Should America continue support of Israel?

[The Zeonic States]

As opposed to exterminate them?
And even if they didn't,why tolerate the Arab invasion at all?

Because, as alien as it might seem, some people don't think that where a few families lived centuries ago should determine who gets the land now.

That agrument could work for either side, Which are you speaking of?

[Norsklow]

As opposed to exterminate them?
And even if they didn't,why tolerate the Arab invasion at all?

Because, as alien as it might seem, some people don't think that where a few families lived centuries ago should determine who gets the land now.

Whatever. As long as the Arabs clear out of Africa and never ever come near the place again.
And Sir, that includes being even caught LOOKING across the Jordan from East to West.

[Conserative Morality]

That agrument could work for either side, Which are you speaking of?

I'm speaking of the idea that Arabs should be forcibly expelled from North Africa because of the original Berber population.

[Enadail]

And what makes a state legitimate? Is it just because they're Jews?

This is one of the reasons I dislike Israel. I have no issue with its existence, but any time I hear someone say anything negative about Israel, someone invariably comes out about how its all lies, and only an antisemite would say negative things about Israel. Nothing was said about Israel's legitimacy being based on their being Jewish, but of course, that's the fall back. The persecution complex runs so deep... Jewish people are not the only religious group who don't live on the land their ancestors lived on, not the only religious group without their own state, not the only religious group to suffer horrible atrocities and genocides, but to some die-hard believers of Israel still believe it should get special dispensation.

As for Israeli settlements and their legitimacy, I read a really nice article in Times magazine a few years ago, co authored by an Israeli and Palestinian, which talked about how a number of the settlements were forced, where the Israeli army would clear an area in search for terrorists, and before the locals could move back, Israeli's would take over and the army would protect them. They also wrote an article about the peace efforts; shock and surprise, people on BOTH sides want peace, politicians and religious leaders on both sides want war (not saying all politicians and religious leaders want war). This isn't some master Arab plan.

This is not so cut and dry, as if Israel has been all above board, as if they've done nothing wrong, and everyone's out to get them. Israel has made a name for itself as a state, its shouldn't be dismantled by any overseeing group, but its done a lot of dirty work and should be held accountable, just like ALL groups should. Stopping with the persecution complex is a good place to start.

[Norsklow]

That agrument could work for either side, Which are you speaking of?

I'm speaking of the idea that Arabs should be forcibly expelled from North Africa because of the original Berber population.

That 'because' is not mine. Straw Man, sayid.

[Elwher]

Yes, we should, from a purely realpolitk reason.
As long as Israel continues to exist, the radical Islamic groups will continue to devote much, if not most, of their efforts against it. This diverts forces and energies which might be used against us instead. Therefore, to my way of thinking, the continued existance of an anti-Islamic Israel is benificial to the United States and should be supported.

So your contention is that if not for Israel, Hamas would start firing Intercontinental Ballistic Katyusha's at the United States? Israel fuel's anti-American sentiment, it doesn't distract from it.

No, my contention is that Fundementalist Islam would oppose the United States no matter if Israel existed or not. Many of their critiques of our society are not based on our support of Israel, but on our willingness to tolerate social and moral issues which they find intolerable. Given this basic divide, I believe that if Israel were to vanish from the earth, the planning and finance used against it would be diverted to other targets; one of which would be us. No, the weapons used would be different than those used against Israel, but I'd rather see any weapons used against someone else than against me.

I agree that Israel fuels anti American sentiment, but it distracts anti American action, which is what I would like to do.

[Conserative Morality]

That 'because' is not mine. Straw Man, sayid.

When you continue someone else's argument, expect the other person to respond as though you agree with them until you state otherwise.

[Enadail]

Because, as alien as it might seem, some people don't think that where a few families lived centuries ago should determine who gets the land now.

Whatever. As long as the Arabs clear out of Africa and never ever come near the place again.
And Sir, that includes being even caught LOOKING across the Jordan from East to West.

