Israel - The Right to exist as a State?


View Poll Results: Does Israel have the right to exist with secure borders free from attack
NO 6 14.29%
Yes 31 73.81%
Not sure 5 11.90%
Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll

Goober
Free Thinker
#61
Cliffy

This is the quote that EAO agrees with -
How else would you interpret it but pure Anti Jewish - Jewish Controlled media -

CanaduhYour quote "the fact they dont own the media like the jews do. Every time the Israels do something or someone speaks out against them they play the holocaust get out of jail free card"
 
MHz
#62
Goober once Muslims control the world will Alberta become Alburkastan? Did you really read all those links you posted, that was a lot of reading if you did.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#63
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

Goober once Muslims control the world will Alberta become Alburkastan? Did you really read all those links you posted, that was a lot of reading if you did.

No I did not - I tried to find links that would provide some sort of balance - Tried I did - But I am sure that some links may not be of the best quality -
 
earth_as_one
#64
Thanks Cliffy. I appreciate your comment.
 
Dexter Sinister
No Party Affiliation
#65
Israel has as much right to exist, and to defend itself, as does any other state. That isn't the issue. This conflict has been going on in various forms not since 1947, but since Old Testament times. That territory has been overrun by Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Jews, Romans, Phoenicians, Arabs, Christian crusaders... The heart of the current issue is ancient religious texts that promise the land to more than one group, and the human folly that leads people to think that's important. But it's not really even about religion, it's about tribalism, power, and control. And it's all stupid and pointless, murderous disputes ostensibly over minor religious differences and tiny bits of territory. Sometimes I despair for our species.
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
#66
Quote: Originally Posted by Dexter Sinister View Post

Israel has as much right to exist, and to defend itself, as does any other state. That isn't the issue. This conflict has been going on in various forms not since 1947, but since Old Testament times. That territory has been overrun by Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Jews, Romans, Phoenicians, Arabs, Christian crusaders... The heart of the current issue is ancient religious texts that promise the land to more than one group, and the human folly that leads people to think that's important. But it's not really even about religion, it's about tribalism, power, and control. And it's all stupid and pointless, murderous disputes ostensibly over minor religious differences and tiny bits of territory. Sometimes I despair for our species.

You've got that straight. I used to despair for our species,but more and more,I am indifferent.Perhaps the world would be a better place without us.
 
Liberalman
Free Thinker
#67
Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_one View Post

I can't speak for Canadah, but his statement "Every time the Israels do something or someone speaks out against them they play the holocaust get out of jail free card" is one line of thought in this book written by Jewish American academic Norman Finklestein:

You can read the book or get a summary by Finklestein himself in this interview:
YouTube - Norman Finkelstein on suffering, morality and justification p1

The Nazi Holocaust was a terrible, horrendous atrocity. Its exploitation for personal profit and as a political weapon to stifle criticism of Israel's war crimes and crimes against humanity is disgusting.

Its not that different than how disgusting you are when you play the anti-Semiticism card against anyone who dares criticize Israel. Abusing anti-Semiticism as a weapon to stifle legitimate criticism of Israel diminishes the meaning of anti-Semiticism which IMO is a real problem.

But you aren't alone. Both anti-semiticism and the holocaust have both been abused recently as a means to discredit the UN's Goldstone Report, which details both Israeli and Palestinian war crimes as well as Israeli crimes against humanity:
Read the Goldstone report for yourself:
United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict

or read the 2009 Amnesty International Annual Report regarding Israel and the Occupied Territories:
Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories | Amnesty International Report 2009


or consider a Palestinian viewpoint:

Clearly Israel has not fulfilled any of the conditions they agreed to honor when they were recognized by the UN as I already stated here:

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/in...ml#post1211240


You can say that about any country in the world.
Things happen and things change.

The Arabs decided to get rid of Israel in 1967 and lost the war and also lost some of the land.

The Arabs decided not to take in the displaced Palistinian people.

Israel is willing to take them in if they lay down their weapons and give up and live in peace.
 
earth_as_one
#68
Quote: Originally Posted by Liberalman View Post

You can say that about any country in the world.
Things happen and things change.

The Arabs decided to get rid of Israel in 1967 and lost the war and also lost some of the land.

The Arabs decided not to take in the displaced Palistinian people.

Israel is willing to take them in if they lay down their weapons and give up and live in peace.

I disagree and think Israel should be held to their agreement.

Also this statement is another common misperception:

Quote:

The Arabs decided to get rid of Israel in 1967 and lost the war and also lost some of the land.

