Questions for the 'Hurrah for Israel' crowd

[Figleaf]

jbg, but you fail tom ention to mention that while the Palestinians have had to deal with their border shifting, the Israelis keep encroaching So it is not the same thing at all to your likening of the US Can border, a bit of a problematic strawman there, eh!

Why don't the "Palestinians" come up with some proposed productive activity for their future "state"? I have a sickening feeling that giving them land just give them a base from which to kill with impunity. Don't you have that feel?

No. I have the feeling that that's just self-serving Israeli propaganda. I think most Palestinians would accomodate themselves to making a better life if there were a peace. Some fringe elements would stay militant and dangerous, and they would have to be treated like criminals for whatever misdeeds they carry out.

By the way, the US and the Brits (there was no nation known as Canada, only provinces known as Upper and Lower Canada) did some "encroaching" back in the early part of the 19th Century, but no one would say that either country went primarily into the death business.

No-one?

[Figleaf]

I agree with reperations but with conditions;

- That the Italians compensate the Israelis for the expulsion of the Jews from Judea during the Roman Empire, thereby initiating the diaspora towards Europe.

- That the Egyptians accept their responsibility for enslaving the Jews a few millenia ago.

Presumably, then, you would agree that Israel should compensate the Caananites.

[marcinmoka]

Presumably, then, you would agree that Israel should compensate the Caananites.

Cannanites are the grandchildren of Noah. But if you insist.

[Black Dog]

It would have to be a pre-condition, how can they start talking while rockets and bombs are flying - not going to happen.

And why not? Generally speaking, peace is a result of peace talks, hence the name.

As another point, it's interesting how the Palestinians are lumped together into one monolithic entity. One of the thornier aspects is the lack of unity among the Palestinians themselves. For instance, if Israel was able to get Hamas to stop its armed activities, there's no guarantee another group wouldn't step in. The solution is to have a strong central authority,but that is easier said than done.

[jbg]

And why not? Generally speaking, peace is a result of peace talks, hence the name.

It is very rare that peace talks create peace. Almost all wars in history were fought to the point of surrender and the "talks" were more about the terms of surrender than about "peace". Even the War of 1812 was fought to a draw, and then this result was ratified by the Treaty of Ghent. Other examples are WW I and II, US Revolutionary War, and the Seven Years War (more properly the French and Indian War). The few wars that have ended with truly negotiated treaties, including Vietnam, have seen the "peace" prove ephermal.

As another point, it's interesting how the Palestinians are lumped together into one monolithic entity. One of the thornier aspects is the lack of unity among the Palestinians themselves. For instance, if Israel was able to get Hamas to stop its armed activities, there's no guarantee another group wouldn't step in. The solution is to have a strong central authority,but that is easier said than done.

Black Dog, you hit the nail on the head. What is the point of, for example, negotiating with Hamas, who cannot and/or will not bind any other faction?

[Figleaf]

Black Dog, you hit the nail on the head. What is the point of, for example, negotiating with Hamas, who cannot and/or will not bind any other faction?

jbg, you hit the nail on the head. Israel has a counterpart for negotiations: the Palestinian Authority, and it shouldn't bother to take any notice of internal Palestinian politics.

[M.Dancer]

Black Dog, you hit the nail on the head. What is the point of, for example, negotiating with Hamas, who cannot and/or will not bind any other faction?

jbg, you hit the nail on the head. Israel has a counterpart for negotiations: the Palestinian Authority, and it shouldn't bother to take any notice of internal Palestinian politics.

Hamas and Fatah are the palestinian authority.

[Black Dog]

Black Dog, you hit the nail on the head. What is the point of, for example, negotiating with Hamas, who cannot and/or will not bind any other faction?

Gotta start somewhere.

[Figleaf]

Black Dog, you hit the nail on the head. What is the point of, for example, negotiating with Hamas, who cannot and/or will not bind any other faction?

jbg, you hit the nail on the head. Israel has a counterpart for negotiations: the Palestinian Authority, and it shouldn't bother to take any notice of internal Palestinian politics.

Hamas and Fatah are the palestinian authority.

No, Hamas and Fatah are the main political parties holding seats in the legislature of the Palestinian authority. They no more 'are' the PA than the Republicans and Democrats 'are' the United States.

[jbg]

Black Dog, you hit the nail on the head. What is the point of, for example, negotiating with Hamas, who cannot and/or will not bind any other faction?

Gotta start somewhere.

The best analogy would be if I wanted to strike a deal with "Canada" and sat down at a bar on Yonge and Bloor to make a deal with you, on Canada's behalf.

