly from the area now known as Jordan(although because Transjordan was a part of the Palestinian mandate, they were technically "Palestinians"). Jews had also been in that particular area of the Ottoman Empire that Israel was carved out of since at least the late 1400's(in Jerusalem, Hebron, and particularly in Tsfat). It's a myth that this area was some sort of vibrant civilization, because up until the late 1800's there weren't many Jews or Arabs there.

Yes, I resumed, but I think that what you say doesn't change what I meant.

I meant that, globally, Palestine wasn't the ground of Jews during about 2000 years, 1848 years if we want to be more precise (from 100 A.C. to 1948 A.C.). And even if during all this years it has not been a clearly identified "ground of the Arabs" Palestine has been a territory which the Arabs took a little bit after the born of Islam and which stayed in Muslim empires during about 1300 years, first the Arab one (about 800 years), then the Ottoman one (about 500 years).

So, outside of all the other reasons I mentioned before as "originalities", Arabs have can have at least as much claims on this land than Jews.

That's why the question is still to me:

Do we have to take in count the originalities or to let these 2 peoples fighting for this land?

Question to the one I would ad:

If we take the originalities in count, why do we do this? Why do Occident supports Israel? I would like this to be clearly assumed, this could clarify the situation for a lot of peoples.

[Хahar 🤔]

I just went through and read that article in National Geographic again last night. And you know what? I'm tired of Zionism. I'm tired of the H-word being thrown around as an excuse and justification for anything and everything. If you need Holocaust reparations, then make a Jewish state in Bavaria. Don't force reparations on an innocent populace. And I'm tired of the T-word, which has recently popped up. Terrorists are not the root of the world's evil. While I do not condone the Intifadas, they were certainly justified. You have brought it upon yourselves. And I'm tired of Israel's blatant disregard for international law. The Green Line's there for a reason. If you can't be safe within its confines, move somewhere with less bombs.

But the more I see, the less I feel that the negotiating table will accomplish anything. Talk is good when you have common ground to negotiate on. When there is none, the talks degenerate into a Munich. Let them fight it out. If you rebuild the Temple, you will see the Apocalypse with your own eyes.

If anyone wants to discuss these points with me, I will gladly. If not, that is all.

[Silent Hunter]

Xahar, are you also tried of China's disregard for international law in Tibet?

[Хahar 🤔]

Xahar, are you also tried of China's disregard for international law in Tibet?

Yes. Yes, I am.

[Silent Hunter]

Xahar, are you also tried of China's disregard for international law in Tibet?

Yes. Yes, I am.

Glad to hear it.

Do you believe that rocket attacks on Israeli towns are justified?

Anyway, Bavaria was not the traditional home of the Jewish people (in Europe, that was Poland). Israel was. Plus, you'd also be forcing a Jewish state on innocent people too- not every German was involved in the Holocaust.

[Хahar 🤔]

Xahar, are you also tried of China's disregard for international law in Tibet?

Yes. Yes, I am.

Glad to hear it.

Do you believe that rocket attacks on Israeli towns are justified?

If they are beyond the Green Line, yes.

Anyway, Bavaria was not the traditional home of the Jewish people (in Europe, that was Poland). Israel was. Plus, you'd also be forcing a Jewish state on innocent people too- not every German was involved in the Holocaust.

Exactly. Therefore, Israel was not created as compensation for the Holocaust, and therefore, the Holocaust bulls**t has no basis in fact.

[Silent Hunter]

Attacks on innocent civilians (remember there are kids there) are completely unjustified- and that's what the Katyusha rockets, which are highly inaccurate, are. Would you say that the Red Army's raping of German women in 1945 was justified?

There had long been calls for an Israeli state. The Holocaust was the major reason why it happened though.

BTW, Xahar, if you're going to swear, at least spell it correctly.