Simply put: why? Persecute an entire group of people because of actions of a group?

Its more or less like saying Europeans killed a lot of Indians in India... clear all the Europeans out of India! Never come back!

Except that sounds completely pig headed and stupid, and anything with a logical thought in their brain would reject any such argment.

[The Humanist Federation]

Tell that to the Palestinians trying to get work in Israel.

An independent Palestinian state would worsen the working conditions of Palestinians even further. Watch this video, it explains why dividing Jerusalem would be bad for Palestinians, and the same concept would apply to dividing Israel. Dividing Israel would only make it more difficult for Palestinians to work in Israel.

I never called for the division of Jerusalem. My idea is to make Jerusalem into a neutral city, governed by a secular government with democratically elected officials from the Israelis and Palestinians. Until both parties could coexist under this new government, a neutral peacekeeping organization will secure the region.

[Jewcrew]

And what makes a state legitimate? Is it just because they're Jews?

This is one of the reasons I dislike Israel. I have no issue with its existence, but any time I hear someone say anything negative about Israel, someone invariably comes out about how its all lies, and only an antisemite would say negative things about Israel. Nothing was said about Israel's legitimacy being based on their being Jewish, but of course, that's the fall back. The persecution complex runs so deep... Jewish people are not the only religious group who don't live on the land their ancestors lived on, not the only religious group without their own state, not the only religious group to suffer horrible atrocities and genocides, but to some die-hard believers of Israel still believe it should get special dispensation.

I only used that argument due to the poster's Antisemitic libel that Israel controls America's banks and politicians. Just another Antisemitic conspiracy hiding behind Israel.

As for Israeli settlements and their legitimacy, I read a really nice article in Times magazine a few years ago, co authored by an Israeli and Palestinian, which talked about how a number of the settlements were forced, where the Israeli army would clear an area in search for terrorists, and before the locals could move back, Israeli's would take over and the army would protect them. They also wrote an article about the peace efforts; shock and surprise, people on BOTH sides want peace, politicians and religious leaders on both sides want war (not saying all politicians and religious leaders want war). This isn't some master Arab plan.

If this happened, the occurrences were likely few and far between, in very small settlements or dealing with nomads and many decades ago. (IF it happened, as even Israelis have lied about their own nation.) It doesn't make it right, but there is no such thing as an angelic nation. The Allies committed numerous, highly barbaric acts during WWII, yet we don't create a false equivalency between the Axis and the Allies.

Yes, there are people on both sides that want peace, and Israel has offered peace on numerous occasions. The issue is not necessarily the Palestinian Arabs; it is Hamas and Fatah. If you removed Hamas and Fatah and created a proper democratic system among the Palestinian Arabs, I'm convinced peace could be attained very rapidly.

This is not so cut and dry, as if Israel has been all above board, as if they've done nothing wrong, and everyone's out to get them. Israel has made a name for itself as a state, its shouldn't be dismantled by any overseeing group, but its done a lot of dirty work and should be held accountable, just like ALL groups should. Stopping with the persecution complex is a good place to start.

Israel recognizes where it has done wrong. It has dismantled settlements beyond the lines given to them in the Oslo Accords; took responsibility when they allowed a Christian militia in Lebanon into a refugee camp, which then slaughtered the inhabitants; paid massive reparations to the casualties and the families of those that died on the USS Liberty; sends massive amounts of humanitarian goods into Gaza even, while Hamas was keeping Israeli residents in the South in bunkers 23 hours a day; treats numerous Palestinian Arabs in Israeli hospitals without compensation...

I could go on, but I shouldn't have to.

[Jewcrew]

An independent Palestinian state would worsen the working conditions of Palestinians even further. Watch this video, it explains why dividing Jerusalem would be bad for Palestinians, and the same concept would apply to dividing Israel. Dividing Israel would only make it more difficult for Palestinians to work in Israel.

