ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

I could agree with some of this provided we also recognize Israel's right to self defense and not put Israel in a position where it must put itself under more risk from terrorist attacks than it already has.

Foxfyre wrote:

I could agree with some of this provided we also recognize Israel's right to self defense and not put Israel in a position where it must put itself under more risk from terrorist attacks than it already has.

No restriction on Israel's right to self defense. However, Israel has already misused the prospect of terror attacks to rationalize their seizure of land and rights from the inhabitants of the West Bank.

It is an historical fact that the relaxation of oppression can bring about increased violent reaction as people try to settle old scores and perhaps misinterpret as weakness what is in fact merely the removal of injustice. There is no remedy for that danger - except in the recognition that continued oppression will only yield a far worse outcome later.

There is no valid contemporary reason for American evangelists to apply or support a degree of religious or racial intolerance in Israel or Palestine than they would willingly accept in this country.

I have been doing some reading about the historical connection between American evangelism and the the concept of a restoration of Israel. We're both aware of the self-identification of some of the American colonists with the situation of early Jews and their promised land. It turns out this continued through the early 19th century with numerous attempts by American evangelists to found agricultural-based colonies for Jews (and themselves) in Palestine. Their motives appear to have been, in large part, derived from this common view of themselves.

I don't have any problem with this, except for the exclusivity and intolerance (or unequal treatment ) of others that has remained in the Zionist state. Even the Puritans of new England finally gave up their original ideas of religious rule and intolerance of other beliefs. There is no valid contemporary reason for American evangelists to apply or support a degree of religious or racial intolerance in Israel or Palestine than they would willingly accept in this country.

I find myself agreeing with George. I must take a pill and lie down for a while.

As usual, your post is total garbage.

There is probably no more humane and tolerant state than Israel. Its Arab citizens are accorded full rights, and even serve in the Knesset.

It has been incredibly restrained in its responses to continuing and vicious attacks from its neighbors from even before the state was formed. Before the 1967 war, when Israel was attacked by the Pals and surrounding states, there were hundreds of attacks on it, and Israel didn't seek to add a single inch to the state. It has essentially begged Pals to reach a reasonable accord, only to be figuratively spit in the face.

George, your credibility is zilch.

McTag wrote:

I find myself agreeing with George. I must take a pill and lie down for a while.

I'm kind of used to such by now.

So I only lie down because it's bedtime :wink:

I notice that Walter usually recovers from that condition fairly quickly.

OK, then to extend your argument, Israel should continue to enforce the physical barrier between their settlements in the West Bank and the rest; continue depriving the Palestinian residents of Israeli-claimed areas any political and property rights in the state of Israel; continue exercising air and water rights over the entire West Bank and Gaza; continue denying any rights to either return or compensation for Palestinian residents driven out by the IDF or the earlier Zionist terror organizations; and continue to permit immigration to Israel only to professed Jews.

Just what kind of a future do you believe that will yield? More to the point, what do you believe will be the future costs to this country for continuing to support such a state -- one with basic principles so antithetic to our own?

Some critics of Israel, often with questionable motives, exploit the nature of Israel's parliamentary political system to falsely depict Arab citizens as a vulnerable minority. Indeed they are - but only inasmuch as all minorities in a parliamentary government that are outside the ruling coalition suffer some disadvantages. Israel contains a lively system of distinct communities living side-by-side, often vying for the same limited supply of the largely socialized national welfare and aid programs. Israeli Arabs, for example, compete with other minorities that do not typically reach the top - ultra-Orthodox Jews, Russian immigrants, and religious Sephardim. That some of these groups sometimes do better than others does not show discrimination; it simply shows the system at work.

Most important, however, the disadvantages of political minorities in Israel have nothing to do with Israel's ceremonious identification as a Jewish state. Their situation will change if and when Israel transforms itself from a system of proportional representation, with each minority having a party to call its own, into a district-based election system. Many Israelis support such a change, though it has shortcomings, too. But even under the current, imperfect, political reality, Jewish and Arab citizens are equal under the law.