[Хahar 🤔]

Attacks on innocent civilians (remember there are kids there) are completely unjustified- and that's what the Katyusha rockets, which are highly inaccurate, are. Would you say that the Red Army's raping of German women in 1945 was justified?

Had the German women moved to the occupied zone of Russia?

There had long been calls for an Israeli state. The Holocaust was the major reason why it happened though.

BTW, Xahar, if you're going to swear, at least spell it correctly.

There's a filter.

[Silent Hunter]

Attacks on innocent civilians (remember there are kids there) are completely unjustified- and that's what the Katyusha rockets, which are highly inaccurate, are. Would you say that the Red Army's raping of German women in 1945 was justified?

Had the German women moved to the occupied zone of Russia?

There had long been calls for an Israeli state. The Holocaust was the major reason why it happened though.

BTW, Xahar, if you're going to swear, at least spell it correctly.

There's a filter.

1. I'm sorry, but how does that justify it?
2. Then don't do it at all. It smacks of poor language.

[Хahar 🤔]

Attacks on innocent civilians (remember there are kids there) are completely unjustified- and that's what the Katyusha rockets, which are highly inaccurate, are. Would you say that the Red Army's raping of German women in 1945 was justified?

Had the German women moved to the occupied zone of Russia?

I'm sorry, but how does that justify it?

That the Germans had willingly participated in the oppression of Russia. You're looking at tings on a level that is far too personal. War is impersonal.

[Silent Hunter]

Attacks on innocent civilians (remember there are kids there) are completely unjustified- and that's what the Katyusha rockets, which are highly inaccurate, are. Would you say that the Red Army's raping of German women in 1945 was justified?

Had the German women moved to the occupied zone of Russia?

I'm sorry, but how does that justify it?

That the Germans had willingly participated in the oppression of Russia. You're looking at tings on a level that is far too personal. War is impersonal.

The women of Berlin certainly hadn't, at least not directly. Are you seriously condoning the murder of children?

[Хahar 🤔]

Attacks on innocent civilians (remember there are kids there) are completely unjustified- and that's what the Katyusha rockets, which are highly inaccurate, are. Would you say that the Red Army's raping of German women in 1945 was justified?

Had the German women moved to the occupied zone of Russia?

I'm sorry, but how does that justify it?

That the Germans had willingly participated in the oppression of Russia. You're looking at tings on a level that is far too personal. War is impersonal.

The women of Berlin certainly hadn't, at least not directly. Are you seriously condoning the murder of children?

Exactly. Therefore, it was not justified.

And, once again, you are looking at things far too personally. Children die in war. That is a fact. Whether I condone it is irrelevant.

[Silent Hunter]

I'd say it was pretty relevant. For that, I'm adding you to my ignore list. Until you apologise.

[Хahar 🤔]

I'd say it was pretty relevant. For that, I'm adding you to my ignore list. Until you apologise.

That's kinda...harsh. Well, I've always wanted to know who ignores me.

What do you want me to apologize for?

[Silent Hunter]

For not condemning the murder of children and condoning attacks on civilians.

I await your PM.

[Хahar 🤔]

I don't support the deaths of children, but it's war. Would you have supported the bombings of Germany in WWII?

[phk]

Drama.

[BenNebbich]

well bavaria is quite crowded, but if it is the way to world peace send them jews to bavaria.

serious:

israel is not the problem.

the arabs are.

offtopic:

after wwII many germans were displaced from eastern europe. just a fact. they were all (well) intergrated in east- and westgemany.

back to topic:

did we see any effort of the arab states to integrate the palestinian refugees in their countries.

no we didn't.

we didn't see any 'arab' solidarity.

they use the refugees as hostages.

just wait when oil is gone and nobody cares about them.

i'm looking forward.


 

[Хahar 🤔]

serious:

israel is not the problem.

the arabs are.

Okay, how about we move all the Arabs to Germany and allow the Germans a second choice of places to live after the Arabs have had their turn? The Arabs are not the problem. The Germans are.