In 1967 Israel attacked their neighbors without warning. Israel initiated that war, not its neighbors. I suggest you read up on it:

Quote:

Following numerous border clashes between Israel and its Arab neighbours, particularly Syria, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser expelled the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) from the Sinai Peninsula in May 1967.[8] The peacekeeping force had been stationed there since 1957, following a British-French-Israeli invasion of Egypt which was launched during the Suez Crisis.[9] Egypt amassed 1,000 tanks and nearly 100,000 soldiers on the Israeli border[10] and closed the Straits of Tiran to all ships flying Israeli flags or carrying strategic materials, receiving strong support from other Arab countries.[11] Israel responded with a similar mobilization that included the call up of 70,000 reservists to augment the regular IDF forces.[12]

On June 5, 1967, Israel launched a preemptive attack on Egypt.[13] The Arab countries denied planning to attack Israel, and asserted that Israel's strike was not preemptive but an unwarranted and illegal act of aggression.[14] Jordan, which had signed a mutual defence treaty with Egypt on May 30, then attacked western Jerusalem and Netanya.[15][16][17]...

Six-Day War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It wasn't exactly a sneak attack since tensions had been escalating in the region for some time. But Israel initiated that war without without warning. Israeli apologists have distorted the facts regarding the 1967 war from a Pearl Harbor like attack into some sort of self defense.

Most of what people commonly believe about Israel/Zionism is not actually true. The more you dig into Israel's history, the more you discover that many commonly held beliefs regarding this conflict are actually manipulated misperceptions.
 
earth_as_one
#69
Quote: Originally Posted by Dexter Sinister View Post

Israel has as much right to exist, and to defend itself, as does any other state. That isn't the issue. This conflict has been going on in various forms not since 1947, but since Old Testament times. That territory has been overrun by Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Jews, Romans, Phoenicians, Arabs, Christian crusaders... The heart of the current issue is ancient religious texts that promise the land to more than one group, and the human folly that leads people to think that's important. But it's not really even about religion, it's about tribalism, power, and control. And it's all stupid and pointless, murderous disputes ostensibly over minor religious differences and tiny bits of territory. Sometimes I despair for our species.

Yet another common misperception. You are completely leaving out the four centuries of relative peace in this area before WW I when it was a remote and unimportant corner of the Ottoman empire. During that time, Jews, Christians and Muslims lived in relative peace. Jews and Christians were a discriminated minority throughout the Ottoman empire, but as long as they paid their taxes, they were protected by the empire and free to worship their religion without harassment from the government.

Your misperception is that this area always was at war and therefore Zionism didn't really change much, when in fact, the area used to be peaceful until Zionism. In fact many Palestinian Jews opposed Zionism for precisely that reason.

You might find this short article enlightening:

Quote:

The History of Zionism & Judaism
This text is from an article called "An Open Letter" published in the Jewish magazine, "Hachoma". We think it provides a good historical overview of the history of Zionism and why the Zionist ideology is opposed by religious Orthodox Jews.

The History of Zionism

 
ironsides
No Party Affiliation
#70
During World War I, strategists for all the major powers increasingly perceive oil as a key military asset due to the adoption of oil-powered naval ships, new horseless army vehicles such as trucks and tanks, and even military airplanes. Use of oil during the war increases so rapidly that a severe shortage developed in 1917-18.

It was not Zionism that created the problems in the Mid-East, it was the major powers involved in WW-1 that needed oil to run their new machines of war. Keep in mind that Europe had no oil at that time, and all of a sudden discovered they had a great need for it.
 
Dexter Sinister
No Party Affiliation
#71
Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_one View Post

Your misperception is that this area always was at war and therefore Zionism didn't really change much...

Straw man fallacy; I said no such thing.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#72
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

No I did not - I tried to find links that would provide some sort of balance - Tried I did - But I am sure that some links may not be of the best quality -

You want your thumb weighed in the transaction.
 
EagleSmack
#73
Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_one View Post

That's how the Israeli military treats unarmed non-violent protestors. The soldiers in the video were taken to court but their charges were dismissed and the officer got a promotion.

Any clips of Palestinian treatment of Israeli bus riders? Just curious.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#74
The most productive cows are often staked and chained in a pasture. The human world has plainly been fixed to one position with a stake of religion pounded into Jeruselem and there we are to circle in a great stinking perpetual milking parlor. The shepards of men rejoice.
 