[Black Dog]

The best analogy would be if I wanted to strike a deal with "Canada" and sat down at a bar on Yonge and Bloor to make a deal with you, on Canada's behalf.

It's a very poor analogy for reasons that should be self-evident. Hamas, unlike yours truly, is a major player in the internal politics of Palestine. Somehow geting them onside would be a significant step towards peace, especially if Israel was somehow able to get them to crackdown on other, smaller factions.

[marcinmoka]

The best analogy would be if I wanted to strike a deal with "Canada" and sat down at a bar on Yonge and Bloor to make a deal with you, on Canada's behalf.

It's a very poor analogy for reasons that should be self-evident. Hamas, unlike yours truly, is a major player in the internal politics of Palestine. Somehow geting them onside would be a significant step towards peace, especially if Israel was somehow able to get them to crackdown on other, smaller factions.

But onside of who? You can't get them on the side of Israel if they don't see Israel as being Israel for all they see is a large congregation of Jews who need to be eliminated from the Muslim lands.

[Black Dog]

But onside of who? You can't get them on the side of Israel if they don't see Israel as being Israel for all they see is a large congregation of Jews who need to be eliminated from the Muslim lands.

So you're saying the conflict is insoluable?

[marcinmoka]

So you're saying the conflict is insoluable?

As long as Hamas is influential and they continue claiming that Israel must be destroyed and all the Jews kicked out, then YES.

[Figleaf]

So you're saying the conflict is insoluable?

As long as Hamas is influential and they continue claiming that Israel must be destroyed and all the Jews kicked out, then YES.

Well, what are you really saying there? That as long as a party to the conflict refuses to make peace, there will be no peace. Can't disagree with you there.

But isn't the issue really: What will it take to get the Palestinians and Israel to make peace, and can the parties be convinced to go there?

[jbg]

But onside of who? You can't get them on the side of Israel if they don't see Israel as being Israel for all they see is a large congregation of Jews who need to be eliminated from the Muslim lands.

So you're saying the conflict is insoluable?

Probably is not soluable, unfortunately.

The Muslims in that part of the world have been a serious problem for a long time. The European finding of the Americas, in fact, was triggered by the need to avoid land travel to the Orient. Guess who was in the way?

[Black Dog]

Probably is not soluable, unfortunately.

The Muslims in that part of the world have been a serious problem for a long time. The European finding of the Americas, in fact, was triggered by the need to avoid land travel to the Orient. Guess who was in the way?

Gee, then maybe sticking a whole shitload of displaced Europeans right under their noses wasn't the hottest idea.

[marcinmoka]

Probably is not soluable, unfortunately.

The Muslims in that part of the world have been a serious problem for a long time. The European finding of the Americas, in fact, was triggered by the need to avoid land travel to the Orient. Guess who was in the way?

Gee, then maybe sticking a whole shitload of displaced Europeans right under their noses wasn't the hottest idea.

Right. Because the Jews ORIGINALLY hail from Europe! I guess the name "Jerusalem" was really just a perversion of "Jielenia Gora" in Poland and this was somehow lost in translation.

[Figleaf]

Probably is not soluable, unfortunately.

The Muslims in that part of the world have been a serious problem for a long time. The European finding of the Americas, in fact, was triggered by the need to avoid land travel to the Orient. Guess who was in the way?

Gee, then maybe sticking a whole shitload of displaced Europeans right under their noses wasn't the hottest idea.

Right. Because the Jews ORIGINALLY hail from Europe! I guess the name "Jerusalem" was really just a perversion of "Jielenia Gora" in Poland and this was somehow lost in translation.

I don't see what any concept of 'originally' hailing from has to do with anything.

[Black Dog]

Right. Because the Jews ORIGINALLY hail from Europe! I guess the name "Jerusalem" was really just a perversion of "Jielenia Gora" in Poland and this was somehow lost in translation.

Are you disputing the historical fact that the large majority of Jews who came to Israel in the post war period were of European extraction? And, as Figleaf rightly points out, the geographical origins of the Jewish people is irrelevant at best. What's more:if the Jews have the right to the land based on some historical connection to the land, then surely the Arab peoples they evicted can claim the same "right of return." Of course, the same logic would entitle me to a piece of Ukraine because of my ancestral connection to that place and entitles us all to a little bit of Africa due to humanities' origins there.

[jbg]

Right. Because the Jews ORIGINALLY hail from Europe! I guess the name "Jerusalem" was really just a perversion of "Jielenia Gora" in Poland and this was somehow lost in translation.

