Were you raised with an ideology of racial entitlement or were you indoctrinated with it later in life.
Similar to the spat of threads on how the US’s invasion of Iraq was illegal (and how did we American’s feel about living in an illegal country, blah blah blah). Maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t…since there seems to be no mechanism to enforce ‘international law’, it’s really just a meaningless term thrown out to score points when it happens to favor whatever position you are trying to score points on. Other than that it’s a lot of hot air.
Personally, I think that the Israeli’s fucked up by not annexing all that territory from the start…it would have settled a lot of the issues now cropping up. For various reasons they chose not to do so, and now they are trying to do it through the backdoor, which is probably not a wise move in the long run, not if they actually want to try for peace in the region.
I can feel it in the air though…that sense of pile on. I LOVE the smell of pile on in the morning! It smells like…The Straight Dope…
-XT
What right would Israel have had to do annex that land from the start?
In the OP you say you did not move for the purpose of making a statement, but you are making a statement nonetheless.
What statement do you feel you are making? (Or alternately, do you mean that others are reading a statement into what you are doing?)
Did you consciously weigh up whether this was a right thing to do?
Have you stopped beating your wife yet?
ahem
Conquest. They obtained those lands during armed conflict, and they could have simply annexed them. I doubt Jordan or Syria would have disputed such an annexation…in fact, IIRC Jordan relinquished it’s claim to the lands it lost (granted, not to Israel, but that is just a technicality). Israel COULD have done it had they chosen to do so and pay the initial political costs it would have entailed. It would have been painful, but by now it would be a done deal. Instead, they have kept up an occupation that has gone on for decades, a sort of quasi-annexation that has no legal standing, and has just caused the whole thing to fester away.
-XT
Do you get a religious rush out of being unpopular and criticized? Is that why you started this thread? So that you feel better about a morally dubious decision by being piled on by outraged people?
I ask because I come from a religion that very much relishes being “persecuted” and uses it to cement the believers in place.
Does this count as sneak bragging?
It was stolen from them.
This is not a valid criticism of my question. The OP’s belief in racial entitlement is already established.
This is about the lamest excuse possible. Everybody is living on land that was stolen at some point. The entire United States was stolen, and stolen a lot more recently than the Romans took Israel. Do you support he rights of American Indians to take it all back by force? Does everybody get to go take back land that their ancestors lived on 2000 years ago? What a crock of shit.
I only have girls, so they are not required to serve in the military. As of now, my oldest is in midrasha (a post-high school seminary) where she will study for up to a year. Then, she will be in the army for two years, followed by some more study, followed by university.
My middle daughter is a HS senior; she will do sheerut leumi (national service) next year instead of the army. My youngest has a few years left to decide what she wants to do.
I’m as concerned as any other parent that would have a child entering the military.
There is no such thing as a right of conquest. That’s patently ridiculous. Just because you can take something by force doesn’t mean you have a right to.
By your own logic, though, if the Arab world is able to conquer Israel, you would support and recognize their sovereign right to the land, right? Might makes right. Also, if I can break into your house, and kick you out and claim it for my own, that makes it my house, right? Right of conquest. Get out of my yard.
What right does France have to Strasbourg? What right does Poland have to Danzig? What right does (North) Vietnam have to Saigon? What right does the U.S. have to Texas?
Maps are drawn by wars. You’re allowed think that they shouldn’t be; you’re allowed to think that they aren’t anymore - although in the latter case, you’d be obliged to explain why the cutoff date was before 1967.
Personally, I don’t think anyone would give a shit about what I thought if that happened.
You’re so adorable when you ignore 6,000 years of history. Yes, you are! Yes, you are!
By those standards, then everybody has a right to steal whatever they want at any time.
Show me anything in international law that recognizes a “right of conquest.”
They would have even bigger issues. Because if they made the Palestinians citizens there would be an Arab majority, and it would be very hard to find a justification for not doing it.
I suspect the Israelis initially thought they could force the Arabs to the peace table with the territories as a bargaining chip (& perhaps hang on to some in the end as well). But the Arabs had time, and then the settlers messed it up for them, and that’s where they are today.
There’s no easy way out.
It’s a rhetorical question. I’m asking if you would hold the same line cosnsistently, or if you only want to use it when it’s convenient to you. Do Arabs have a right of conquest too, or only Jews?