I never called for the division of Jerusalem. My idea is to make Jerusalem into a neutral city, governed by a secular government with democratically elected officials from the Israelis and Palestinians. Until both parties could coexist under this new government, a neutral peacekeeping organization will secure the region.

That was attempted.

Israel accepted this proposal in 1948. The Arabs all rejected it.

[The Humanist Federation]

I never called for the division of Jerusalem. My idea is to make Jerusalem into a neutral city, governed by a secular government with democratically elected officials from the Israelis and Palestinians. Until both parties could coexist under this new government, a neutral peacekeeping organization will secure the region.

That was attempted.

Israel accepted this proposal in 1948. The Arabs all rejected it.

Try again damnit. Butter them up.

[Norsklow]

Whatever. As long as the Arabs clear out of Africa and never ever come near the place again.
And Sir, that includes being even caught LOOKING across the Jordan from East to West.

Simply put: why? Persecute an entire group of people because of actions of a group?

Its more or less like saying Europeans killed a lot of Indians in India... clear all the Europeans out of India! Never come back!

Except that sounds completely pig headed and stupid, and anything with a logical thought in their brain would reject any such argment.

It seemed to have worked for the Chinese in kicking out the Brits, for the Mau Mau in Kenya likewise,and I have never thought it particularly unfair.

Meanwhile, kick the Arabs out of Africa. Harb aleikum!

[Norsklow]

That was attempted.

Israel accepted this proposal in 1948. The Arabs all rejected it.

Try again damnit. Butter them up.

No. They had their chance. Now they get Bupkas.

[The Humanist Federation]

Try again damnit. Butter them up.

No. They had their chance. Now they get Bupkas.

That's a bit harsh. I'm sure there's plenty of sensible Arabs and Palestinians who would don't share ties with groups like Hamas, that are willing to sit at the negotiating table and hammer out a sensible solution to this idiotic problem with sensible Jews. I'm sure they would take offense to being rounded up and shipped out of Africa.

[Jewcrew]

That was attempted.

Israel accepted this proposal in 1948. The Arabs all rejected it.

Try again damnit. Butter them up.

Sorry, but that's just not going to happen. The majority of Jerusalem has been sovereign Israel territory since 1949, and all of Jerusalem since 1967. Israel has agreed to a joint administration of the Eastern portion of Jerusalem, but to the victors of a defensive war go the spoils. If Jordan had not attacked Israel in 1967, the Arabs wouldn't have lost control of it. No international law requires a defender to return all territories captured in a defensive war.

[Enadail]

I only used that argument due to the poster's Antisemitic libel that Israel controls America's banks and politicians. Just another Antisemitic conspiracy hiding behind Israel.

I was reading the same posts you were, and I didn't see any antisemitic libel. I'm not sure where you did. I saw opposition to Israel, which is not even VAGUELY the same.

If this happened, the occurrences were likely few and far between, in very small settlements or dealing with nomads and many decades ago. (IF it happened, as even Israelis have lied about their own nation.) It doesn't make it right, but there is no such thing as an angelic nation. The Allies committed numerous, highly barbaric acts during WWII, yet we don't create a false equivalency between the Axis and the Allies.

I remember doing my own research after reading the article and finding it was more then just few and far between. Every nation has its dirty secrets; it takes a strong person to stand up to what their nation has done wrong, rather then just believing its the one in the right.

And you're right, every nation has done wrong, but every post you've made so far has made it seem like you believe Israel has done everything it could to be the bastion of positivity in the world, and everyone else is out to get it with lies, falsehoods, and attacks. If you didn't mean it, fine, but be aware, that's how you're coming across.

Yes, there are people on both sides that want peace, and Israel has offered peace on numerous occasions. The issue is not necessarily the Palestinian Arabs; it is Hamas and Fatah. If you removed Hamas and Fatah and created a proper democratic system among the Palestinian Arabs, I'm convinced peace could be attained very rapidly.

So you're saying, if you get rid of terrorists, you'd have peace? But because there are terrorists, the response is to disenfranchise or attack even civilians? And we should continue to accept this as a good thing?

