Israel / Lebanon.

[Dr. Dilznick]

Gillette is a trip.

The creation of Israel came about as a result of the massive migration there, not the other way around. Regardless, there is no set, defined manner to create a nation and set borders. It normally happens through war and bloodshed. If we were to fall back to that tried and true method, Israel would be a bit larger than it is currently. No Palestinian state was destroyed to create Israel, and much of the land that became Israel was owned by Jewish settlers anyhow.

 

[Snakebyte]

Backing the arabs just because israel treatens arabs etc like shit.

btw in lebanon muslims, jews and christians live peacefully together. And fucking Israelis destroy that harmony.

 

[bigschlotsky]

Backing the arabs just because israel treatens arabs etc like shit.

btw in lebanon muslims, jews and christians live peacefully together. And fucking Israelis destroy that harmony.

In the 1990s Lebanon was in civil war between the Christians and the Syrian-backed Shia Muslims. Essentially Syrian troops controlled the country. At this time Hesbollah was pushed back from the Israeli border by the Israeli army. UN Resolution 1559, passed in 2000, called for the Syrian army to leave Israel and for the Lebanese government to disarm the Hesbollah terrorist group. This resolution led to Israel withdrawing from southern Lebanon with the promise that the Lebanese army would move in to control that terriroty. Six years later, the Lebanese government has done nothing. Instead Hesbollah, still sworn to the destruction of Israel, now occupies southern Lebanon and is armed with thousands of missiles provided by Iran via Syria, and aimed at Israel. I see you're from Germany. If Poland had thousands of Russian-supplied missiles aimed at you, I think you'd want your government to do something about that, just as the Israeli government is. Israel did their part by withdrawing from Lebanon in 2000. It is now Hesbollah and Iran that have destroyed Lebanon's peace.

 

[Lordpendragon]

It can't be easy being the chosen people.

Yes, I find Zionism obnoxious.

Incidentally to say that the rest of the world stood and watched the holocaust is deeply offensive to those whose countries and cultures were put on the line to fight fascism.

 

[bigschlotsky]

It can't be easy being the chosen people.

Yes, I find Zionism obnoxious.

Incidentally to say that the rest of the world stood and watched the holocaust is deeply offensive to those whose countries and cultures were put on the line to fight fascism.

Offensive or not, it's true. Britain and the US knew the locations of the rail lines to the concentration camps. They could have bombed them and the didn't. They fought fascism, but they knew the Jews were being exterminated and they chose not take strong and immediate action to stop it. They also turned away Jewish refugees who later returned to Germany to be murdered.
Perhaps they also found Zionism, and the "chosen people", obnoxious. Underneath so much of this anti-Israel sentiment I see an undercurrent of anti-Jewish sentiment. Old habits are hard to break.

 

[Lordpendragon]

Perhaps they also found Zionism, and the "chosen people", obnoxious. Underneath so much of this anti-Israel sentiment I see an undercurrent of anti-Jewish sentiment. Old habits are hard to break.

Of course you would - that is the point.

 

[D_Sir Dancealot]

I'm backing the Muslims: Isreal and its psychopathic right wing Jewish government has treated them like shit pretty much from the word go

Actually, the Arab world has treated Isreal like shit since 1952 when they became a state. To this day, with a couple of exceptions(Eygpt as one) Arab nations refuse to recognize Isreal as a legitimate state.

Why are the Isrealis wrong for protecting themselves? If the Arab world prefer the Isrealis stop "defending" then maybe they should stop "offending".

Once a upon a time, a few Arab nations attempted to attack Isreal in what would later be called the Six-Day War. After striking Isreal first the Isreali responded with kicking the shit out of the offending counties. This is how Isreal ended up with the Gaza Strip. This is what is called "to the victors go the spoils."

The U.S. was the first nation to recognize Isreal, we have had strong relationship with them ever since. I for one, wish the U.S. would let them off the leash and allow the Isreali to blow the f-ing Arab world back into pre-Muslim time.

 

[bigschlotsky]

Originally Posted by Yorksguyuk
Actually, the Arab world has treated Isreal like shit since 1952 when they became a state. To this day, with a couple of exceptions(Eygpt as one) Arab nations refuse to recognize Isreal as a legitimate state.
Why are the Isrealis wrong for protecting themselves? If the Arab world prefer the Isrealis stop "defending" then maybe they should stop "offending".
Once a upon a time, a few Arab nations attempted to attack Isreal in what would later be called the Six-Day War. After striking Isreal first the Isreali responded with kicking the shit out of the offending counties. This is how Isreal ended up with the Gaza Strip. This is what is called "to the victors go the spoils."
The U.S. was the first nation to recognize Isreal, we have had strong relationship with them ever since. I for one, wish the U.S. would let them off the leash and allow the Isreali to blow the f-ing Arab world back into pre-Muslim time.

