Interesting video from a pre-Israeli Jew

[Bob]

I pity you and the hate filled world you live in.

Yes, I am hate-filled because I refuse to acquiesce to the demands of those who wish to destroy me. I am rigid and inflexible because I will not allow myself to be subjugated and liquidated in accordance with the demands of my enemies.

[Machjo]

Bob, I've noticed a few inconsistencies:

Is Israel a secular state or a Jewish state? If secular, then the 'God gave it to us' argument is gone, never mind the fact that according to the Bible no state of Israel is to be formed until after the messiah has returned. Also, if secular, then why the Judaification the military and the desire to expand Israel's borders to its former boundaries of Biblical times rather than be satisfied with its limits as recognized by international law? And why so little intervention on the part of the police against extremists in Israel who harass and threaten Christians and other non-Jews?

And if religious, then why not adhere to the Bible and dismantle the state of Israel until the Messiah returns?

Looking at it that way, your best bet is for the secular argument since then you could argue on international law which has at least given some Palestinian land to the state of Israel rather than the Bible which would require you to dismantle the state of Israel entirely until the coming of the Messiah.

Now granted the secular argument is not without its challenges too. First off, since the Bible prohibits the formation of the state of Israel until the coming of the Messiah, the UN should never have taken that land from Palestinians and given it to the Zionists in the first place. That said, since native-born Israelis as individual persons have the same rights under international law as the Palestinians, since after all it's not fair to blame the children for the sins of their fathers (though granted the Bible did sometimes mete out multi-generational punishments, but if we're arguing on secular grounds the Bible thus becomes irrelevant and only international law relates), this leaves the UN with no choice but to now maintain the current legal status of the state of Israel.The displaced Palestinains have already been displaced, and to renege on the creation of the state of Israel would then displace many Iraeli Jews while not necessarily fixing the problem for the Palestinians since their old homes are likely not there anymore, already bulldozed and built over.

So the best bet it would seem would be for the uN to maintian the current legal status of Israel and continue to insist that Isreal return to its original legal boundaries as given by the UN originally, which has been the position of the UN all along anyway.

Why does Israel not comply with international law and retreat back to its legal boundaries rather than to continue to occupy and colonize foreign land?

Edited June 21, 2010 by Machjo

[naomiglover]

He's not a pre-Israeli Jew.

You are a dishonest person, Bob.

[wyly]

You are a dishonest person, Bob.

bob is likely a member of the Hasbara an Israeli propaganda machine that uses zionists to spreads it's misinformation everywhere...letters to editorials, call in radio programs, tv talk shows, posting in forums...Israel sees the tide changing more and more people are realizing the injustice done to the Palestinians...

[JB Globe]

Jews were assaulted, robbed, and murdered by Arabs as soon as their numbers began to grow in the late 19th century and became vocal about their nationalist aspirations.

There is no question that hostilities increased with the growth in Zionism. As is clear to anyone who's done their homework on Israeli and Zionist history, Arabs and Muslims are opposed to Jewish self-determination and have always been. Zionism, a movement for the emancipation of Jews and the establishment of a Jewish state, runs contrary to Arab and Muslim rejection of Jewish independence. To them, the entirety of the land belongs to them and all non-members of their groups must be subservient to Arab rule.

And the Arab response to Zionism was entirely predictable and understandable - because you would have had the same response if Zionists chose to establish Israel anywhere in the world, because it's a doctrine which dispossess whoever happens to live where the nation is founded.

If the Roma of Europe ever decide to establish an independent state in their ancestral homeland of Rajasthan in India - you can expect a similar situation to arise, because you're "securing" one group of people at the expense of another.

The same stupid logic this dumb Jew is using could be used to suggest that the civil rights movement for blacks "started" racial tensions, as during this time, lynching of blacks were increased, as well as assaults and murders (including MLK's assassination).

Bad comparison - black Americans are Americans, only a small fraction of Israelis can trace their history in Israel back beyond the 20th century - the creation of Israel involved massive migration of foreigners into the region, African American history in the US goes back much further, and they didn't have a say in their migration. Also - they were simply standing up for their constitutional rights, whereas the creation of Israel was one of several options available to secure the Jewish community post-WWII.