Hell yah the religious extremists are the issue, on both sides. If people would behave civilly instead of radically, we'd all be happy, but you don't respond to radical action with radical action.

Israel recognizes where it has done wrong.

That's very true. Most Israelis I've met have been very forthcoming. Your posts have been less so. And I've met people who've been been bigger apologists.

It has dismantled settlements beyond the lines given to them in the Oslo Accords; took responsibility when they allowed a Christian militia in Lebanon into a refugee camp, which then slaughtered the inhabitants; paid massive reparations to the casualties and the families of those that died on the USS Liberty; sends massive amounts of humanitarian goods into Gaza even, while Hamas was keeping Israeli residents in the South in bunkers 23 hours a day; treats numerous Palestinian Arabs in Israeli hospitals without compensation...

And that's great, and any decent person should be pushing for those actions, regardless of state. I'm not unappreciative of the state; as I said, I don't oppose its existence.

I could go on, but I shouldn't have to.

And you don't. Up till now, you've just sounded like an apologist, and because of past experience, Israeli apologists are one group I really can't stand. But I would encourage you to do further research too... If even one settlement was stolen by a group of Israeli's and not returned, then the entire nation should be clammoring for that group to leave and return the last. And to my knowledge, its happened on a few occasions.

[Norsklow]

No. They had their chance. Now they get Bupkas.

That's a bit harsh. I'm sure there's plenty of sensible Arabs and Palestinians who would don't share ties with groups like Hamas, that are willing to sit at the negotiating table and hammer out a sensible solution to this idiotic problem with sensible Jews. I'm sure they would take offense to being rounded up and shipped out of Africa.

And I repeat - Arabs taking offence at anything will not figure in my roadmap for peace. It's only a bit harsh in the Versailles Treaty sense of being a bit harsh.
To my mind, that was nowhere near harsh enough, for it failed to drive a permanent stake through the heart of German national aspirations.

[Enadail]

Try again damnit. Butter them up.

Sorry, but that's just not going to happen. The majority of Jerusalem has been sovereign Israel territory since 1949, and all of Jerusalem since 1967. Israel has agreed to a joint administration of the Eastern portion of Jerusalem, but to the victors of a defensive war go the spoils. If Jordan had not attacked Israel in 1967, the Arabs wouldn't have lost control of it. No international law requires a defender to return all territories captured in a defensive war.

You're right, no law requires it. No law requires I have 5 dollars to a homeless guy either. I do it because I think I can help that person.

There's no arguing that 3 religious groups lay claim to Jerusalem. No one can know for fact who is right in this life (if you're a member of those 3 groups, you believe in an after life). Its well established that all 3 groups have vied, violently, for that city. It would lead to the logical conclusion that as long as one group maintains control, only violence will follow. It would also lead that a group who was above their own ego would work to establish total joint control so all groups could live peacefully together. It would help create not a council under another's purview, but an alliance that could help eradicate the radicalism you yourself said is the problem.

No one (with any logic) is saying Israel HAS to do it... but someone thinking it through would come to the conclusion that it should be done.

[Enadail]

That's a bit harsh. I'm sure there's plenty of sensible Arabs and Palestinians who would don't share ties with groups like Hamas, that are willing to sit at the negotiating table and hammer out a sensible solution to this idiotic problem with sensible Jews. I'm sure they would take offense to being rounded up and shipped out of Africa.

And I repeat - Arabs taking offence at anything will not figure in my roadmap for peace. It's only a bit harsh in the Versailles Treaty sense of being a bit harsh.
To my mind, that was nowhere near harsh enough, for it failed to drive a permanent stake through the heart of German national aspirations.

And that makes you no difference then the radical's on the opposite end.

[Jewcrew]

I was reading the same posts you were, and I didn't see any antisemitic libel. I'm not sure where you did. I saw opposition to Israel, which is not even VAGUELY the same.

