THE WAR IN GAZA

...
So, there are so many possible co-reasons, including others not mentioned, I am sure, that MIGHT be involved when a poster is anti-Israel. Non of which are known, when responding to an anti-Israel post. Naturally, the fallacious logic of so many posts focus on the civilian casualties, or the denial of Israel's right to exist. In effect, the posting is taking sides with Hamas, since its stated goal is the oblivion of Israel, and only by emphasizing horrors that Israel may be committing, can the world believe that the stated objective of Hamas is reasonable.

And to all a good night.

Foofie wrote:

...
So, there are so many possible co-reasons, including others not mentioned, I am sure, that MIGHT be involved when a poster is anti-Israel. Non of which are known, when responding to an anti-Israel post. Naturally, the fallacious logic of so many posts focus on the civilian casualties, or the denial of Israel's right to exist. In effect, the posting is taking sides with Hamas, since its stated goal is the oblivion of Israel, and only by emphasizing horrors that Israel may be committing, can the world believe that the stated objective of Hamas is reasonable.

And to all a good night.

Foofie, there is some truth in the points you make. However you persistently evade the central issue - and that is whether, on its present course, there is - in view of all that we know about human history - any realistic prospect of a peaceful, just settlement between Israel and its neighbors. I believe the answer is, there is not. Instead we will see continued terrorism, reprisals, hatred and destruction - a prospect that, in view of current trends, could be very dangerous for Israel.

Israelis certainly have "a right to exist". However the canard you so often repeat about Israel's "right to exist" is itself deceptive. You imply in that phrase that, as a necessary part of its continued existence, Israel has the right to continue to expropriate the territory of neighboring peoples; to govern their lives in military occupation for decades; to control their supplies of water, electrical power, and the movement necessary for their economic lives. Stated this way, I believe most people would answer, no, under those conditions Israel has no right to continue. Certainly it no longer has the right to demand continued support from this country.

I would think that in the early 1800's there were western settlers that doubted that the west would ever have an end to Indian hostility.

Also, we do not make electricity for Mexico, I believe. Nor, are we obligated to give them water

The Mexican Water Treaty of 1944 - Committed 1.5 maf of the river's annual flow to Mexico.

And your opinion whether there is, "any realistic prospect of a peaceful, just settlement between Israel and its neighbors. I believe the answer is, there is not. Instead we will see continued terrorism, reprisals, hatred and destruction - a prospect that, in view of current trends, could be very dangerous for Israel.", is just your opinion that you are promulgating in your posts.

I would think that in the early 1800's there were western settlers that doubted that the west would ever have an end to Indian hostility. Hopefully, we will not see a retake of that 100 year situation. But, I believe your posts are just taking an a priori pessimistic position, based on the false premise that past history is the only way to judge the future. Sorry, the nuclear age changed the equation regarding past history. Also, this history will include different players, than past history.

However, the Israeli Palestinian conflict is already more than 50 years old. How many more decades of it must the world endure

However the canard you so often repeat about Israel's "right to exist" is itself deceptive.

Quote:

Also, we do not make electricity for Mexico, I believe. Nor, are we obligated to give them water

wrong

Quote:

The Mexican Water Treaty of 1944 - Committed 1.5 maf of the river's annual flow to Mexico.

http://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g1000/lawofrvr.html

No. I was right. I said "obligated." If the U.S. chose not to, then no treaty.

Foofie wrote:

And your opinion whether there is, "any realistic prospect of a peaceful, just settlement between Israel and its neighbors. I believe the answer is, there is not. Instead we will see continued terrorism, reprisals, hatred and destruction - a prospect that, in view of current trends, could be very dangerous for Israel.", is just your opinion that you are promulgating in your posts.

I would think that in the early 1800's there were western settlers that doubted that the west would ever have an end to Indian hostility. Hopefully, we will not see a retake of that 100 year situation. But, I believe your posts are just taking an a priori pessimistic position, based on the false premise that past history is the only way to judge the future. Sorry, the nuclear age changed the equation regarding past history. Also, this history will include different players, than past history.

Interesting argument - and not entirely without merit.

However, the Israeli Palestinian conflict is already more than 50 years old. How many more decades of it must the world endure? The wealth population and dedication of the sympathizers of the Palestinian position is increasing - as that is of the Palestinians themselves. Meanwhile, absent any new sources of immigrants such as the former Soviet Union, and given current Israeli birth rates, the relative population picture for Israeli Jews is none too good. The former widespread sympathy for Israel that once pervaded the Western World is now largely gone. The undeveloped world tends to align itself with the Palestinians. In short the new (and nuclear) age appears to offer far more advantages to the Palestinians than to the Israelis, who are increasingly isolated.

Quote:

However, the Israeli Palestinian conflict is already more than 50 years old. How many more decades of it must the world endure

I think that we have given the Zionists more than enough time to get their act together...they have failed to do so. Unless a two state solution can be found in the reasonably near future it is time to demand either that Israel becomes a multicultural society or that Israel dies. The Zionists have by their own refusal to act civilly given the global community no choice but to demand that Zionist control either be extremely diluted or else ended all together.

Somewhat amusing. However in its essential character it is hardly different from the ethnic and racial jokes (including those told about Jews) that have polluted human discourse for as long as recorded history.

What was your intent in posting it?

Quote:

No. I was right. I said "obligated." If the U.S. chose not to, then no treaty.

The US has obligated itself, there is precedence now. I suspect that international law would not allow America to take the water now.