Hamas legalizes Crucifixion

[Comrade Tovya]

superchunk said:

Comrade Tovya said:

At one time I did support the "two-state" solution... but I just don't think that this is a viable solution anymore. (I'll go into my reasons in a moment)

And I don't need the media to tell me who does wrong, because I have the unique situation of actually knowing a good-deal of settlers personally, so I know what goes on and what their goal is.  And when it comes to religious beliefs, observant Jews don't mind if Muslims stay in Israel, because the laws of Islam are mostly in line with halacha and therefore there has never been a problem with cohabitation.  But, because the religious Islamic populace takes the opposite stance, this stance will never work.

In 1948, the UN split Israel into 2 states, and the Arab nations (including the Arab population of Palestine/Israel) said that they would not accept a Jewish state in pan-Arabia, declared war and invaded.  This whole talk of a two-state solution has already been tried, and the Arab world completely rejected it then, and they reject that notion now.

Furthermore, the Arabs have only lost land to the Israelis because they continued to declare war on the Jewish-state and lost time and time again.  This whole notion of an aggressively-expanding Israel is just not historically founded.  The Israelis turned over an enormous amount land back over to the Arabs after they won the war... which is almost unheard of.  Generally, the victors retain the spoils, but Israel has gladly turned most of the captured territory back over and has only asked to be left alone in return.

And don't confuse me with someone who thinks that Israel is a flawless nation with flawless leaders, because it far from that.  But without a shadow of a doubt in my mind, the system of government that exists in Israel is much more democratic and free-thinking than any other system of government in the middle east.  If Israel was a tyranical nation, Arabs wouldn't hold seats in the Knesset (parliament).  No Jew is given or has been given the same rights in Arab nations that the Arab citizens of Israel enjoy.

And as for the supposed green-line, what the hell is that anyway?  There is no such thing as the green-line... any such lines were erased after the Arabs rejected the UN resolution 181 and tried to "drive the Jews into the sea" as was their admitted goal.

I've always found it amuzing that the Islamic nations cry foul when Israel supposedly ignores UN Resolutions, but they have been doing the same thing since the UN was fouded.  Why is that the Jews should be good little world citizens and obey the UN, but the Arabs do not have to? 

Honestly, if you were to ask my opinion on the matter, the U.S. should keep out of the middle east all together... if the Arabs want to attack Israel again, that's their business, let them go at it.  But if the Arabs get the snot kicked out of them again, I say let the Israelis keep all of the territories they gained.

If the truth be known, the only reason why any nation outside of the region gives two craps about the middle east or the so-called "peace process" is because of the oil sitting under the ground.  If the oil dried up tomorrow, no one would care if the Israelis wiped the Arabs off of the map.  The only reason why the U.S. strong armed Israel into giving up it's previous gains in the defensive wars since 1948 is because the Arabs control a bunch of oil, and the west needs it.

If the Arabs were wise, they would find a way to make peace as soon as possible, because the oil won't last forever.  And when it's gone, the modern middle east will look more like the medieval version of it.  And without oil, the Arabs won't be able to support their military infrastructures, and their economies will collapse.  And if they attempt to make war against the Jews in that day and time, the world won't be there to force Israel to turn over land gained from such a war, because they won't care about an Arabic world that has no oil.

 

Your history is a little off.

Israel didn't exist prior to 1948, therefore they weren't splitting it in two, they were taking Arab land away from Arabs and giving it to European Jewish settlers. Before WWI The Arab population (Christian and Muslim) accounted for about 90% of the entire area now considered Irsrael/Palestine. During WWII England made a deal with the Arab peoples to rise up against the Ottomans and they would be given full control over *any* lands that are a majority Arab. This happened in every single location but, Palestine.

During WWII and especially right after there was a very large, and illegal, movement of European Jews into what originally legally purchased farms (kibbutz) that by 1948 was only about 20% of the entire land. Britian tried to stop this but couldn't and maybe didn't really want to. From 1945-1947 Jewish population when from about 15% to about 40% of the total. All from Europe.

When the UN forced the racist and unlawful division of Palestine into two states, why should they have accepted it? The Jews there were not born there. They didn't have thousands of years of records to prove ownership. It was just a f'ed up resolution from the get go. On top of that, the Jews, though getting a smaller % of overall land were receiving 80% of viable farming land.

Then when the war in 1948 started a huge backlash against Jews in the middle east caused most of them to also move to the new Israeli state.

Then in 1948-49 wars Israel gained more land. The only time Israel has ever given land back was in '56 when Israel, with the support of England and France due to Egypts nationalization of the Suez Canal, invaded Egypt unprovoked and conquered the entire Sinai. It took the US and the UN to force Israel to leave many months later.