Part of me is tempted to take this stance too. After all, it's frustrating when the situation gets bad like this. But if we take a step back, I think we have to recognize that many of the Arab countries have changed for the better in the past 50 years. In 1948, Israel basically had to worry about the entire Arab world. Today it's essentially Hamas, Hesbollah, Syria and Iran. Egypt and Jordan are far more moderate now, Libya is on it's way, Iraq is not a threat to Israel for the time being, and while private Saudi money still finds it's way to Hamas, the Saudi government probably no longer supports anti-Israel activities. So it really comes down to Gaza, Hesbollah, Syria and Iran. Of course one could argue that while the geographic range of the threat has decreased, the intensity of the threat has increased because Iranian firepower is greater than it once was. Hopefully we won't have to see that possibility tested.

 

[D_Sir Dancealot]

Are you some kind of idiot? Do you not realize that if Isreal and all other parties do not sit down and talk with the U.N then this could turn into WW3?

You also need to get your facts right! The state of Isreal (even though it is mentioned in the old Testiment) was set up directly after WW2 by the LN (League of Nations) in the lands known as Palestine. The L.N felt that the homeless Jews required a state to live in. The L.N is know known as the UN, and was mainly controlled by Russia, U.S.A and the U.K. However, after helping setup the new State of Isreal, the Isreali army kicked out the L.N army by force! The surrounding nations where not happy with the new state; imagine if the state of Texas was declard a new country and the people living there had to move out!! I dont think they would be too happy. An overview of the situation basically means it was a cock up from the start. The L.N had to sort out a home for the millions of homeless Jews in a rush and based on my researched did it over dinner by just looking at a map. And the rest we know about.

Therefore, I believe that the U.N should insist that all parties are un-armed and talk. The problem areas of Gaza and the West Bank need to be sorted out and the Palestinians should have water and electricity restored to their homes. The U.K is a multi racial state and in most cases it works well, so why cant Isreal? On the subject of Iran, again the U.N need to take control of the situation with the help of other Arab countries. America, Russia and China should take a back seat and try not to get too involved (look at history). With regards to the Iraq and Afghanistan problems, again look at history. Who armed the tribal Afghans and Iraqi's during the 1980's and gave them millions of dollars to train their forces??? The answer is the U.S.A. It does not matter what colour you are or the religion you follow, we should all work together to make this world safer. Certain political leaders are the people to be concerned about and Bush is one of them!

Someone earlier said that when the U.S.A gets into problems, no one offers to help then out! Again you are wrong. The Vietnam war, Australia and New Zealand supplied forces. Canada and the U.K supplied special forces and supplies etc. During the last fuel increase the U.K loaned the U.S gas and fuel reserves. We had to pay the price by paying high prices for our fuel!

Back to Isreal, I do agree with the statemant made by someone else on here, that perhaps it would be safer if Isreal was un-armed and made a weapon free state. This could also be extented to the surrounding countries!!

And FYI Im from a Jewish back ground, Im British and do not want a third World War!

 

[D_Sir Dancealot]

Gillette is a trip.

The creation of Israel came about as a result of the massive migration there, not the other way around. Regardless, there is no set, defined manner to create a nation and set borders. It normally happens through war and bloodshed. If we were to fall back to that tried and true method, Israel would be a bit larger than it is currently. No Palestinian state was destroyed to create Israel, and much of the land that became Israel was owned by Jewish settlers anyhow.

I think you should look at a map of the world before and after the First World War. You will clearly see that the State of Palestine which includes the current lands of Lebanon,Syria,parts of Jordn, Iran and Iraq (some parts) down to the Egyptian border did exist as one State. During the First World War many battles took place in the land on Palestine between the Turks and British Armies. A number of the Palestinian Tribes were alies to the British Army and were promised dependent on their tribe a country after the war. The main bulk of the land now known as Isreal was desert land and occuppied mainly by nomad tribes.

 

[sunsetapisto]

you guys do realize that the terrorists broke the UN agreement, I beleive in the year 2000. Israel upheld it's part. Don't talk about having a meeting like that because it's been tryed and it doesn't work.

Perhaps if people stopped strapping bombs on to their twelve year old children and sending them into israel the zionists would be a bit more "tolerant".

If someone was bombing your house, wouldn't you want justice to be served?

 

[bigschlotsky]

Back to Isreal, I do agree with the statemant made by someone else on here, that perhaps it would be safer if Isreal was un-armed and made a weapon free state. This could also be extented to the surrounding countries!!

Yeah, good luck with that! You'd have to disarm the entire Middle East if you want to disarm Israel. And you'd have to somehow get trustworthy assurances from China and Russia that the Arab countries will stay disarmed. That scenario is not going to happen, and my guess is even if it did Israel still wouldn't disarm. They're a sovereign nation with a right to defend themselves, and you still have a situation where several countries and terrorist groups are swown to destroy Israel.