EagleSmack
#75
Quote:

Following numerous border clashes between Israel and its Arab neighbours, particularly Syria, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser expelled the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) from the Sinai Peninsula in May 1967.[8] The peacekeeping force had been stationed there since 1957, following a British-French-Israeli invasion of Egypt which was launched during the Suez Crisis.[9] Egypt amassed 1,000 tanks and nearly 100,000 soldiers on the Israeli border[10] and closed the Straits of Tiran to all ships flying Israeli flags or carrying strategic materials, receiving strong support from other Arab countries.[11] Israel responded with a similar mobilization that included the call up of 70,000 reservists to augment the regular IDF forces.[12]

On June 5, 1967, Israel launched a preemptive attack on Egypt.[13] The Arab countries denied planning to attack Israel, and asserted that Israel's strike was not preemptive but an unwarranted and illegal act of aggression.[14] Jordan, which had signed a mutual defence treaty with Egypt on May 30, then attacked western Jerusalem and Netanya.[15][16][17]...

Nothing to see here...move along...
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#76
Quote: Originally Posted by Dexter Sinister View Post

Straw man fallacy; I said no such thing.


Dexter Sinister
http://israelipalestinian.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questionID=000443

I am getting the impression that this site is reasonable - Not slanted as many sites are - Your opinion is?

One thing people should note is that every time Arabs attacked Israel and lost - they always want the land back - and when that does not happen Israel is at fault - Seems to be a common thread that runs through the whole problem in the Mid East.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#77
The modern misinterpretation called Israel is at fault according to god. Do you want us to join in the crime and share gods wrath thereby lessoning your share of damnation?
 
Dexter Sinister
No Party Affiliation
#78
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

I am getting the impression that this site is reasonable - Not slanted as many sites are - Your opinion is?

I just spent about 15 minutes at it, obviously not long enough to see it all, but from what I DID see I'd have to agree, it seems reasonable and balanced. Certainly worth bookmarking--which I did--and going back to for reference. Thanks for the link, I think you've found a good one. There's so much heated rhetoric out there on this subject, that site is refreshingly laid back.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#79
A balanced reasonable approach to chaos and genocide? How the lawyers chortle.
 
Dexter Sinister
No Party Affiliation
#80
You give up too easily, Beave. Chaos and genocide (not that I'm agreeing that's an accurate description) happen for reasons.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#81
Quote: Originally Posted by Dexter Sinister View Post

You give up too easily, Beave. Chaos and genocide (not that I'm agreeing that's an accurate description) happen for reasons.

Oh no you don't. They happen through cause, which leads any reason, not to be confused with aspiration. Reason or lack thereof is proved post event, following the scientific method. Now since there has been no resolving event that we may examine as evidence of reason or aspiration we can only comment on trends in the case of the matter in question. The trend of shrinking Palestinian assets would seem to indicate A/spontaneous abandonment by Palestinians or B/theft by Israelis. Now we may inquire as to the reasoning behind transfers of ownership.
Last edited by darkbeaver; Feb 1st, 2010 at 01:30 PM..
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#82
Open question

I see The statement by Canaduh as clearly Racist - Am I wrong, right or prejudiced?

CanaduhYour quote "the fact they dont own the media like the jews do. Every time the Israels do something or someone speaks out against them they play the holocaust get out of jail free card".


The Native American "holocaust" happened before the media could latch onto it, not to mention the fact they dont own the media like the jews do. Every time the Israels do something or someone speaks out against them they play the holocaust get out of jail free card.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#83
The case for racial status for the Jews has been disallowed by Israelis who regularly import black Jews and Light brown Jews and Indian Jews. Racism is being confused with common discrimination at best.
 
Spade
Free Thinker
#84
Judaism is a religion, not a race.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#85
SwhatIsaydmon!
 
earth_as_one
#86
Quote: Originally Posted by Dexter Sinister View Post

Straw man fallacy; I said no such thing.

I was refering to this comment:
Quote: Originally Posted by Dexter Sinister View Post

...This conflict has been going on in various forms not since 1947, but since Old Testament times...

Which is not true. The Israel/Palestine conflict has only been going on since 1947, when Zionists started an ethnic cleansing war.

