Quick google search. Finding this:
Not a site I would particularly rely on but the quoted text rings true enough.
Brainglutton My point being that end of Israel as a Jewish state, while a plainly desirable outcome, does not mean: The end of Israel.
Plainly desirable to everyone except, you know, the Jews.
Tough luck for them, huh?
What makes ‘the Jews’ so special that they should have a nation committed to their religion?
Nothing, but “Jewish” is an ethnic/national identity as well as a religious one, and the modern state system is partly a result of the 19th-Century movement of nationalism, the idea that every nation should have its own state.
Most Jews live outside Israel, and while most of those have a deep emotional investment in Israel, it is not their country and its existence really is nothing to them in practical terms. Jews in America aren’t suddenly going to start being persecuted or marginalized just because they no longer have Israel to flee too. In fact, anti-semites would rather they all go to Israel.
But not at the cost of an apartheid whereby a majority of the governed people are excluded from the political process, denying them the right to self-determination. So we are back to the 1 State/ 2 State question. It is the familiar path:
- 2 State - the withdrawl of West Bank settlements to allocate resources to Palestine: or
- 1 State - expansion of the current Israeli ‘borders’ to include and enfranchise the Palestinian population.
Both rational and reasonable solutions are unacceptable to present day Israel.
If I may dare to Godwinize the thread (though I’m not sure if citing a relevant fact rather than hyperbolic analogy does so), within living memory there have been pogroms and systematic exterminations. Whether or not it happens to be in the Middle East, I can see why there is a justification for a well-defended Jewish state somewhere.
I think the Kurds deserve to carve out an autonomous state in Northern Iraq, as well. If Canada starts engaging in gas attacks on Trois-Rivieres, I guess I’ll become a separatist, too.
Let me ask - are you in favor of all the Islamic states being converted to secular countries and the abolishment of Sharia law?
Israel may be a Jewish state, but it’s a modern democracy that allows people to practice any faith they want. It allows personal practices that are abhorrent to Orthodox Jews, on the principles of political tolerance and freedom that guide other modern democracies. The Jewish religion takes a back seat to modern jurisprudence in Israeli law.
Would that the Islamic world was even half as tolerant. And yet it’s only the Jewish state that seems to be such an affront to certain types of secularists.
Well if the reason be historical, let the nation be history too.
There a few bigger fans of an autonomous Kurdistan than I. In fact the need is much greater than for either Israel at any time, or Palestine now. There are 30 million Kurds you know. The ill-dealing they have suffered at the hands of the UK and the US is astounding. However, it is not an issue where the giant engines of disinformation are in play, or correspondingly the need for gentle correction of opinions is present.
As much should be evident from the principles I have advanced. However, I’m not sure there are many or indeed any states which observe Sharia Law. That said, if democracy produces Sharia Law, I’m not sure it is for me to argue.
It is not the religiosity per se. It is the apartheid, excluding the conquered/governed people from the political process - because they do not conform to the particular ethnicity.
True. WRT 2, it is unacceptable to the Israelis at least party because the Israelis don’t trust the Palestinians, once they’ve been granted independence, to give up the fight to drive the Jews into the sea and take over all of Canaan.* And with an open border to Jordan, no longer patrolled by the IDF, the Palestinians would be in a better position to build up their strength and prepare for the next war. I personally think the Israelis would have little to fear from a fully independent Palestine, as I’ve explained in other threads, but I can at least understand the Israelis’ POV on this point. They have been surrounded by enemy states and fighting for their very survival as a nation at all times since before the state of Israel even was founded.
Also, even if the Israelis pull out of the OTs mostly, they still don’t want to withdraw west of the Green Line, because that would require evacuating their West Bank settlements – an idea almost politically impossible to sell in Israel, as I understand it; which is why they’re building their Wall well to the East of the Green Line and, in the process, appropriating a lot of the best territory.
*The most neutral name for the country – and IMO the one to be preferred when discussing all the territory between the Mediterranean and the Jordan.
Even though renouncing the West Bank settlements is the right thing to do. And as you note, ‘appropriating’ * the best territory, the wrong.
Noted.
*stealing.
In any case, let’s try to remember that the purpose of this thread is supposed to be to explain the crisis, not to justify or condemn any party’s actions.
I’m dreaming, aren’t I?
It’s not that historical. There are survivors still milling about and the destructive social movements that climaxed in WW2 didn’t evaporate in 1945.
At any time? We’ll have to disagree on that, since the need was pretty dire in, say, 1939. It would have been nice if the ~950 passengers of the SS Saint Louis had had a guaranteed safe destination.
Let’s not forget, y’know, Iraq. 
Sorry, BrainGlutton.
But in the MENA, they never happened in the first place.
I think you will find that many jewsdo not like the idea of a jewish state.
Yes, you’re right. Obviously Jews aren’t safe in Europe (with its history) but they are safe in the Middle East (which lacks that same history). Clearly, every European Jew should go to Israel immediately.
Facetiousness aside, I personally prefer the idea of Israeli-built schools (including trade schools) in the surrounding areas aimed mostly at educating and empowering women. It could end up surrounding Israel with a buffer zone of Arabs who have something to protect and are less likely swayed by demagogues. Then you give property owners M-16s and tell them that if they don’t want Israel to (in its own defense) blow up their date orchard, they should shoot any Hezbollah thug who thinks it’d be cool to launch rockets into Israel from the back 40.
Not a perfect solution, to be sure, but I find the image satisfying. 
Sevastopol, I do have to say that I find your scenario a little disingenous. Israel is currently approximately 80% Jewish and 20% Muslim - obviously the culture is going to be slanted towards the majority religion (the same that the United States is slanted towards Christianity and Egypt is slanted towards Islam and Japan is slanted towards Buddhism). But I feel that the Muslims in Israel is doing reasonably well for a minority population. Do you honestly believe that if the numbers were reversed and the country had a population was 80% Muslim and 20% Jewish that the Jewish minority would be treated as well?
Doesn’t that happen in every other state in the region, regardless of ethnicity? If anything, Israeli Arabs have it better than most.
I mean, if defending democracy is your goal, shouldn’t you create a list of all the nations in the Middle East and rate them according to the number of abuses, and act accordingly?
Just curious, as always.
Well, this thread has been very interesting. It’s a bit comforting to know that even people who know a whole lot more about what’s going on…don’t really know what’s going on 
Will have to do a bit more reading. One more question - Isreal and the US are supposed to be allies - why? What’s in it for the US?