 

[bigschlotsky]

I think you should look at a map of the world before and after the First World War. You will clearly see that the State of Palestine which includes the current lands of Lebanon,Syria,parts of Jordn, Iran and Iraq (some parts) down to the Egyptian border did exist as one State.

It was called Palestine but it wasn't a Palestinean state and it wasn't controlled by Palestineans. "Palestine" is just what the European colonial powers named it.
I should also note that Arafat said on many occasions that the concept of a "Palestinean" is simply a construct invented by the PLO to justify their claims to the land. The "Palestineans" are really Jordanians and Egyptians. Jordan and Egypt went to war with Israel several times to try to capture territory. Each time they lost territory instead. Now, Gaza is populated by Egyptians who we call Palestineans, who are in their predicament largely because their country, Egypt, decided to declare war on Israel. Egypt has abandoned these people, and refuses to take control of Gaza because it's a mess. Likewise, the West Bank is populated by Jordanians who we call Palestineans, who are in their predicament largely because their country, Jordan, decided to declare war on Israel.

 

[Lordpendragon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora

The above link gives some of the diaspora that have happened to various and many peoples over the years. Personally, I find it a fascinating and relevant area of our history. Our history as humanity rather than as one defined group.

The question is whether we recognise the past, and at which points, and wish to re-impose it on the present and future. You can correct my history, but I don't think that there was an autonomous Hebrew State between c. 800 BC abd 1948 - that's quite a long time.

Should each Native American tribe have it's own Independent State?

As far as I understand the situation, the WZO founded in the nineteenth century, had bought much land in Palestine, to which may Jewish emigrants went. During and after the Second World War, the trickle became a flood which the British tried to stem to manitain stability. Terrorist attacks on the British and local Arabs lead to the LN proposing and passing the creation of Israel.

America and Russia had their political reasons, but none thought to ask the Arab/Muslim world and as a result we have had a major threat to World Peace ever since.

It is at least good to see that Israel is adhering to some UN directives now, but I can understand why the existence of Israel is an insult to the Arab World and why every time an Arab country comes to the fore within their own region, they use Israel as an object against which to flex their muscle.

Incidentally, Israel had extended it's territory by fifty percent since its creation. Some of which it is now ceding.

I do not know what the solution is, but historically the creation of Israel was poorly implemented. I would also like to say that Jews owe Muslims a great debt for their tolerance over the years which allowed the traditions to be kept - the Christians were far less tolerant of Jewish culture.

 

[AndrewEndowed24]

To Lord Pendragon: Britain displayed valor, but the facts are that the world was not interested in stopping the genocide of a foriegn population. Of course, i don't blame them, that sort of altruism is practically unheard of.

Now to the matter at hand:

If you want to understand who is causing these problems you have to understand the structure of incentives in the region.

Continued violence is the greatest threat to Israel's survival. Considering the continuation of the state is pretty much Israel's only goal, their interests lie in amelioration.

The Palestinian's are living in a false consciousness based around the impossible dream of the recapturing of their land. I'd say they have a pretty big motivation to destabilize things (though the goal is a chimera).

Anyone who thinks the Israelis are trying to wipe out the Palestinians needs to smoke more crack, even their most violent actions in terms of civilian palestinian death while quite bad, never reach the level of brutality with which the other Arab nations treat them. On the other hand Israel has stopped mulitiple campaignes BECAUSE of excess civilian casualities on the Palestinian side. All the while, Jordan routinely massacred palestinian civilians in the 60's 70's and 80's.

In my view, the Palestinians are a people plagued by demagogues who feed them all sorts of bullshit about the nobility of living in a perpetual resistance, -of fighting an unwinnable war- or that they might actually beat Israel. Unfortunately, these views, though attractive, are dangerous to Israelis and Palestinians alike. The sad fact is that there is no innate consequence that one suffers from toying with radicalism -if you think about it. The incentive has to come from Israeli consequences.

Another issue: the average palestinian iq is hovering around the 90's, the Israeli IQ is significantly higher (conservative estimates range from 110-115), the number is probably higher for just the ashkenazis as the average is lowered somewhat by the Arab and Sephardic populations. If the Palestinians accepted peace, they would likely become a permanent underclass, comparable to the black population here. Affirmative action could only disguise this painful fact to a minimal degree; a proud people would be forced to play second fiddle in the economy. I suspect this has a fairly significant role in Palestinian reluctance to de-radicalize, they
would prefer to blame their culture's failure to functionally adapt to modern realities and their economic woes on Israeli aggression rather than innate incompetence.