The notion of aggressivly expanding Israel is exactly how it was created. Britian left because of the Irgun and Stern Gang. The original Middle Eastern terrorist organizations, both Jewish. This is where Arabs learned that destroying hotels and such can give you a positive outcome. These organizations massacred an entire Arab village of Deir Yassin ( http://www.deiryassin.org/ ) just before the 48 wars to demonstrate what would happen if any Arabs remained. These organizations leaders are where the majority of the first leaders of Israel came from.

You must also realize that gaining land by means of war is agianst the Geneva convention. International laws requires Israel to pull back to the Green line, this is why the 'Territories' even exist. The world won't acception Israel's annexation of these lands. This is why Israel started the settlement plan of again aggressively exanding the facts on the ground. Put homes and other structures all throughout the region, then they can probably annex the whole area.

BTW, the green line is the line before the 1967 war. It is the internationally accepted border of Israel. It is the border that the PA and the Arab world has tried to get Israel to agree to since the first negotiations with Rabin.

Israel is the occupying power, they have the military might and nuclear arms. They have the international and moral obligations to leave the territories and remove their illegal settlements. All Arabs are required to do is accept Israel exists. That was offered many times since Rabin and most vocably in 2000 just after the Arab summit when almost every Arab leader and the PA drafted a resolution of peace to Israel. However, Israel didn't even consider it. They didn't even send low level negotiators to see if they could negotiate the retention of some border line settlements, which Arafat was going to do when they negotiated with Clinton.

This issue is far from a Arab caused problem as you would like to think. Both side share a massive amount of blame. However, as it now stands Israel is the one who needs to make the biggest changes to make peace. Removal of the Illegal settlements within the WB, like Hebron etc. They would probably be allowed to keep the ones along the green line.

 

Please don't mince my words, you knew good an well what I was saying.  Israel existed long before the Arabs left the deserts of modern day Saudi Arabia... history goes further back than just the 20th century.  Your idea that modern history dictates the annals of time is just wrong. 

Now I will break down your comments...

A) The British did NOT promote Jewish immigration into British Palestine, and history has actually shown that they even tried to stop it.  When they exhausted their time and resources trying to prevent fighting between Jews and Arabs, they made the decision to surrender their rights to Palestine to the UN to decide it's fate.

The UN via resolution 181 decided that the survivors of the holocaust needed a homeland of their own, and split the former British Mandate into two states--and Arab one, and a Jewish one.  The Jews were fine with the decision, and the Arabs of greater Pan-Arabia were not. 

Therefore, the Arab nation mounted a joint war against the Jews, and were thoroughly defeated.  Israel gained land not out of naked aggression, but in a war of defense.  And according to international law, land obtained in a defensive war is legally able to be retained.

B) Jews didn't leave Arab nations out of the backlash of anger by Arabs, they were expelled from those nations, and their properties were seized.  That's racism my friend.  So you may want to keep off of the subject of racism, because the Arabs were the worst proponents of gross anti-Judaic racism.   At least the Jews gave equal citizenship to the Arabs that remained within Israel's borders... and as I've stated before, are able to and currently do hold public office in the Israeli government.  No Jew is or has been given that same right under modern Islamic rule.  So like I said, yor better off not speaking the word racism in this discussion, because it's one subject that gives greater pan-Arabia a black eye.

C) They didn't leave just because of the Stern Gang & Irgun.  The Arabs had their own militias as well, and both groups took shots at each other and the British.  Like I previously stated, and is historically proven, the British were tired of policing the violence between the two groups.  Your revisionist history might make you feel good inside by pretending that the Arabs were these saintly people in the middle of the desert, but the actual history of Palestine & Israel proves differently.

I don't mind if we disagree, that's completely okay.  But if the reason for this thread is to revise history and paint the Jews as these "evil masterminds of domination", then it's a pointless thread.  As I previously stated, I do not think Israel is a flawless nation without failures.  I am honest enough to admit that Israel has commited folly before.

Yet, on your part, you completely paint everything about Israel as being racist, illegal, and inhumane... but as for the Arabs, you paint them as these flawless victims who have done no wrong to the Jews.  Really, give me a break.  The Jews aren't perfect, but I can assure you that the Arabs screwed up big time by making war against them in 1948, 1967, & 1973. They lost these wars, and Israel gained it's territory in defensive wars, which as I previously stated, allows a nation to retain captured territory according to international law.

I love how the pro-Arab camp likes to quote UN resolutions and international law when they think it paints Israel as an illegal entity, but when other resolutions condemn the Arab world or whenever they are guilty of breaking international law, they mock the UN as an illegitimate Zionist organization.

The whole idea that withdrawing to the "greenline" would solve all of the problems is bogus.  That was the line prior to the start of 1967 war, and the Arabs didn't want peace then... the fact that there is a Jewish nation in the middle of greater-Arabia is the only reason that the Arabs need to make war on Israel.  And that is the reason for the slogan "Palestine: From the River to the Sea" that Palestinians like to throw up so often.  The Arabs will never make peace until they have driven the Jews into the sea.