What Does Support For Israel Really Mean?

[Wouldhe]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

Quite so Nola. I'd venture that there is not one of us reading this thread, NOT ONE OF US, that would not do exactly as the Palestinians are doing.

I agree! If some country had invaded and stole my land, demolished my house and left me to starve in some camp, I think you might be calling me a 'terrorist' too. The irony is that the actions of Israel are no different to what the settlers did to the native Americans and the response from the Palestinians is no different to how the American Indians responded...yet most Americans see it as 'different' some how.

I wonder if the present critics of the Palestinians, would consider the 'French Resistance' attacks against the invading German army in the 1940s as 'Terrorism' in the same way that they consider the Hamas attacks against the invading Israeli army as 'Terrorism'? There are an awful lot of Americans that tend to overlook the fact that the USA have certainly not been averse to getting into bed with 'terrorist' if it will benefit them. The Iran-Contra affair springs to mind, not forgetting the installation and upkeep of bin Laden. When Bin Laden was fighting the Russians, America saw him as a 'freedom fighter'. When he turned around and did the same to America, he suddenly became a 'terrorist'.

Yep...and then whining because they got stung!

So Plad, here we are approaching 2013 and this dilemma exists still. What would you propose to do to fix it. I don't think giving back the land would be an option.

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by Wouldhe

I don't think giving back the land would be an option.

Why not old boy? The land doesn't belong to them - are they to profit from theft?

[hrdguera]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

Why not old boy? The land doesn't belong to them - are they to profit from theft?

And who says it belongs to the Palestinians?
Just saying. How did they get it?

Now, I say that in full recognition of the feelings, and the quote by Mahatma Gandhi:

“Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs…Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home.” - Mahatma Gandhi

Still, by that philosophy, as Wouldhe says, should we give America back to Native Americans? Or the English?? Should you agree to give Spain back to the Romans? (Remember my ancestor, El Cid?)

There was a general feeling, pretty much held by all Americans during our history that simply holding the land, fallow, did not entitle one to ownership. The prevalent "Protestant Work Ethic" combined with "Manifest Destiny" seemed to "give" the settlers the "right" to simply take the land and make it theirs by making it productive. I'm not sure I agree with that 100% but the fact remains that is pretty much what we as a people believed and that is factual in what happened. To many, it was a "sin" to simply have possession of the soil without making it productive (and using it to feed the hungry and needy).

There is a sense of logic to that and our municipalities and governments still practice that today when they "condemn and seize" a property from its rightful owners for "eminent domain." And that has been upheld by the courts of our land as beneficial to the public good. It happens even to this today and can be done legally by almost any governmental body. Sure, some compensation is required but when the "lawful owner" doesn't comply; then it is simply seized by the governmental authorities. This is done almost universally, and not just in Centralized Governmental countries (Socialist and communist).
The basis for this seems to be something along the order of "the greatest good for the greatest number (or the great government).

[Morbidus]

I have been thinking about this over the weekend. I am quite aware that most of America won't agree with me, but I see it this way by this illustration:

You live in a quiet little neighborhood. There are two neighbors on your quiet little street. In one house live a family. In the next house lives another family where they just recently moved in. It turns out that these neighbors don't like each other very much-maybe one of them curses and binge drinnks every weekend. Whatever. Anyway, the one neighbor has decided to put up a fence-only it seems that the property line is in dispute and the fence "may" have been moved on the other neighbor's property line. So they fight and feud and go into court-and it turns out that the court has ruled against them. So fine. But it seems everytime the other neighbor looks out his back window-mysteriously at night the "fence" seems to be moving closer and closer until finally it is closing in up against their back door. Well now, what to do? They've already lost in the courts. They could call the Sheriff but it seems the other neighbor runs a political machine that just got the Sheriff elected and if they start any trouble the Sheriff will arrest them.

So, stopping here (which is exactly where we are) we have to conclude that regardless of the issues it seems that one of the parties feels disgrutled and frustrated. I suppose that some feel they should simply pick up and move to another neighborhood. What would you do?

[Morbidus]

I love "El Cid". "CAN A MAN LIVE WITHOUT HONOR"?

[Morbidus]

Originally Posted by hrdguera

And who says it belongs to the Palestinians?
Just saying. How did they get it?

Now, I say that in full recognition of the feelings, and the quote by Mahatma Gandhi:

"I don't have sex with the females but I only climb in bed with them to keep warm."

"In that case Sahib, there is no reason that you can't sleep with me." Said his apostle.

[hrdguera]

Originally Posted by Morbidus

I have been thinking about this over the weekend. I am quite aware that most of America won't agree with me, but I see it this way by this illustration:

You live in a quiet little neighborhood. There are two neighbors on your quiet little street. In one house live a family. In the next house lives another family where they just recently moved in. It turns out that these neighbors don't like each other very much-maybe one of them curses and binge drinnks every weekend. Whatever. Anyway, the one neighbor has decided to put up a fence-only it seems that the property line is in dispute and the fence "may" have been moved on the other neighbor's property line. So they fight and feud and go into court-and it turns out that the court has ruled against them. So fine. But it seems everytime the other neighbor looks out his back window-mysteriously at night the "fence" seems to be moving closer and closer until finally it is closing in up against their back door. Well now, what to do? They've already lost in the courts. They could call the Sheriff but it seems the other neighbor runs a political machine that just got the Sheriff elected and if they start any trouble the Sheriff will arrest them.