The claim that Israel controls America's banking system and government is merely a rehash of the old Antisemitic libel that Jews control America. No nation other than the Jewish nation is singled out for this kind of accusation, and that isn't a coincidence.

I remember doing my own research after reading the article and finding it was more then just few and far between. Every nation has its dirty secrets; it takes a strong person to stand up to what their nation has done wrong, rather then just believing its the one in the right.

If you're talking about the things that occurred during the Independence War, that requires the context of, oh, I don't know... the fact that the Shoah (Holocaust) had just ended 4 years prior? The fact that the Jews were with their backs to the ocean and an enemy talking about massacres like the Mongol hordes and driving the Jews into the sea?

And you're right, every nation has done wrong, but every post you've made so far has made it seem like you believe Israel has done everything it could to be the bastion of positivity in the world, and everyone else is out to get it with lies, falsehoods, and attacks. If you didn't mean it, fine, but be aware, that's how you're coming across.

I've merely debunked myths, I have never claimed Israel was angelic. If that's how you read it, that's your failing, not mine.

So you're saying, if you get rid of terrorists, you'd have peace? But because there are terrorists, the response is to disenfranchise or attack even civilians? And we should continue to accept this as a good thing?

Israel does not attack civilians. Even Hamas admitted that more than 7 out of 10 dead in the Gaza War were Hamas members. That's the lowest civilian to militant casualty ratio for insurgent warfare on the entire planet. Chechnya's ratio is 5:1, Iraq is 4:1, Afghanistan is 3:1. Israel, with lower than 1 civilian per militant, has the most accurate military on the planet. For context, casualties in WWII were over 90% civilian (a ratio of 10:1), not including the Shoah.

Hell yah the religious extremists are the issue, on both sides. If people would behave civilly instead of radically, we'd all be happy, but you don't respond to radical action with radical action.

Israel's government has offered peace over and over again. See the peace offers of 2000 and 2008. Israel and the Israeli government are not the problem. Israel had little problem getting peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan once those nations were willing to actually negotiate. The idea that Israel is the obstacle to a peace treaty with the Palestinian Arabs is fallacious.

[Jewcrew]

Sorry, but that's just not going to happen. The majority of Jerusalem has been sovereign Israel territory since 1949, and all of Jerusalem since 1967. Israel has agreed to a joint administration of the Eastern portion of Jerusalem, but to the victors of a defensive war go the spoils. If Jordan had not attacked Israel in 1967, the Arabs wouldn't have lost control of it. No international law requires a defender to return all territories captured in a defensive war.

You're right, no law requires it. No law requires I have 5 dollars to a homeless guy either. I do it because I think I can help that person.

There's no arguing that 3 religious groups lay claim to Jerusalem. No one can know for fact who is right in this life (if you're a member of those 3 groups, you believe in an after life). Its well established that all 3 groups have vied, violently, for that city. It would lead to the logical conclusion that as long as one group maintains control, only violence will follow. It would also lead that a group who was above their own ego would work to establish total joint control so all groups could live peacefully together. It would help create not a council under another's purview, but an alliance that could help eradicate the radicalism you yourself said is the problem.

No one (with any logic) is saying Israel HAS to do it... but someone thinking it through would come to the conclusion that it should be done.

As I've stated in other posts, Israel has offered joint administration of East Jerusalem, which is where the Old City and the religious sites are. The PA rejected this in 2000.

[Norsklow]

And I repeat - Arabs taking offence at anything will not figure in my roadmap for peace. It's only a bit harsh in the Versailles Treaty sense of being a bit harsh.
To my mind, that was nowhere near harsh enough, for it failed to drive a permanent stake through the heart of German national aspirations.

And that makes you no difference then the radical's on the opposite end.

How many of us worry about,say, Japanese extremism lately?
Mind you, we did have to worry about German extremism after we failed to drive a stake through the heart of their aspirations.

[Enadail]

The claim that Israel controls America's banking system and government is merely a rehash of the old Antisemitic libel that Jews control America. No nation other than the Jewish nation is singled out for this kind of accusation, and that isn't a coincidence.

