Israel, in case you missed it

[yusuf]

choses settlements over peace, again

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/09/israeli-settlement-homes-ariel-west-bank

[zenshiite]

No surprise there.

The pre-conditions for these peace "talks" are always "we(Israel) get what we want, you accept that or STFU."

[Darth Rock&Roll]

well, in my opinion and view, and in context to the 6 day war, I'm not so certain that west bank shouldn't at this point belong to Israel.

The bigger problem is what to do about Gaza. Which I think should get it's own statehood.
The west bank is contentious and Israel more or less won it during the war.

So, why aren't the Syrians and Jordanians stepping up? It was they who lost this land in their conflict.

Making Israel the bad guy isn't right. There's plenty of egregious and erroneous to go around with everyone involved.
However, these are occupied territories and the surrounding nations at best grudgingly accept Israel with many not even acknowledging it as a state.

So, I put a lot of weight in this on Syria, Jordan and even Lebanon as well as the Palestinians themselves who elect Hamas and continue to take Israeli subsidization, continue to commit acts of terror in Israel.

I really don't think that Israel is the only bad guy here is what I'm saying.

[Steve James]

All that really matters is whether one thinks that expanding settlements (anywhere) will promote or lead to peace. Not even all Israelis share the same feeling about that. To me, it makes sense to require security, even above peace. However, all new settlements are in contentious areas and closer to attack. So, they are, by nature, less secure and more prone to attack. And, if one believes in the "dark side" of human nature, then there will always be someone on either side to make sure that there will be an attack.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

Actually, Israeli settlements are peppered all over west bank and there are also Israleis settlers in Gaza as well.

The water works and road works as well as all other infrastructure that exists in West Bank is put there by Israel.
Much of it was very parched before those innovations.

It boils down to this in that conflict.

Why is it ok to have a strictly Islamic nation, but not a Jewish one?
These folks in the region identify themselves religiously first (impossible to reason with dogma and doctrine in any meaningful way), nationalistically second and familial (tribe) third and last come the individual and that is where the feelings of responsibility and accountability go as well.

It is religions fault, then the nations, then the family and way down the line, an individual who almost never takes responsibility for their actions. It is always "a gunman" , "a bomber" etc. Odd don't you think? If these crimes were committed here, it would be all about the individual responsible and that would go back the other way as far as the accountability line goes.

[yusuf]

Hey

we all know that the end result of all this bullshit will either be a two state solution on 1967 borders with the 4m plus palestinian rfugess given compensation, or a single state with the Palestinians in the west bank and Gaza treated as some sort of bantustans.

It's an easy choice.


Yusuf

[yusuf]

Oh and just in case thats not contentious enough, Jerusalem should be a free city and no man made flag should fly over it...

[Steve James]

Why is it ok to have a strictly Islamic nation, but not a Jewish one?

Why? ... Who said it was okay? And, afaik, all the states you mentioned that are in conflict with Israel (i.e., you mentioned Jordan and Syria) are majority-Muslim states, but have historically had citizens of several religions. That goes back before any of these states existed.

Anyway, Europe had religious (i.e., Christian) states, even Empires, for much of its recorded history. I'm not sure that is good or bad or justifies anything. But, I don't believe in "religious-states" because I think humans are more important than their beliefs. There's no religious argument that anyone can make that justifies what they do. Christians rounded up York's Jews into a synagogue and burned it down in the name of Jesus --(ok, after claiming that the Jews were eating children). Pick a major European city, and you'll find examples of the same thing. "That" is the justification for a Jewish state; but it has nothing to do with religion.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

Gimme a break here Steve. LOL. Please don't compare 14th century apples to 21st century oranges.

Here's the bottom line.

In the middle east Israel is the ONLY democracy.
In some islamic nations, particularly in the most powerful of them (SA) Apostasy is still, to this day punsihable by death.

That means, if you deny Allah, you will be put to death by order of his majesty.

All the nations surrounding Israel have dismal conditions for the people. They are ruled by dictators or monarchs. They repress people quite solidly and not to mention human rights are an afterthought if any thought is given to them at all.

these are not forward thinking nations. These are backwards, tribal nations ruled with totalitarian practices. If it's not some monarch, then it's some mullah calling the shots.

that power structure is ancient and useless. But, the power elite of the middle east are who the real problem is. People for the most part just wanna chill, have some food and shelter and some pastimes. Comfort, raise a family in a safe place. Too few people running the huge geography of it all has the common people framed as tools or enemies of the state. You can't just be a person there, you are relegated to some cause or another.

Let's find the heads of the snakes I say, put the neck under the boot and do away with monarchs and religious leaders once and for all. Total revolution into a secular world. You can have your god, but keep it to yourself. That's the best way.

[zenshiite]

^So your argument is that an apartheid state ruled by democracy for one ethnic group, and disenfranchisement for another is legit and good? What the fuck is that? How is that any different from the surrounding states?

Furthermore, most of the world accepts that an Islamic state is a bad thing. The question, really, is why should there be the acceptance and expectation of a Jewish state at all? Particularly when the religious aspect of identifying as "Jewish" is secondary in the conception of Israel to the ethnic/racial conception of "Jewishness." In which case, you have a state insisting upon an ethnic/racial character to the entire organization of the nation-state and any ethnic/racial grouping outside of this one particular is secondary to that which is the organizing principle of the state in question. As we see from the current structure of Israel, it is not a theocratic state, but a democratic state for those Jews living there and far less democratic for the Arabs residing within the borders of the state. That is abhorrent to me.

