Oh, good then, since that’s not even a distant parallel to Israel, you’ll retract your earlier statements.
My United Empire Loyalist ancestors, who oddly enough did NOT strap gunpowder grenades on their kiddies to blow up Yanks, or set up cannon on this side of the Niagra River to randomly shell American cities, posthumously pronounce this ‘the most historically inept analogy EVAH!’ 
Yeah, but I don’t see you giving any of it back, huh?
No one is suggesting that Israel should either. What I am suggesting is that there were some shenanigans in the formation of Israel, and it certainly can’t be classified as mostly honorable. The point of Jewish immigration was to establish a Jewish state in Palestine, which necessitated the removal or marginalization of the existing population, just as American expansion required the same thing. It was wrong when the American settlers did it, and it was wrong when the Jewish settlers did it.
Thieves don’t give stuff back unless they are forced to.
Actually that is a mythic narrative.
Yes, it was to establish a homeland in the region, but it did not necessitate the removal or marginalization of an extant population. The extant Arab population was not huge (albeit significantly larger than the Jewish one) and the (perhaps naive) concept was that the economic boon that Jewish immigration brought would be welcomed by them as it significantly raised their standard of living from what it was and from what Arab stadard of living was in surrounding areas. In fact Jewish immigration provoked significant Arab immigration into the region and specifically into areas that Jews were immigrating into. It was where the jobs were as a consequence of Jewish investment. Problems began in that Jews still got the better jobs in these new investments which fostered a resentment, which was then exploited by certain Arab politicians into anti-Jewish riots, and tit-fot-tats after that, which grew until we get to today.
Cites for all of this have been provided in multiple past threads and can be provided again if you really want.
Yeah, not unless someone was describing the situation accurately.
Nope, you’re just inventing that because it makes your argument a bit tenable. The fact that it bears no relationship with reality should be a good clue, however, as to the validity of your argument.
The partition plan, which was agreed to by the proto-Israelis, would have seen the local Arab populace keeping their property rights and given full citizenship. There was no “necessity” of removing anybody. There was no plan, other than Plan D and limited engagements during '48 which was forced by military necessity. The fact that even today 20% of Israel’s populace is not Jewish should give you a good clue as to the nature of your invented “necessity of removal”. There was also no plan for “marginalization”, whatever you’re using that weasel word to mean, exactly. Evidently though it really is Double Standard Theater. The existence of numerous Arab states is just fine, but when Jews do it, it “necessitates” removal of the native populace and their “marginalization”, evidently by allowing them to hold full property rights, citizenship and run for elected office.
When you find your position is based on myths, don’t be surprised when your conclusion is mythical.
Edit Damn, didn’t see DS’s post when I previewed a few minutes ago. Still, not going to edit anything out. These sorts of debates are never served by creative myth-making, and they’d be greatly improved if people would stick to facts instead of inventing them to fit their narratives.
If terrorists living in Miami started lobbing rockets at Fort Lauderdale, would the US government take the same approach that Israel has taken to stop it? Knowing that people can’t escape the area because of border restrictions? Knowing that only a very small number of people are actually doing anything wrong?
I know the US has done some bad things, but I can’t imagine us knowingly dropping a bomb on our Granny’s retirement home because we suspect a terrorist is shooting rockets from the roof. I don’t know what we would do, but I don’t think we’d do that.
No, America generally drops bombs on other people’s grannies’ retirement homes.
I mean, how is your analogy any way relevant? Miami and Ft. Lauderdale are the same country! Israel and Gaza are not!
How exactly did they plan on creating a homeland without removing or marginalizing the extant population? I mean, there was a majority of Palestinians on the land that the Jews wanted to create Israel on. The only way to get a Jewish dominated state is to either push the existing population off the land, or dilute their numbers enough to make them a minority.
I don’t really see the relevance of this.
Heh, and I thought the anaology in the OP was the worst ever. Turns out I was wrong.
There is nothing to puzzle out, FinnAgain. You’ve stated that there is a gap in U.S missile defense and that the government cannot derail these rockets with any type of reliable efficacy. If there is a gap like you say there is, why haven’t al-Quaeda used these rockets against America? Indeed, much of the Canadian border is unpatrolled; the U.S-Mexico border is riddled with smuggling tunnels and
trailblazed paths that have allowed millions of illegals to flow from Mexico to America. Our borders are likely *less * secure than Israel’s.
Like white phosphorous and cluster bombs, right?
Thats because the Iron Dome system was designed to defend against missiles 4 kilometers away. If the system is ineffective against missiles shot from closer range, then Israel’s next move should be clear: Improve Iron Dome or build a system to accentuate the shield’s defensive capabilities.
- Honesty
The original intention was not to create an independent nation - that, in the beginning of Zionism, would have been considered hopelessly ambitious - but rather, to create a “homeland” within a larger, imperial structure (first Turkish, and then after WW1, British).
It is a terrible anacronism to reason backwards from the creation of the state of Israel and assume that everything the Zionists did was part of their cunning plan to that end. The notion of a handful of Jewish refugees from Eastern Europe planning to take on the Turkish Empire is, well, absurd.
Gaza is a country now?
If we wouldn’t treat our own civilians like that, then why would it be reasonable for us to treat another civilian population like that? If there are ways to stop terrorists that don’t require 1000 innocent lives lost, then why not use them?
I’m just not buying the argument that Israel’s actions in the latest affair are reasonable, given what’s been dealt to them. Ya’ll have every right to stop Hamas. But if you’re going to take the “by every means necessary” approach, then you can’t be surprised when the other side shares the same philosophy.
Are you really of the opinion that Islamicist terrorists can set up shop in (say) Niagara or Windsor to fire missiles into America without us Canadians noticing, or doing anything about it? :dubious:
Maybe if they were fired into Detroit, no-one would notice … 
If you know the way to stop Hamas without civilan casualties, please share.
And yes, I know the US bombs the crap out of someone else’s grandmother’s retirement homes. That doesn’t justify the actions of Israel, Hamas, and anyone else. It just means we all suck.
I’m so sick of this fighting and irrational hatred and nonsensical justifications and bullshit hand-wringing and ridiculous absolutism. None of it makes sense to me. I can’t even get the straight dope on the history of this conflict, because it’s so full of ideological bullshit from every direction. It all just makes me wish for a giant nuclear bomb to wipe everyone out. It makes me hate everyone and everything.
If terrorists in Miami were lobbing rockets at Fort Lauderdale and the local governments were ineffective at stopping them, what would the federal government do?
I don’t think they can set up “shop” and attack America from the otherside of the border. It does, however, strike me as bizarre that there hasn’t been one rocket attack from any al-Queda operative from across our boders given the paucity of patrolmen on our borders (especially the Canadian side) combined with the immensity of the U.S border. I am of the opinion that there is no gap in missile defense as FinnAgain purports otherwise the terrorists would have exploited it by now. I am also of the opinion that a terrorist is likely to pass through Canadian or Mexican customs than the U.S. Especially the latter.
<sigh> Ain’t that the truth. We blame Kwame for all things that are ill with the city.
- Honesty
Wait.
Do you honestly believe that the entire U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders, several thousands of miles in all, are covered by hundreds, even thousands of anti-missile laser batteries that none of us have ever heard of?
Really?
Sure about that?