:dubious: Bolding mine.You do realize there is a large middle ground between being Israel’s unpaid guardian angel and nuking it into glass, don’t you ?
Or, I can oppose the policies of whatever government happens to be in power, and feel nothing in particular about the people.
You are confusing what did happen with what the neocons thought was going to happen. Iraq was supposed to instantly forgive any and all casualties, damage and atrocities we commited in the process of “freeing” them; embrace right wing American style capitalism; and become a shining beacon of peace, democracy and prosperity.
But if it’s a gov’t elected through a democratic process by the people it governs then it is exercising the will of it’s people. No?
If it is true that people and nations act in their own best interest, why do you insist that the US support of Israel is not in America’s best interest?
Much like Kurdistan doesn’t exist as a state, yet it’s people are the largest? Stateless people in the World.
Yet the OP’s article simply gives people a simplistic and downright generalised assessment of ‘who’s influencing who’ in the shape of World politics, and squarely points it at the ‘Jews’ since they’re possibly the only ones who’d be interested in security matters of the Middle East :rolleyes: So it gives the reader the impression of this ‘oh, it’s their fault, not ours, since we’re powerless against the Jewish lobby’
I don’t think Israels founding is the problem, it’s the Palestinians refusal to accept a two state solution as much as the Israelis want it that is keeping this conflict going, that and Palestinian militantcy being unchecked and unable to be reined in as such by the PA.
I personally have no problem with Western States and the US in particular supporting the State of Israel, abandoning or shunning this country because of its ethnic identity+Democracy is morally wrong. Sure, you can condemn Human rights abuses by their armed forces or question certain policies directed against the Palestinians, however keep in mind what they’re up against, and the reasons as to why they’ve denied PA statehood for this long. Because in this thread, I’m getting the impression certain posters think Israel = Bad, Palestine = Good.
Is it just my opinion, or would it take some of the heat off of the US if more nations felt that way? I have no objection to the US being Israel’s ally; I just wish Israel had more allies. In a small, sad way, it’s like being the only friend of the office psychopath.
Well, that relates to the OP – one reason the U.S. supports Israel is that we have a lot of Jews here. Since the Holocaust, more than any other country on Earth. I think there are more Jews in New York City alone than in the whole of Israel. And they vote. I doubt there’s a Jewish vote of such importance in any other democracy (apart from Israel).
Not at all. By that line of thinking, anything can be justified, no matter how wrong it is. If anything, Israel should hold itself to a higher standard of conduct for one simple reason… They themselves were the victims of horrible abuses not too long ago (World War 2 anyone?). “Never again”. Remember that phrase? It should apply equally to them. No excuses, no slack.
The majority of Israeli people want a two state solution, however due to the Palestinian reluctance to adhere to any agreements establishing this, I don’t see why it’s a problem Israelis use the territory they occupy to solidify their position in the West Bank. However even this is untenable, considering the proposals Olmert has set forward which includes a return to the 1967 borders and maintaining a presence at the Jordanian border, with or without Palesitnian approval.
The Jewish people have been persecuted by nearly every major religious group for millenia. Also take into consideration the position the Israelis are in, surrounded by hostile Arab states who actively fund and support the destruction of their people, not counting the fact their is an Islamist govenment in the Gaza Strip and West Bank stating they want to obliterate Israel. Like I said criticism is fine, boycotting the Israelis because they somehow live in an ‘illegitimate’ state is yet again persecuting them ignoring the other side.
:rolleyes: Of course it’s a problem. It’s the problem. It’s what makes the whole situation intractable. What to do with all those settlers?
If Palestine is to be an independent state, Israel has absolutely no business patrolling its borders with Jordan.
Nor the Gaza Strip’s border with Egypt. (The Israelis still control that, don’t they?)
That is not true. Muslims did not start persecuting Jews until Israel was founded. (And, of course, Hindus and Buddhists are also major religious groups and have never persecuted, or taken much notice of, Jews.)
That article contradicts nothing I have said in this thread or any other.
If this were really Olmert’s policy, that would definitely be a good thing and a major step forward towards a two-state solution. But AFAICT, the new Kadina government is working on a plan for what has been described as an “Israeli Ulster”, where a significant portion of the West Bank (nearly one-tenth) will be claimed as Israeli territory, and the unilaterally determined borders of Israel will follow the new barrier wall rather than the original 1967 borders. Several long spurs of Israel-claimed territory will allow continued Israeli control of access between Palestinian regions.
Return to the 1967 (pre-war) borders, which would allow for a larger and more consolidated Palestine with more fertile land and water sources plus control of East Jerusalem, would be a territorial division that IMHO no reasonable Palestinian could object to. However, so far I’m pretty skeptical that Olmert actually has any such thing in mind.
There was Muslim persecution of Jews before the founding of Israel. There was, of course, anti-Jewish rioting in the '30s and '40s and the Hebron massacre of 1929, but even before the 20th century, there was a bunch of anti-Jewish violence, not to mention anti-dhimmi laws, which were sometimes very bad.