The irony of the Zionist project, to me, is the boom in anti-Jewish sentiment that it has caused. When you come into a place and start gobbling up land and resources by hook or by crook you have absolutely got to expect the people who were there before you to hate you.

[Steve James]

I made no comparison. I just said that the historic (European/Christian) persecution of Jews is a more legitimate justification --to me-- for a "Jewish" state than for any religious reason. Frankly, I don't think that this or that act is good or bad, justifiable or not, because of the actor's or the victim's religion. Bringing up the legitimacy of a "Jewish state" was your idea, as is all this extraneous stuff about Saudi Arabia and democracy, etc. This conflict is not about religion. And, Jerusalem is probably the best example of that.

[Interloper]

There is no "boom" in anti-Semitism; rather, the level of anti-Semitism has remained the same -- that is to say, persistantly and perniciously -- for more than 2,000 years. It's just that "incidents" like founding the State of Israel and subsequent attack by Arab nations http://www.historycentral.com/Mideast/Israel.html ; beating back the attacking Arab nations in 1967 http://www.historycentral.com/Mideast/SixDay.html ; and all of the other "Zionist" self-defense activities since happen to result in flurries of more vocal and acted-out anti-Semitism around the world where Jews are traditionally villified and hated.

SSDD.

Just to remind us all of historic fact, keep in mind that when the League of Nations/U.N. proffered Jews the chance to re-settle in their ancestral land in the 1940s, and suggested a 2-state solution, Jews stated that they would be willing to accept a portion of land just 20% of the size of the parcel that the Partition offered, and to let the Arabs have the rest. But, the Arabs did not want even that, and so here we are again haggling for a 2-state "solution."

Steve, remember the "White Paper"? It sealed the fate of Jews now trapped in Europe as the Third Reich took power. http://www.historycentral.com/Mideast/whitepaper.html

For fun: a short timeline of Middle East happenings: http://www.historycentral.com/Mideast/index.html

[Darth Rock&Roll]

^So your argument is that an apartheid state ruled by democracy for one ethnic group, and disenfranchisement for another is legit and good? What the fuck is that? How is that any different from the surrounding states?

Furthermore, most of the world accepts that an Islamic state is a bad thing. The question, really, is why should there be the acceptance and expectation of a Jewish state at all? Particularly when the religious aspect of identifying as "Jewish" is secondary in the conception of Israel to the ethnic/racial conception of "Jewishness." In which case, you have a state insisting upon an ethnic/racial character to the entire organization of the nation-state and any ethnic/racial grouping outside of this one particular is secondary to that which is the organizing principle of the state in question. As we see from the current structure of Israel, it is not a theocratic state, but a democratic state for those Jews living there and far less democratic for the Arabs residing within the borders of the state. That is abhorrent to me.

The irony of the Zionist project, to me, is the boom in anti-Jewish sentiment that it has caused. When you come into a place and start gobbling up land and resources by hook or by crook you have absolutely got to expect the people who were there before you to hate you.

I think he was addressing me Steve. And no, that's not what I think Zenshiite. I truly believe those people who wish to have a palestinian state should have it. I think Israel will be key to letting that happen and I agree that Jerusalem, being the crossroads of the old world should not belong to any state and should run it's own affairs.

I also agree that the situation in Israel is contentious and troubled. I also think that Israels Jewishness is no different from the surrounding nations absolute and deep identity as Islamic. Even more so, they are still less than the officially titled "Islamic Republics" of Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, and Mauritania. Which are viewed as some kind of substitute for "caliphate". So, calling something a Jewish state is no different from that, or the inference given by Americans who say "one nation under god" and it's likely that most Americans believe that "God" to be Jesus or the Trinity including Jesus.

So, the religious question and the allowability of a nation to directly associate itself to the religious practices of the majority, is not uncommon and it is not fair in the very least to criticize Israel for it's Jewish way of running a nation. As for the aphartheid that exists, who created that? I'm not asking who controls the situation, obviously it is Israel and her allies that control it, I'm asking what is the root cause for the form of apartheid that does exist? I think it is fear and hostility due to being attacked virtually immediately upon forming the state of Israel. That was only the beginning, and that early on. As you likely well know, it has been a constant and consistant stream of attacks on Israel day by day since then. the situation of Israel lashing back has gotten worse in the most recent times with them inflicting great damage against the aggresors which in turn, has created tensions on almost every single issue.

So, you tell me, what is so bad about have the two state solution implemented, with palestinians being given an agreed upon borderlands and the Islamic world can accept and acknowledge the existance of Israle, the Jewish state, among their Islamic ones. then, everyone can get along, live their lives and put their guns down and dispel their hate.

If you narrow it down to it's core issues, it's not that hard to see what should be done and we all get stymied when some idiot jacks it up and we have to wait for th tension to simmer down. Well it's not simmering down is it. So, what is it that should be done do you think?

[Steve James]

Steve, remember the "White Paper"? It sealed the fate of Jews now trapped in Europe as the Third Reich took power. http://www.historycentral.com/Mideast/whitepaper.html

Yes, there was deliberate collusion against European Jews --and there's still plenty of it, too. That is one area where blame should be spread around.

[Chris Fleming]

I think we should boycott Israel.