All this is not to deny that Israel has one special mission as a Jewish state - albeit one that does not affect the rights of its non-Jewish citizens. Israel was built as a haven for Jewish refugees fleeing persecution. The legendary Israeli statesman Abba Eban referred to this aspect of Israel as a case of "international affirmative action," because it was designed to correct an inherent disadvantage suffered by a particular group throughout history, which has deprived them of a level playing field. Unfortunately, Jews still need a place of refuge from persecution. For that reason, diaspora Jews deserve the special treatment they receive in this one respect. When the Jewish community of Ethiopia stood defenseless against the onslaught of armed partisans in the 1991 civil war, or when Argentina's Jews became the target of scape-goating and attacks during the recent economic depression, or when Soviet Jews fled Communism, Israel alone opened its doors unconditionally. For Jews seeking refuge in Israel, the state grants immediate citizenship. Nevertheless, a non-Jew enjoys the same right and opportunity to become a citizen of Israel as any other country offers, including the United States. And once a citizen, he or she enjoys all the rights and privileges granted by Israel's laws and government to the majority of its people, based on a principle of equality now enshrined in the basic law of the country and the fabric of its political culture.
http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp507.htm

I understand your disapproval of Israeli policy and I recall you once relating an unpleasant personal experience at the hands of the Israelis. (At least I think that was you.) But I also think we're talking past each other and I think you might be in error on a couple of points.

For one, there is the Right of Return that allows ANY Jew to immigrate to Israel as Israel unashamedly has established itself to be a refuge for oppressed and discriminated Jews from anywhere. And it is a fact that Israel intends to maintain a substantial Jewish majority to insure that the Jewish people who live there will not be oppressed or discriminated against, at least by their own countrymen.

I think you are in error that Non Jews are not allowed or welcomed. I think the record shows differently. The difference is that Jews are afforded automatic admittance and the others have to go through a non-Jew admission policy.

You can criticize that as being a racist policy and perhaps it is. But so was affirmative action and other programs in this country intended to correct previous wrongs against black people, women, etc. al. Racism in that context is not necessarily evil and in fact may be necessary at least as a temporary policy.

....

All this is not to deny that Israel has one special mission as a Jewish state - albeit one that does not affect the rights of its non-Jewish citizens. Israel was built as a haven for Jewish refugees fleeing persecution. The legendary Israeli statesman Abba Eban referred to this aspect of Israel as a case of "international affirmative action," because it was designed to correct an inherent disadvantage suffered by a particular group throughout history, which has deprived them of a level playing field. Unfortunately, Jews still need a place of refuge from persecution. For that reason, diaspora Jews deserve the special treatment they receive in this one respect. When the Jewish community of Ethiopia stood defenseless against the onslaught of armed partisans in the 1991 civil war, or when Argentina's Jews became the target of scape-goating and attacks during the recent economic depression, or when Soviet Jews fled Communism, Israel alone opened its doors unconditionally. For Jews seeking refuge in Israel, the state grants immediate citizenship. Nevertheless, a non-Jew enjoys the same right and opportunity to become a citizen of Israel as any other country offers, including the United States. And once a citizen, he or she enjoys all the rights and privileges granted by Israel's laws and government to the majority of its people, based on a principle of equality now enshrined in the basic law of the country and the fabric of its political culture.

If Americans now are to be commended for abolishing slavery, cannot Israel be recognized for abolishing terrorist organizations?

Most important, however, the disadvantages of political minorities in Israel have nothing to do with Israel's ceremonious identification as a Jewish state. Their situation will change if and when Israel transforms itself from a system of proportional representation, with each minority having a party to call its own, into a district-based election system. Many Israelis support such a change, though it has shortcomings, too. But even under the current, imperfect, political reality, Jewish and Arab citizens are equal under the law.

...
I strongly believe that the Israeli government will remove all restrictions the hinder the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank the very same day that the Palestinians acknowledge Israel's right to resist and pledge to do their best to stop and condemn all terrorist activity. Is that too much to ask of the Palestinians in return for justice?
...

The Palestinian Arabs have yet to even acknowledge Israel's right to exist much less Israel's right to resist.