The settlers can be brought back into Israel proper, it’s not difficult even though there’s hundreds of thousands of them.
No it doesn’t, Israel has to have certain gurantees that it’s independence and sovereignty won’t be compromised by an independent Palestinian state which controls the border to Jordan, since these guarantees aren’t possible, it’s only acceptable the Israelis control the West Bank border with Jordan.
Well since Palesitnian security forces aren’t always competent to stop arms shipments or corruption, things which threaten Israeli and Palestinian lives alike.
Oh they persecuted plenty of Jews, they just didn’t persecuted them on the scale of bigotry they do today, I mean God forbid Jewish people having a state of their own, especially within the Middle East. Places of worship, participating in government and law, were forbidden. Hindus and Buddhists haven’t had major Jewish popultions to deal with, plus their religions are distinctly different from those of the major monotheistic religions in the West.
1 tenth? So that culiminates in some border claims near the West bank, a strip of land next to Jordan for security purposes and East Jerusalem, I don’t see a problem with this, considering the Palestinian government/s have been largely inept of producing anything resembling an effective state which would keep the peace.
Only time will tell, Abbas may have a few tricks left up his sleeve yet.
This I’m not so sure about. There have been a lot of territorial claims over the years based on Israel’s assertions of paramount, permanent, non-negotiable security requirements, some of which turned out to be more flexible than they originally seemed.
For example, I can remember when many Israel supporters were claiming that Israel would never be able to relinquish the Gaza Strip because it was unacceptable for security reasons to have Palestinians controlling its border with Egypt. But then Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip. I also remember the same sort of thing being said about never relinquishing control over any part of the Golan Heights; however, during the 1999-2000 negotiations, Israel actually offered to recognize Syria’s claim to most of the territory.
So I’m a bit skeptical about claims that Israel’s survival and security absolutely mandates maintaining permanent control over any border area beyond its own internationally recognized territory. Such claims on Israel’s part might be sincere, or they might just be attempts to raise the value of the bargaining chip.
Okay, but the issue here is not really whether you see a problem with this, but whether the Palestinians see a problem with this.
Sacrificing one-tenth of Palestinian territory, fragmentation of the remaining 9/10 into insecurely connected regions, loss of water sources and fertile land, and abandoning East Jerusalem may seem like comparatively trivial issues to you, but a lot of Palestinians don’t see them that way. Especially if the decisions about them are not negotiated but unilaterally imposed.
I agree that Palestinians ought to be doing a better job of maintaining peace and good governance, but I don’t think it’s going to be constructive to say to them, in effect, “Israel is in charge of determining whether you are meeting adequate standards of functionality, and if they decide you don’t meet those standards then they can penalize you however they see fit.”
That’s like playing a soccer match where one team not only gets to be the referee but also gets to write the rule book.
Assuming they cooperate; from what I’ve heard, many are outright fanatics. Not to mention the political problems of using force to take Israelis from their home instead of Palestinians.
And an independent Palestinian state doesn’t have to have such guarantees ?
I know dhimmis were always second-class citizens in Islamic societies – but that included Christians and Zorastrians; it wasn’t specifically anti-Jewish. And Jews, like Christians, were allowed to live among Muslims and practice their religion, so long as their synagogue was not taller than the town mosque. As I understand it, Muslims generally did not hate Jews because they had no reason to; Jews were history’s losers, and had been since the founding of Islam. (Mohammed did, on one occasion, exterminate three Jewish tribes who had rebelled against his rule, down to the last child, but that was routine in his time and place; exterminating a defeated tribe was the only way to forestall a multigenerational blood feud.) It was only when a strong new Jewish state was founded on what Muslims considered the indefeasible territory of Dar al-Islam that Muslims started having a serious problem with the Jews.
Look at the recent evacuation of the Gaza settlements. Multiply all that tumult by a hundred or more, and add in resistance by diehards who will utterly refuse to leave their homes unless forced at gunpoint.
Wait a minute. Why would Palestine controlling its own border with Jordan be a threat to Israel’s sovereignty? And how can Palestine truly be independent if it has no borders Israel does not control?
It’s not big deal, if Israel wants to remove them it will. It’s the same thing as Gaza times ten.
Nope, Palestine is the victim of victors justice, it’s in no position to enact terms on the Israelis in any way whatsoever, and it’s mainly their own fault for getting themselves in such a bad position as they’re in now.
Persecution in all forms is wrong, don’t bother with the semantics.
Still persecution, still second class status.
Some Muslims believe that the Qu’ran instructs them ‘beware of the Jews’ I don’t know the specifics, but it does add to the general disdain of the Jews by Muslims in the Middle East.
Then that shows a very bigoted and narrow minded view some of them have in terms of allowing compromise for both states to survive. Palestinian Arabs could of had their own state alongside the Israelis with considerably more territory than they had now, but they rejected, and thus brought on one of the longest wars in history.