So, stopping here (which is exactly where we are) we have to conclude that regardless of the issues it seems that one of the parties feels disgrutled and frustrated. I suppose that some feel they should simply pick up and move to another neighborhood. What would you do?

Well, that is a very good question.
What would I do?
I would simply "Black-Ops" them out of the neighborhood without any physical harm to them. (This is jest)
There are so many options here:
Their unmarried daughters end up pregnant.
Their pets run off.
Their grass dies.
Their roof leaks.
Their plumbing corrodes.
Their tires are always flat.
They think they have ghosts.
Their toaster makes facsimiles of famous religious leaders or demons (which ever scares them more).
Their trees die.
Their phone lines keep dying.
Their water tastes bad.
They see strange lights at night.
They hear strange noises at night when they are trying to sleep.

You get the idea.
......

Then you start on their allies, like the Sheriff, etc..


Just kidding. This was just for Max.

[hrdguera]

Originally Posted by Morbidus

"I don't have sex with the females but I only climb in bed with them to keep warm."

"In that case Sahib, there is no reason that you can't sleep with me." Said his apostle.

One of the best lines ever!

[Stevomeo]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

All these years??? What ...45 years? Do you pay your respects on Veteran's Day bro..or do you just say 'Ah forget it. It was a long time ago. That's the way the cards fell for those guys'? Nah mate...there are some things that are so unjust that they should never be forgotten and always fought against.

You can use any country you want bro. Canada was just used as an example.

Indeed! That is what Israel did to the Palestinians.So why are the Americans justified in fighting the invasion of the USA by say...France but the Palestinians are not justified in fighting against the invasion by Israel?

...and Israel has fired thousands of hi-tech missiles at the Palestinians. Also, if one country invades and illegally occupies another, it can hardly complain when the occupied country fights back. Remember, retaliatory action against attack must not be disproportionate to the attack. Since 2000 alone, there have been over 6000 Palestinians killed. Contrast this with just over 1000 Israeli deaths. In this recent episode we have had over 80 Palestinian deaths compared to 3 Israeli deaths.

Perhaps not, but we will never know unless they do. If they gave back the occupied territory and the Palestinians continued to launch an offensive at Israel, at least Israel would have some justification in taking retaliatory action but at the moment it isn't. At the moment it is an aggressor that has invaded and occupied another country and is refusing to leave despite world opinion that it should and despite the dictates of an organization that it is a member of telling it to withdraw.

What I would like to see (beside Israel withdrawing of course) is Israel being ejected from the UN. That might start the process for peace.

I'm not saying that I agree with the actions of the Palestinians here but I am saying that I do sympathise with them. If someone kicked me out of my home, stole my land and my livelihood, I dare say I would not be averse to lobbing a few rockets at them myself.

Since 1967, 0 Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and 24,813 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel.
Israel currently has 236 Jewish-only settlements and ‘outposts’ built on confiscated (stolen) Palestinian land. Palestinians do not have any settlements on Israeli land. There are no Israelis being held prisoner by Palestinians, while 5,604 Palestinians are currently imprisoned by Israel. Add to that, the fact that the Palestinians see the world condemning Israel for it's actions yet not offering to help them with anything other than empty rhetoric and 'strongly worded statements' and is it any wonder that Palestinians feel aggrieved? As one Palestinian said...'You accuse us of terrorism. Give us the same weapons as you are giving Israel and there will be no need of terrorism'.

You can roll your eyes all you want pal but we are no longer living in a time when we can land on the beach, plant a flag and claim that country in the name of the king. Things are more civilised now and if two countries are at war, the victor cannot claim the land of the vanquished as his own. What Israel has done and is doing is politically wrong, against international law (that they have signed up to) and morally wrong. The fact that the USA and Britain is supporting it is also morally wrong.

What if you have no right to be there??? And why do you see Israel lobbing high tech bombs at the Palestinians as 'self-defence', yet when Palestinians lob bombs at Israelis, you see it as 'terrorism'?

I see no mention of Israeli terrorism there.

You are correct "we" live in a civilized world, but the middle east as a general rule does not.

When you as a country are attacked in the manner Israel has been you have a few choices. 1) Do nothing at all, bury the bodies, and repair the damage. 2) You strike back at those who are attacking you as precisely as possible and you expand your borders and create a larger buffer zone between you and your enemy. If Mexico was lobbing missiles into the US you can damn sure bet that we would enter Mexico and set up a de-militarized zone of sorts to protect our citizens from continued attacks.

Good question: Who lobbed the first missile? and thus far has lobbed over 1,300 since this skirmish began? The Palestinians.......and may I remind you that they are indiscriminate in nature unlike Israel's attempts to hit militant targets. This is how I see the line drawn between civilized nations and terrorists.

I've played "Switzerland" on this issue for many years. The reason that I lean toward the defense of Israel is not because they have won my mind and or heart. It's because the Palestinians and their Islamist ilk have proven that they are savages hell bent on destroying anyone and anything that doesn't bow to Allah. As for treatys, they are only worth the paper they are written on when one side cannot even acknowledge the existence of the other side.

[Wouldhe]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

Why not old boy? The land doesn't belong to them - are they to profit from theft?

Understood but how much land are we talking about and would it be expected that Israel just disappear? Though that may be the answer, I think about that the same way as Mexico wanting to take back the southwest U.S. It's impossible to do. The whole internal structure of a well established nation is too entrenched to just walk away and say "here yha go". Where would the Isaeli's go?

Didn't Israel give some land back a few years ago that didn't change anything? Hamas just moved their rockets into the land that was given back? There is going to have to be another solution.