I don't see what any concept of 'originally' hailing from has to do with anything.

Congratulations "Figleaf". At least you're seeing the light of day. That means the "Palestinians" have no vested rights, and we should all head back to the Great Rift Valley of Africa, then re-sort where everyone lives.

[jbg]

Probably is not soluable, unfortunately.

The Muslims in that part of the world have been a serious problem for a long time. The European finding of the Americas, in fact, was triggered by the need to avoid land travel to the Orient. Guess who was in the way?

Gee, then maybe sticking a whole shitload of displaced Europeans right under their noses wasn't the hottest idea.

Germany wasn't the greatest place for them either. Ditto Poland, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, even, for a while, the UK.

[Rue]

The best analogy would be if I wanted to strike a deal with "Canada" and sat down at a bar on Yonge and Bloor to make a deal with you, on Canada's behalf.

It's a very poor analogy for reasons that should be self-evident. Hamas, unlike yours truly, is a major player in the internal politics of Palestine. Somehow geting them onside would be a significant step towards peace, especially if Israel was somehow able to get them to crackdown on other, smaller factions.

Blackdog you talk like some snot nosed little private school kid., Get a grip with reality. Hamas is a terrorist organization. It has no interest in peace, or negations with Israel. It has said time and time again its mandate is to wipe out Israel and replace it with the state of Quds.

You can repeat this nonsense that people shoud talk with Hamas but it is just that nonsense. Hamas does not want to talk. Its easy for you to say talk with people who are not interested in talking and only interested in terror, but its nonsense. Until they denounce their charter and make it clear they are ready to talk and not pursue violence your repeating people should talk with them is ridiculous. Enough already pretending they are nice people.

[Rue]

Right. Because the Jews ORIGINALLY hail from Europe! I guess the name "Jerusalem" was really just a perversion of "Jielenia Gora" in Poland and this was somehow lost in translation.

I don't see what any concept of 'originally' hailing from has to do with anything.

Congratulations "Figleaf". At least you're seeing the light of day. That means the "Palestinians" have no vested rights, and we should all head back to the Great Rift Valley of Africa, then re-sort where everyone lives.

JBG why would you engage in dialogue with someone who has repeatedly made it clear what his feelings towards all Jews are and has made it clear he is not interested in any dialogue unless it is to make negative generalizations or misrepresentations about Jews. Save your energy for someone interested in an opinion other then his own. You are just giving this person a platform and oxygen for his fire.

[Rue]

"And, as Figleaf rightly points out, the geographical origins of the Jewish people is irrelevant at best. "

Blackdog it is not irrelevant. For you it is because you are selective as to what you want to consider about Jewish history. You are deliberately subjective and selective because you don't want to consider it relevant that as much as you would like to portray Jews as Europeans, they come from Israel and the Middle East originally. That is the point. Selectively revising Jewish history I expect of Figleaf-you I would expect more out of.

"What's more:if the Jews have the right to the land based on some historical connection to the land, then surely the Arab peoples they evicted can claim the same "right of return."

Arab peoples are natives to the Middle East as are Jews. They both have equal rights to call it their own. The problem is it would not be practical to allow a right of return for the children or children's children of those Palestinians displaced the same reason it is impossible to do the same for the children or children's children of the 700,000 Jews thrown out of the Muslim world after 1949 or with those descendants of the Jews who left Europe after the holocaust.

Can we stop with this b.s. about law of return. Its absolute b.s. Let's talk reality. We have two peoples who are going nowhere and the inevitable is they either learn to live side by side or groups like Hamas can keep living in a world where they still think they can wipe out Israel and kill Jews world-wide as well as non Jews world-wide until this is achieved.

"Of course, the same logic would entitle me to a piece of Ukraine because of my ancestral connection to that place and entitles us all to a little bit of Africa due to humanities' origins there."

The above comment is idiotic. If you were thrown out of the Ukraine and now want to return, would you please use the brains you have and read up about the current laws in the Ukraine which are attempting to accommodate Ukrainians who want to return. As for your comment about Africa-do you think making an idiotic comment that misses the point is debating?

If you have a spiritual or religious connection to Africa then go back. No one is stopping you. Your comment equating the Jewish religious belief of its covenant with God to live in Israel with your smarmy comment about human origins in Africa is childish. You completely ignore the religious connotation and context and in so doing ridicule a central precept of Judaism. Its tiresome. If you can not understand the link in Judaism between God, the Jewish people and the land of Israel, then simply say so-don't ridicule it.