[GostHacked]

Bad comparison - black Americans are Americans, only a small fraction of Israelis can trace their history in Israel back beyond the 20th century - the creation of Israel involved massive migration of foreigners into the region, African American history in the US goes back much further, and they didn't have a say in their migration. Also - they were simply standing up for their constitutional rights, whereas the creation of Israel was one of several options available to secure the Jewish community post-WWII.

I think this is important. And you summed up my feelings about it quite nicely.

[Bob]

And the Arab response to Zionism was entirely predictable and understandable - because you would have had the same response if Zionists chose to establish Israel anywhere in the world, because it's a doctrine which dispossess whoever happens to live where the nation is founded.

Was the Jewish response to anti-semitism entirely predictable and understandable, culminating the nationalist movement known as Zionist? Zionism never advocated dispossession of inhabitant of any land. Indeed, early Zionism's socialist leanings struggled with the question of how to deal with the Arabs of Palestine when the immigration of Jews to the Palestine Mandate began.. As the Yishuv (early Jewish commmunity) grew, and hostilities from the Arabs grew in response, this question was debated over within the Jewish community. This is a complex history of which you are completely ignorant, so spare me your amateur hour analysis.

Interesting fact - some in the Yishuv (as well as some British officials who bought into this reasoning) believed that the Arabs would come to welcome the Jewish community as the the influx of intellects, education, and skills would necessarily lead to increased economic prosperity for Arabs, as well. As the Yishuv grew in size and organization and wealth, however, few Arabs (even those who financially benefited from the economy) looked favourably on this new community, which was seen as alien.

Anyways, there's a long and interesting history of the conflict, read Benny Morris' book "1948". It's boring in some parts but very dense and informative. It it mandatory reading and the quintessential resource for the history of this conflict.

the Roma of Europe ever decide to establish an independent state in their ancestral homeland of Rajasthan in India - you can expect a similar situation to arise, because you're "securing" one group of people at the expense of another.

Again with the Gypsies. Sorry, I don't care about them. Moving on...

Bad comparison - black Americans are Americans, only a small fraction of Israelis can trace their history in Israel back beyond the 20th century - the creation of Israel involved massive migration of foreigners into the region, African American history in the US goes back much further, and they didn't have a say in their migration. Also - they were simply standing up for their constitutional rights, whereas the creation of Israel was one of several options available to secure the Jewish community post-WWII.

There is no other option to secure the Jewish people other than Jewish statehood. Full stop.

Edited June 22, 2010 by Bob

[Bob]

If you watch the video of the lunatic religious Jew (who most Jews, including myself, despise) who claims that Zionism "started" the conflict (this is truth without context), then you have to be opposed to all independence movements. Since moves for independence will necessarily elicit a hostile response from some, therefore the natural prescription is to not demand independence or self-determination because it make make some other mad. Basically, if someone is angered by your political motives, then it's your fault for making moves that made them angry.

Sorry. We're gonna relinquish our independence to appeal to religious nuts and those that hate us.

Do I even need to mention that you're drawing on support from a guy who more than likely believes the world was created in six days and is waiting for the Messiah to return to ressurect all the Jews? You're in a bad position when your intellectual support comes from such a source!

Edited June 22, 2010 by Bob

[Bob]

I think this is important. And you summed up my feelings about it quite nicely.

Alright look. Let's be honest. Just for a minute. You made up your mind long ago about who's responsible for this conflict. I know that you sincerely believe that Zionism and Jews are to blame for this entire conflict for their original dispossession of some of the Arabs of Palestine, as well as establishing a state on land that they desired for their own future state. I know that you naturally side with the underdog and those who are the perceived "losers". After all, since all people are equal and more or less the same (in your view), then any large discrepancy between two groups in terms of power, wealth, or influence can only be explained by the oppression of the stronger group over the weaker group.

Here's my recommendation to you and many others. Start again from scratch. Analyze this issue without your preconceptions and biases. Read literature about the origins of the conflict. Consider what early Zionists did towards fulfilling their ambition. Charity drives to buy and develop land. Leveraging all available political contacts to make diplomatic efforts to secure political recognition for a future Jewish state. Some degree of economic and social integration with the Arabs. it's hardly as simple as you wish it was.