Strong words for Israel

[MagisterCultuum]

Israstine FTW

I too would prefer a one state solution (preferably with the abolition of any official recognition of any political parties, the move to range voting, extremely open immigration regardless of religion or ethnicity, and citizenship that is never automatic but requires a contract with informed consent), but that name is terrible. Not only does it sound stupid, but I'm pretty sure it could be roughly translated as meaning "Land of Strife." It simply takes God out of the name of Israel ("he that striveth with God") and replaces it with a standard Latin based ending for place names that has no real reference to the Palestinian or Philistine peoples.


Most Palestinians believe they are descendants of Esau, making them closer relatives f the Jews than are other Arabs who just believe themselves to be descendants of Ishmael. How about we name their common county Isaac. Not only is that the name of their closest etiological ancestor, but it means "laughter" which I imagine would be a common response to my suggestions.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

So if might makes right, then why is Israel's seizure of Arab lands legal, but the communist seizure of mainland China not?

 

[bhsup]

I didn't say "might makes right". I guess it should be word as "getting attacked and taking land from your attackers makes right"

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I didn't say "might makes right". I guess it should be word as "getting attacked and taking land from your attackers makes right"

That sounds like vengeance, not justice. It would be Just to restore your old borders and perhaps to beat the snot out of their army, but by taking their land also, you're claiming to right one wrong by committing another wrong. It should be plainly clear how that creates a never-ending circle of conflict.

 

[Ahmad]

I didn't say "might makes right". I guess it should be word as "getting attacked and taking land from your attackers makes right"

Unless of course, 'your attackers' are trying to take back the lands you took from them in the first place.

 

[bhsup]

Unless they can claim to be Canaanites, the Israelites were there first. Modern Israel just resumed it's place in the world.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

So would you support a great exodus of Native Americans to their ancestral lands across the United States, displacing whomever they wish in their quest to rebuild their long-lost homeland? Would you give your house up so people who haven't lived there in centuries can reclaim it as theirs?

Why are your private property rights inviolable, but Arab private property rights are not?

 

[bhsup]

Because they're the chosen people of God (Israelites, not the others)

 

[Ahmad]

Unless they can claim to be Canaanites, the Israelites were there first. Modern Israel just resumed it's place in the world.

You're talking ancient history and I'm talking about actual people, many of whom are still alive today and have lost their homes to Israel.

Arguments based on ancient history are just as irrelevant as arguments based on ideology. Please try to stick to rational arguments.

 

[Ahmad]

Because they're the chosen people of God (Israelites, not the others)

Hello ideology, goodbye rationality. No point in further discussion

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Because they're the chosen people of God (Israelites, not the others)

So then you acknowledge that natural law is subordinate to the word of God?

 

[bhsup]

I am acknowledging that the Israelites are the chosen people of God and he gave them that land.

Actually, he gave them a crapton more than that, but I'm being pragmatic about it and not insisting they get the whole thing from the Nile to the Euphrates.

 

[fugazi]

Unless they can claim to be Canaanites, the Israelites were there first. Modern Israel just resumed it's place in the world.

You probably have no idea how scary that sentence is to anyone sane of mind..

 

[Ahmad]

I am acknowledging that the Israelites are the chosen people of God and he gave them that land.

Did he provide them with a receipt?

Actually, he gave them a crapton more than that, but I'm being pragmatic about it and not insisting they get the whole thing from the Nile to the Euphrates.

Thank you for not insisting that hundreds of millions of Arabs be kicked out of their homes in Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq because God already gave all that land to the Jews. That's very... pragmatic... of you.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Did he provide them with a receipt?

Yeah. The Old Testament of the Bible.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I am acknowledging that the Israelites are the chosen people of God and he gave them that land.

A holy war is a just war eh infidel?

 

[G-Man]

You mean like the charter that created the state said it couldn't do? And the body that created it said was illegal and has repeatedly demanded it give back?

With all due respect to the UN division plan, it had no effect on the ground. Israel exists not because of this plan, but because thousands of Israelis died in our war of independance to stop the Arab invasion.




Also, I want to comment on a few other issues people have brought up:
- The one state solution - I really don't see any advantage to it. Jews want a Jewish country, Palestinians want a Palestinian country. The two cultures aren't similar and the two people are bitter enemies. It would be like creating a worst version of Iraq or Lebanon - an artificial country whose borders have nothing to do with the nationalities who live in it, which doesn't really have a coherent culture and in which the populations will fight each other. In other words - violence will get much worst while no side will be happy with its country.
- Who the land belongs to - unlike VRWCAgent, I take a secular view. I believe that land division can't be based only on historical justice, but should focus on the current realities on the ground. This is true not just for Israel, but for dozens of other countries whose population today isn't the same that it was in older times (and that includes most if not of europe). The problem is that the UN works not based on justice or logic, but on popular vote, which is hardly the way just or effective solutions can be achieved. This is why there are villages cut in their middle by borders (like rajar) and this is why, for example, Um al fahem is considered Israel despite being a large Arab city, while a large part of the Jordan valley has only Israelis living in it but isn't considered Israeli.
- The division of Jerusalem - Israel already made several proposals which included the division of Jerusalem, the most recent was made by PM Olmert. It's true that these plans weren't brought for a public decision (because the Palestinians rejected them), but Olmert's party did get the most votes in the last elections, which is as close as it gets to supporting his plans in a parliamentry democracy.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I am acknowledging that the Israelites are the chosen people of God and he gave them that land.

Actually, he gave them a crapton more than that, but I'm being pragmatic about it and not insisting they get the whole thing from the Nile to the Euphrates.

That stretch of land was promised to the children of Abraham, which includes the children of Esau (Idumeans, from whom most Palestinians in the West Bank are likely descendants), and of Ishmael (most Arabs), not only the descendants of Jacob. The land given specifically to the children of Israel was somewhat smaller. It did include the West Bank, some of Jordan (although the ancient Israelites did take some land in Jordan which they had not been told to take), and a little of Lebanon, but not Gaza or much of the Negev.

Abraham also allowed Lot to choose what land he wanted, which could be interpreted as ceding part of his divine land grant to the people of Moab and Ammon. Many inhabitants of the West Bank, Golan Heights, and Jordan are likely descended from these groups.

In the broader holy land the only people I can think of that have no claim to being descendants and heirs of Abraham are the inhabitants of Gaza. Muslims generally hold that this group is the remnant of a particularly wicked and barbaric tribe of ancient nomads that have been harassing God's people since the days of Abraham.

 

[G-Man]

Idumeans, from whom most Palestinians in the West Bank are likely descendants

That's just not true. Palestinians aren't different from the other Arabs in this issue, and Arabs first came to this land from the Arabian peninsula with the muslim conquest. Also, most of the people who are considered Palestinian today are decendants of Arabs who immigrated to this land around the beginning of the 20th century, mostly from Egypt.

Also, while I'm not religious, if you go by the bible, the land was promised first to Abraham, but then again to Jacob, who was the son of Isaac (Genesis 28:13), implying that it was promised only to the decendants of Isaac.

 

[Cutlass]

You guys mean like it was before Israel was attacked multiple times and had to defend itself, capturing territory in the process?

If they refuse to have peace and keep taking property from others, then the only result in the long run is all Israelis dead. You see, the difference is that if we took Alberta, we wouldn't expel the population. We would incorporate them into the US. What they are doing is expelling people from the homes their families have inhabited for centuries.