Fair enough; I missed that one, and you are correct.

If you're talking about the things that occurred during the Independence War, that requires the context of, oh, I don't know... the fact that the Shoah (Holocaust) had just ended 4 years prior? The fact that the Jews were with their backs to the ocean and an enemy talking about massacres like the Mongol hordes and driving the Jews into the sea?

I'm talking about things that happened since 1985. Its a bit more recent.

I've merely debunked myths, I have never claimed Israel was angelic. If that's how you read it, that's your failing, not mine.

Uh... its my fault what you wrote seemed to only present one side of the issue? Isn't that your mistake?

Israel does not attack civilians.

Impossible. Maybe rarely on purpose, but to say any nation never attacks civilians is plain bull.

Even Hamas admitted that more than 7 out of 10 dead in the Gaza War were Hamas members.

Hm... Hamas says that its people are being killed... that doesn't make Hamas seem more the victim at all... no reason for them to lie about that...

That's the lowest civilian to militant casualty ratio for insurgent warfare on the entire planet.

If its true. Lets not also forget, not everyone in Hamas is an extremist.

Israel's government has offered peace over and over again. See the peace offers of 2000 and 2008. Israel and the Israeli government are not the problem. Israel had little problem getting peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan once those nations were willing to actually negotiate. The idea that Israel is the obstacle to a peace treaty with the Palestinian Arabs is fallacious.

Did I say its the obstacle? I said its part of the problem. There's no denying the issues between Israel and Palestine run deeper then the other groups, and Palestine has the issue of having a terrorist population within it.

As I've stated in other posts, Israel has offered joint administration of East Jerusalem, which is where the Old City and the religious sites are. The PA rejected this in 2000.

Then I missed that post and apologize.

How many of us worry about,say, Japanese extremism lately?
Mind you, we did have to worry about German extremism after we failed to drive a stake through the heart of their aspirations.

Even in WW2, America detained thousands upon thousands of Japanese Americans for no valid reason what so ever. They were innocents, many of them Americans in whole, who were falsely accused.

And we didn't drive a stake through German aspirations, we removed a dictatorship run by an insane man leading insane fellows. We never opposed Germany, we opposed the Axis Nazi's.

I have no issue with aggression towards terrorists, people committing atrocities, etc. But all Arabs? That claim is the same claim the terrorists are making, that all westerns or all Jews or all non-Muslims should die.

[Jewcrew]

I'm talking about things that happened since 1985. Its a bit more recent.

I would REALLY love to see evidence of that!

Uh... its my fault what you wrote seemed to only present one side of the issue? Isn't that your mistake?

Until your post, I was defending Israel against myths that were completely one sided. My responses were appropriate.

Impossible. Maybe rarely on purpose, but to say any nation never attacks civilians is plain bull.

Okay, I'll rephrase it: Israel does not purposefully attack civilians.

Hm... Hamas says that its people are being killed... that doesn't make Hamas seem more the victim at all... no reason for them to lie about that...

Hamas' numbers were nearly identical to Israeli numbers, confirming what Israel had been saying from the beginning; that they were targeting Hamas and with unheard of accuracy in warfare.

If its true. Lets not also forget, not everyone in Hamas is an extremist.

First, it's true. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_c ... Gaza_Strip

Edit: Read that and the section below.

Second, do more reading on Hamas. I recommend 'Son of Hamas'. Hamas' publicly stated goal is the destruction of Israel and murder of all Jews, anywhere. Regardless, Hamas admitted that the Israeli numbers of civilian and militant deaths were accurate.

Did I say its the obstacle? I said its part of the problem. There's no denying the issues between Israel and Palestine run deeper then the other groups, and Palestine has the issue of having a terrorist population within it.

I fail to see how Israel is part of the problem when it is Israel that offers peace and the PA that continues to reject it. Israel has met numerous obligations under the Oslo Accords, the PA has failed to meet a single one.