The roots of modern Zionism only go back to the late 1890's:

Quote:

Der Judenstaat (German, "The State of the Jews") is a book written by Theodor Herzl and published in 1896 in Leipzig and Vienna by M. Breitenstein's Verlags-Buchhandlung. It is subtitled with "Versuch einer modernen Lösung der Judenfrage", "Proposal of a modern solution for the Jewish question", and originally called "Address to the Rothschilds" referring to the Rothschild family banking dynasty which was very influential in the realization of a Jewish state in Eretz Yisrael.[1] It is considered one of the most important texts of early Zionism. As expressed in this book, Herzl envisioned the founding of a future independent Jewish state during the 20th century. He argued that the best way to avoid anti-Semitism in Europe was to create this independent Jewish state. Herzl, who had lived as a secular, largely assimilated Jew, was fluent in neither Hebrew nor Yiddish. His lack of contact with Jewish culture and intellectual currents, and his limited contact with Jews less assimilated than he prior to hitting upon the idea of a Jewish return to Zion, led him to imagine that popular Jewish support for a Jewish State elsewhere than in Palestine was conceivable. In Der Judenstaat, Herzl noted the possibility of a Jewish state in Argentina....

Der Judenstaat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I doubt Herzl and the majority of other early Zionists would approve of Israel in its current form.

Herzl wrote a book Altneuland, which describes what he envisioned:
Quote:

...Herzl envisioned a Jewish state which combined both a modern Jewish culture with the best of the European heritage. Thus a Palace of Peace would be built in Jerusalem, arbitrating international disputes—but at the same time the Temple would be rebuilt, but on modern principles. He did not envision the Jewish inhabitants of the state being religious, but there is much respect for religion in the public sphere. Many languages are spoken—Hebrew is not the main tongue. Proponents of a Jewish cultural rebirth, such as Ahad Ha'am were critical of Altneuland.


In Altneuland Herzl did not foresee any conflict between Jews and Arabs. One of the main characters in Altneuland is a Haifa engineer, Reshid Bey, who is one of the leaders of the "New Society", is very grateful to his Jewish neighbors for improving the economic condition of Palestine and sees no cause for conflict. All non-Jews have equal rights, and an attempt by a fanatical rabbi to disenfranchise the non-Jewish citizens of their rights fails in the election which is the center of the main political plot of the novel.[8] Herzl also envisioned the future Jewish state to be a "third way" between capitalism and socialism, with a developed welfare program and public ownership of the main natural resources and industry, agriculture and even trade organized on a cooperative basis. He called this mixed economic model "Mutualism", a term derived from French utopian socialist thinking. Women have equal voting rights - as they did have in the Zionist movement from the second Zionist Congress onwards.

Altneuland
was written both for Jews and non-Jews: Herzl wanted to win over non-Jewish opinion for Zionism.[9] When he was still thinking of Argentina as a possible venue for massive Jewish immigration, he mentioned in his diary he wrote that land was to be gently expropriated from the local population and they were to be worked across the border "unbemerkt" (surreptitiously), e.g. by refusing them employment.[9] Herzl's draft of a charter for a Jewish-Ottoman Land Company (JOLC) gave the JOLC the right to obtain land in Palestine by giving its owners comparable land elsewhere in the Ottoman empire....

Theodor Herzl - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If Zionists remained true to the Herzl's original vision, I'd support Zionism. Unfortunately, Herzl's utopian dream of a peaceful and tolerant Jewish state turned into a dystopian nightmare of violence, war and ethnic cleansing.

Since I don't support war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing, I don't support Zionism in its current form. People who support Zionism today, effectively support war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.
 
Dexter Sinister
No Party Affiliation
#87
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaver View Post

Oh no you don't.

Yes I do. You don't appear to know the difference between reason in the sense of logic, and reason in the sense of an explanation.
 
Dexter Sinister
No Party Affiliation
#88
Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_one View Post

I was refering to this comment:


Which is not true.

Yes it is. The ancestors of today's Jews took over that territory by force of arms in biblical times and the scrapping has been going on ever since. Not constantly, I agree, but pretty steadily. You're focusing on Zionism specifically, I'm talking about ethnic and internecine conflict in that area more generally, which has indeed been going on for thousands of years.
 
Johnnny
No Party Affiliation
#89
What was the name of the guy who conquered that area for israel, called david or solomon? im just curious i cant remember
 
EagleSmack
#90
Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_one View Post

I was refering to this comment:


Which is not true. The Israel/Palestine conflict has only been going on since 1947, when Zionists started an ethnic cleansing war.

Really? They aren't doing a very good job then are they?
 

Similar Threads

60
Has Israel become a Racist State?
by einmensch | Apr 2nd, 2009
0
The Current State of Israel
by I think not | Jul 11th, 2006
60
Does Israel have a right to exist?
by Crusader | Apr 22nd, 2006