All of the internal disfunctionality of the Arab world is made extremely salient by the utter success and sanity with which Israeli internal affairs are conducted, you can complain about their foreign policy but they manage their society far better than the Arabs manage theirs. They can't blame westerners for their problems forever when the reality is that it goes the other way around, the west foolishly involves itself and gets mired in the absurdities of the middle east and then it appears as if we started their problems when we really just got stuck in those which already existed and they manage to blame us.

oh and to those western supporters of palestinians, I see no reason why you should not be allowed to keep poison in your closets, but you must refrain from passing it about in cordials. Your views are of no harm to anyone in our society, but if western support should inspire just one palestinian to radicalize, his blood is on your hands.

 

[bigschlotsky]

I don't think that there was an autonomous Hebrew State between c. 800 BC abd 1948 - that's quite a long time.

My point exactly. For a thousand years Jews were Europe's whipping boy, and after the Holocaust enough was enough.
As for Native American tribes needing their own states, they basically already have them. Indian reservations are almost as self-governing as states are.
I'll tell you this - I sure do think the Kurds need their own nation.
Finally, I'll agree that the establishment of Israel could possible have been done better. But it was done hastily out of necessity. The Jews needed a place to go and no one else wanted to take them. Sometimes things done hastily are sloppy. But the fact is Israel is there and they aren't going anywhere. And the fact remains that, for anyone reading this, if the country next to you was sworn to your destruction, had missiles pointed at you, and was being supplied by another one of your arch enemies, I think you'd want your government to put an end to it. Heck, I think you'd demand it.

 

[Lordpendragon]

It was called Palestine but it wasn't a Palestinean state and it wasn't controlled by Palestineans. "Palestine" is just what the European colonial powers named it.
quote]

Actually, I think the Romans renamed the region after the second Judean revolt in 136 AD, in attempt to wipe it's memory from the world. A Roman General did though allow some Rabbis to set up in Yanveh (?) which may well have saved the Jewish tradition.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Israel, Syria, Lebanon, and the United States of America are all terrorist states (as opposed to some of the middle-eastern countries which simply host terrorist groups). This state-sponsored terrorist regime trend is horrifying.

Regarding "who stole land from whom", we were directed to look at world maps before WWI. Well, let's go back a bit farther. Who owned rights to what land, say, 1000 years ago? 2000? 4000? 6000? Oh, that's right, cartography didn't even exist back then. So, whose story do we believe? At some point, people will divide along some arbitrary line and say "I believe their claim to that territory, the other group is trying to steal it from them." That arbitrary line is usually what holy book they believe in.

 

[bigschlotsky]

To Lord Pendragon: Britain displayed valor, but the facts are that the world was not interested in stopping the genocide of a foriegn population.

Now to the matter at hand:

If you want to understand who is causing these problems you have to understand the structure of incentives in the region.

Continued violence is the greatest threat to Israel's survival. Considering the continuation of the state is pretty much Israel's only goal, their interests lie in amelioration.

The Palestinian's are living in a false consciousness based around the impossible dream of the recapturing of their land. I'd say they have a pretty big motivation to destabilize things (though the goal is a chimera).

Anyone who thinks the Israelis are trying to wipe out the Palestinians needs to smoke more crack, even their most violent actions in terms of civilian palestinian death while quite bad, never reach the level of brutality with which the other Arab nations treat them. On the other hand Israel has stopped mulitiple campaignes BECAUSE of excess civilian casualities on the Palestinian side. All the while, Jordan routinely massacred palestinian civilians in the 60's 70's and 80's.

In my view, the Palestinians are a people plagued by demagogues who feed them all sorts of bullshit about the nobility of living in a perpetual resistance, -of fighting an unwinnable war- or that they might actually beat Israel. Unfortunately, these views, though attractive, are dangerous to Israelis and Palestinians alike. The sad fact is that there is no innate consequence that one suffers from toying with radicalism -if you think about it. The incentive has to come from Israeli consequences.

Another issue: the average palestinian iq is hovering around the 90's, the Israeli IQ is significantly higher (conservative estimates range from 110-115), the number is probably higher for just the ashkenazis as the average 9s lowered somewhat by the Arab and Sephardic populations. If the Palestinians accepted peace, they would likely become a permanent underclass, comparable to the black population here. Affirmative action could only disguise this painful fact to a minimal degree; a proud people would be forced to play second fiddle in the economy. I suspect this has a fairly significant role in Palestinian reluctance to de-radicalize, they
would prefer to blame their economic woes on Israeli aggression rather than innate incompetence.

I agree with almost everything you said except I'd be cautious about saying the Jews are more intelligent. Right now their environment is more conducive to scoring high on IQ tests.

 

[bigschlotsky]

Actually, I think the Romans renamed the region after the second Judean revolt in 136 AD, in attempt to wipe it's memory from the world. A Roman General did though allow some Rabbis to set up in Yanveh (?) which may well have saved the Jewish tradition.

I stand corrected. I should have said that's what the colonial powers "called" it.