By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Lebanon Attacks Israel

MrBubbles said:
dallas said:

I dont think that Israel would ever want a democracy, the palestenians are very poor people, and poor people multiply at much faster rates than the rich, so very soon if this happened the jews would be out of the political sphere kind of like what has happened with south africa.  

I think that the jews best bet is for a separate statehood for the pals, that way the jews can keep them out, and basically set up the upper class area that they've wanted. 


are you referring to the israeli arabs as palestinians or just those in the west bank/gaza?

both, since politically they basically side together and are treated the same by da jews.  If they vote and feel the same, then I might as well lump them together.



Around the Network

you're talking about countries for palestinians...

I don't think there are many examples of countries split in half that actually work... the whole 2 government thing might be a blessing in disquise... like that they can do 2 states.... ironically, I think the one with acess to the sea is not gonna prosper much considering its regime....



OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO

then they would probably want to make it a separate country. 



israeli arabs have equal rights (and thats more rights than they would get in any other arab country)



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

MrBubbles said:
superchunk said:
 

But, I've strayed into arguments I hate, the ones that focus on the past. As for the present and future, Isreal exists and should continue to exist. A divided Palestinian state is not good for the Palestinians or Israelis, therefore a democratic and free Israel over the entire region with equal treatment to everyone is the overall best answer.


of course once the jews stop being dominant in israel it will stop being the free, democratic country that provides equality for its citizens and devolve into the typical oppressive middle-eastern regime.  if they become a minority by being out born by the israeli arabs, then its less likely to happen, but absorbing the west bank and gaza is a death sentence for the country 

That simply makes no sense. Just because it would have an Arab majority does not mean it would divert to some fanatical state. There have been millions of Arabs (Muslims/Christians) living in Israel since its creation, those Arabs don't rise up and cause any issues because they enjoy the life in Israel and its mostly equal freedoms. Also, Gaza would probably not get absorbed in the first place.

The nation exists, it would probably finally have a binding constitution and as long as it kept everything open and free for all, meaning some current laws would require changing, such as who can join military as well as being able to buy land anywhere, etc, then there would be no long term issues.



Around the Network
MrBubbles said:

israeli arabs have equal rights (and thats more rights than they would get in any other arab country)

On paper means nothing when the government itself has extreme prejudice against arabs. They don't give enough support to arab settlements in Israel, among others things.

As a side note, Israeli Jews are extremely racist to Arabs:

In 2006, a research institute poll reported that 41% of Israelis were in favour of Arab-Israeli segregation, 40% believed "the state needs to support the emigration of Arab citizens", and 63% believed Arabs to be a "security and demographic threat" to Israel. The data went on to report more than two thirds would not want to live in the same building as an Arab, 36% believed Arab culture to be inferior, and 18% felt hatred when they heard Arabic spoken.

In 2007, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel released a report stating that the expression of anti-Arab views had doubled, and anti-Arab racist incidents had increased by 26%. The report quoted polls that suggested 50% of Jewish Israelis do not believe Arab citizens of Israel should have equal rights, 50% said they wanted the government to encourage Arab emigration from Israel, and 75% of Jewish youths said Arabs were less intelligent and less clean than Jews.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/mar/24/israel

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7136068.stm



what would happen if israel layed down its weapons? thnk bout it



superchunk said:
Mr Khan said:
starcraft said:
Mr Khan said:

You generally don't figure on Lebanon really having an army, given that the Hezbollah war was against Hezbollah (though Lebanon could have gone straight to Syria and started something, but they're in a precarious position with them, too), and Lebanon didn't really do much.

 

These border incidents don't help matters. Lebanon should have acted with more restraint, though we know how much respect Israel has for other countries' borders (given their illegal occupation of a chunk of Syria for some time now)

I assume you mean the Golan Heights?

Given Syria's behaviour over the last few decades, the way those lands came into Israeli posession, and the proclivity it's people have towards their (relatively) newfound freedom under the Israeli regime, calling it an illegal occupation is a VERY long bow to draw.

 

I am hardly someone that could be called Pro-Israel, but that was a pretty crap example.

Stick with half of Jerusulem.

As anti-Israel as i am, i would call their ownership of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip legal, given that as much as they want to be, the Palestinians aren't a country yet. Syria very much is, and however beneficial it may be, it definitely is a cross-border occupation, and hence illegal

That's just my line of thinking. Despite my dislike for Israel, i won't recognize Palestine until the UN does. Same with Kosovo and the handful of other such territories round the world

According to international laws of war no land an be taken by war and therefore all of these territories are by definition, occupied regions that should have been returned years ago. I can understand why they weren't originally, but this is 40 years after the fact and the conditions today are drastically different. Isreal could offer a full retreat and get full peace, but they simply don't want to give up the land due to their own extreamist views.

Israel does have a great many extremist views.  But it is naive to think that retreating to their pre 1967 borders would give them peace.  There are at least two nations (Syria and ESPECIALLY Iran) who have focused most of their foreign policy and internal legitimacy on the ultimate defeat of Israel and their American supporters.  

I think there are a lot of people in the Middle East that would think better of Israel if they withdrew, but a large number would simply see a weakened state with strategically weaker borders to attack.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

starcraft said:
superchunk said:

According to international laws of war no land an be taken by war and therefore all of these territories are by definition, occupied regions that should have been returned years ago. I can understand why they weren't originally, but this is 40 years after the fact and the conditions today are drastically different. Isreal could offer a full retreat and get full peace, but they simply don't want to give up the land due to their own extreamist views.

Israel does have a great many extremist views.  But it is naive to think that retreating to their pre 1967 borders would give them peace.  There are at least two nations (Syria and ESPECIALLY Iran) who have focused most of their foreign policy and internal legitimacy on the ultimate defeat of Israel and their American supporters.  

I think there are a lot of people in the Middle East that would think better of Israel if they withdrew, but a large number would simply see a weakened state with strategically weaker borders to attack.

Actually quite a few years ago all Arab countries put out a unified agreement that if Israel returned to the Green Line and allowed refugees back to their homes there would be full normalized peace in all categories. Israel refused.



superchunk said:
starcraft said:
superchunk said:
 

According to international laws of war no land an be taken by war and therefore all of these territories are by definition, occupied regions that should have been returned years ago. I can understand why they weren't originally, but this is 40 years after the fact and the conditions today are drastically different. Isreal could offer a full retreat and get full peace, but they simply don't want to give up the land due to their own extreamist views.

Israel does have a great many extremist views.  But it is naive to think that retreating to their pre 1967 borders would give them peace.  There are at least two nations (Syria and ESPECIALLY Iran) who have focused most of their foreign policy and internal legitimacy on the ultimate defeat of Israel and their American supporters.  

I think there are a lot of people in the Middle East that would think better of Israel if they withdrew, but a large number would simply see a weakened state with strategically weaker borders to attack.

Actually quite a few years ago all Arab countries put out a unified agreement that if Israel returned to the Green Line and allowed refugees back to their homes there would be full normalized peace in all categories. Israel refused.

Yes, I remember. 

And how honest do you believe the agreement was?  At the end of the day, whatever most of these regimes say to the West, they still stoke enormous Israel hate within their own populations.  It's gotten to the point that they'd struggle to convince their own people to make peace.

And again, Iran is not Arab.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS