Questions for the 'Hurrah for Israel' crowd

[Black Dog]

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.

Ergo Israel has no "right to exist."

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

Frying pan. Fire.

Rue:

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.

This brings me to a couple of Questions of my own:

1) Is Israel prepared to recognize the existence of a Palestinian State and establish permanant borders?

2) Is Israel prepared to renounce violence?

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.

Everybody came from somewehere else originally. How far back should we go? Five generations? Ten? Fifty? How far removed do you have to be from your place of origin before you lose any claim to it? For the vast majority of Jews, the connection with the land today known as Israel is spiritual and emotional. That's fine, but it's not the basis for a legitimate claim.

Arab peoples are natives to the Middle East as are Jews. They both have equal rights to call it their own.

Nonsense.

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?

My comment was totally on point: the same logic that entitles Jews to a homeland in Israel entitles me to a homeland in Ukraine. After all: my family came from there originally. You implicitly acknolwdge the legitimacy of my claim by saying that the Jewish people's historical roots in the Holy Land entitle them to a state there (absent from the equation is what's to be done with the people who were there before all the Jews showed up to claim their turf.)

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.

Oh, I understand the religious connotations. But I don't care. What's happening in Israel/Palestine can be boiled down to a territorial conflict between different sky-god cults. In order to solve the problem, then, we should leave the man-in-the-sky out of it.

And I will continue to ridule anyone who can, with a straight face, claim this bit of land or that because of a promise made by their invisible sky friend two millenia ago because such a claim is inherently ridiculous.

[Rue]

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.

Ergo Israel has no "right to exist."

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

This brings me to a couple of Questions of my own:

1) Is Israel prepared to recognize the existence of a Palestinian State and establish permanant borders?

Yes and that was the point of the Oslo Accord. They have repeatedly said yes to the above.

2) Is Israel prepared to renounce violence?

The above question is a bit silly. No the Israeli Defence force would not need to strike back or do what it does if there were no terrorists. I would agree with you curtailing interaction between Palestinians and the Israeli defence Force is required if there is to be peace-but this can't come about until somehow the terrorists are imbolized or disarmed. The quickest way to neutralize or make the IDF redudant is to de-arm the terrorists.

"Everybody came from somewehere else originally. How far back should we go?"

The point is it no longer matters. Neither the Israelis or Palestinians have any place to go so dwelling on the past is meaningless. Its a fait accompli that neither side can go anywhere else.

"Arab peoples are natives to the Middle East as are Jews. They both have equal rights to call it their own. " "Nonsense."

That is where you and I disagree and where your credibility is shot. If you can not see this as a conflict between two equals, then you are part of the problem, not the solution.

"My comment was totally on point: the same logic that entitles Jews to a homeland in Israel entitles me to a homeland in Ukraine. After all: my family came from there originally. You implicitly acknolwdge the legitimacy of my claim by saying that the Jewish people's historical roots in the Holy Land entitle them to a state there (absent from the equation is what's to be done with the people who were there before all the Jews showed up to claim their turf.)"

I stated before and you completely ignored the point I made-you ARE already entitled by the law of return currently in effect in Ukraine to return and be granted Ukrainian citzenship.

"Oh, I understand the religious connotations. But I don't care. What's happening in Israel/Palestine can be boiled down to a territorial conflict between different sky-god cults. In order to solve the problem, then, we should leave the man-in-the-sky out of it."

You would have to apply that formula to both sides not just the Israelis as you have done over and over again. The Palestinian and Arab refusal to recognize the right of Israel to exist in a Jewish homeland flows directly from its Muslim religious precepts.

I agree with you that both sides to find a solution must put the religions aside.

"And I will continue to ridule anyone who can, with a straight face, claim this bit of land or that because of a promise made by their invisible sky friend two millenia ago because such a claim is inherently ridiculous."

No more ridiculous then the Ukrainian Christian concept of Jesus being God and no more ridiculous then anything advocated by Christianity, Islam, Hinduism or any other religion. If yous top being selective and only criticizing concepts from Judaism and criticize all religions equally, I might take you seriously. Your selectivity at only criticizing Judaism smells of the kind of Christian self-righteousness and hipporcracy when talking about other peoples' faiths that caused this mess in the first place.

[Black Dog]

1) Is Israel prepared to recognize the existence of a Palestinian State and establish permanant borders?

Yes and that was the point of the Oslo Accord. They have repeatedly said yes to the above.

No, Oslo was a temporary fix. "Permanent status issues" (including borders) were deferred to later negotiations which never occurred.

2) Is Israel prepared to renounce violence?

The above question is a bit silly. No the Israeli Defence force would not need to strike back or do what it does if there were no terrorists. I would agree with you curtailing interaction between Palestinians and the Israeli defence Force is required if there is to be peace-but this can't come about until somehow the terrorists are imbolized or disarmed. The quickest way to neutralize or make the IDF redudant is to de-arm the terrorists.

My question was more to illustrate the absuridity of placing such preconditions on negotiations. Saying "the Palestinians must renounce violence" is pretty open to interpretation. Obviously, the Palestinians must work to end terrorism and attacks on Israeli civilians. But I don't think it's fair or relaistic to expect them to give up the military option any mor ethan you'd expect that from Israel. Follow?

"Arab peoples are natives to the Middle East as are Jews. They both have equal rights to call it their own. " "Nonsense."

That is where you and I disagree and where your credibility is shot. If you can not see this as a conflict between two equals, then you are part of the problem, not the solution.

The point I was making and which I should have elaborated on instead of leaving it as a snarky one-word response (I menat to come back to this, but I forgot) is that the only people with a legitimate claim to the land are those who can demonstrate either ownership or at least residency. Once ethno-religious claims kick in, things get silly real fast.

I stated before and you completely ignored the point I made-you ARE already entitled by the law of return currently in effect in Ukraine to return and be granted Ukrainian citzenship.

Obviously, it's an imperfect analogy, but I can see you're a literal minded type, so I'll explain further. In order to get citizenship, I would probably have to demonstrate that I had a blood connection to a legal citizen of that country. IOW: it's not enough to make the claim soley on the basis of my ethnicity. Furthermore, there's legal provisions in place in most countries that allow for the descendants of citizens to be repatriated: but that's not what we're talking about wrt to Israel. If anything, the only thing most of the people of Israel would be entitled to by your reasoning is citizenship in their country of origin (which would mainly be in Europe).

No more ridiculous then the Ukrainian Christian concept of Jesus being God and no more ridiculous then anything advocated by Christianity, Islam, Hinduism or any other religion. If yous top being selective and only criticizing concepts from Judaism and criticize all religions equally, I might take you seriously. Your selectivity at only criticizing Judaism smells of the kind of Christian self-righteousness and hipporcracy when talking about other peoples' faiths that caused this mess in the first place.

In this case, we're talking specifically about the validity of the Jewish people's religious claim over the land of Israel. That's why I'm mocking that. I'd be more than happy to mock any and all other religions where it's appropriate to do so.

[Black Dog]

Just gonna stick this here...

The United States demanded that Israel desist from even exploratory contacts with Syria, of the sort that would test whether Damascus is serious in its declared intentions to hold peace talks with Israel.

In meetings with Israeli officials recently, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was forceful in expressing Washington's view on the matter.

...

When Israeli officials asked Secretary Rice about the possibility of exploring the seriousness of Syria in its calls for peace talks, her response was unequivocal: Don't even think about it.

Israeli officials should tell Condi to stick it. Making peace with Syria would solve a lot more problems than it would create, including the neutralization of Hizbullah as a military force. Kiboshing the very ides of talks is foolish.

[Rue]

"No, Oslo was a temporary fix. "Permanent status issues" (including borders) were deferred to later negotiations which never occurred."

I believe subsequent talks broke down because of the impossibility of negotiating with Hamas now the legal representative for the Palestinians since its charter calls for the destruction of Israel.

"My question was more to illustrate the absuridity of placing such preconditions on negotiations. Saying "the Palestinians must renounce violence" is pretty open to interpretation."

I don't think anyone on the Israeli side is saying anything other then Hamas has to renounce its charter calling for the destruction of Israel. Both sides need to cool it.

"Once ethno-religious claims kick in, things get silly real fast."

Agreed of course.

"Obviously, it's an imperfect analogy, but I can see you're a literal minded type, so I'll explain further. In order to get citizenship, I would probably have to demonstrate that I had a blood connection to a legal citizen of that country. IOW: it's not enough to make the claim soley on the basis of my ethnicity. Furthermore, there's legal provisions in place in most countries that allow for the descendants of citizens to be repatriated: but that's not what we're talking about wrt to Israel. If anything, the only thing most of the people of Israel would be entitled to by your reasoning is citizenship in their country of origin (which would mainly be in Europe)."

No actually your analogy is as close a match as we can get in this discussion. The law of return that allows anyone Jewish to ask for Israeli citizenship is based on a religious notion not just a legal one but it is no more absurd then how the Muslim world does not seperate its religious identity from its state functions or how the Vatican operates its state or how many Christian states operated and still operate.

" I'd be more than happy to mock any and all other religions where it's appropriate to do so."

Good so join me when I see I find all religions equally as absurd and in an ideal world Jews would have never needed a nation nor Muslims nor Christians and in an ideal world all of us should live in non religious states that treat everyone as equals, but in the real world this aint happening and when it comes to the Middle East we need a practical solution to the reality that Palestinians and Israelis aint going anywhere else.

Practically we need someway to defuse the terrorists which would then make the Israeli Defence force a moot point, and somehow find a way to enable a second Palestinian state (other then Jordan) to function in an economic alliance with Jordan and Israel.

In an ideal solution, Israel, Lebanon, Palestine 2, Jordan, Syria. and Iraq and Saudi Arabia should have a free trade agreement but of course that will never happen. The ironic thing is if the Sunni Muslim world stopped warring with Israel, it would make an amazing economic alliance. Wishful thinking.

[Black Dog]

No actually your analogy is as close a match as we can get in this discussion. The law of return that allows anyone Jewish to ask for Israeli citizenship is based on a religious notion not just a legal one but it is no more absurd then how the Muslim world does not seperate its religious identity from its state functions or how the Vatican operates its state or how many Christian states operated and still operate.

That's a weak defense IMO. I can't thiunk of any other state that awards citizenship based solely on ethno-religious grounds and not some demonstrable claim to citizenship.

[PolyNewbie]

I say give Palestine a sea port, get the check points out of there and have Israel give back the land they occupy. Let the Americans build desalinization plants for all middle eastern countries that they have been terrorizing.

[jbg]

I say give Palestine a sea port, get the check points out of there and have Israel give back the land they occupy. Let the Americans build desalinization plants for all middle eastern countries that they have been terrorizing.

Why can't the wealthy Arab oil countries fund all this? As for a seaport, Gaza, last I checked, wasn't landlocked.

[PolyNewbie]

jbg:As for a seaport, Gaza, last I checked, wasn't landlocked.

Check again. Get a higher resolution map.

[jbg]

jbg:As for a seaport, Gaza, last I checked, wasn't landlocked.

Check again. Get a higher resolution map.

Maybe your guide dog can find the beach where allegedly Israelis shelled beachgoers.

[PolyNewbie]

jbg:Maybe your guide dog can find the beach where allegedly Israelis shelled beachgoers.

??

You are a waste of a keyboard and computer.

That part of Palestine that looks like it may have sea access actually has about 300 meters of Israeli control along the beach.

[marcinmoka]

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/mapspub/maps/803130.jpg

[jbg]

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/mapspub/maps/803130.jpg

Doesn't look landlocked to me.

[Figleaf]

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.

You, Rue, are a dirty liar. I have NEVER made characterizations about Jews or anyone else. I have NO particular feelings about ANY people as a people.

I defy you to refer to ANY quote of mine that suggests otherwise. Either cough up whatever evidence you think you have on this malicious allegation of yours, or stop with the smears and lies.

[Figleaf]

"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.

It is an irrelevant point.

Selectively revising Jewish history I expect of Figleaf-you I would expect more out of.

Cite an example where I did such a thing, if you can.

Arab peoples are natives to the Middle East as are Jews. They both have equal rights to call it their own.

That rather depends on your definition of 'rights'. International law does not recognize rights to territory by ethnic or religious groups based on habitation in the remote past or claims of religious covenants. It does recognize the right of a people inhabiting an area to be free from expulsion, genocide, or the denial of self-determination. It is these international rules which today makes 'wiping out' Israel, for example, a criminal act.

Of course what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

[Figleaf]

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.

Ergo Israel has no "right to exist."

Wouldn't it be useful to call things what they really are, so that people don't get confused and make unsupportable claims. In particular here, it's much more accurate not to say 'Israel has a right to exist' but instead 'the people of Israel have the right to establish and maintain their state in the territory they preponderantly and lawfully inhabit.'

[Figleaf]

"No, Oslo was a temporary fix. "Permanent status issues" (including borders) were deferred to later negotiations which never occurred."

I believe subsequent talks broke down because of the impossibility of negotiating with Hamas now the legal representative for the Palestinians since its charter calls for the destruction of Israel.

Is anyone going to acknowledge and attempt to address the challenge to this nonsense that Blackdog, myself, and others have pointed out? Peace talks occur to END a conflict, ergo, the conflict is ongoing when they are attempted. The refusal to talk because the enemy is the enemy is not a reason, it is just a refusal to talk.

Good so join me when I see I find all religions equally as absurd and in an ideal world Jews would have never needed a nation nor Muslims nor Christians and in an ideal world all of us should live in non religious states that treat everyone as equals, but in the real world this aint happening and when it comes to the Middle East we need a practical solution to the reality that Palestinians and Israelis aint going anywhere else.

Amen, brother.

[jbg]

Is anyone going to acknowledge and attempt to address the challenge to this nonsense that Blackdog, myself, and others have pointed out? Peace talks occur to END a conflict, ergo, the conflict is ongoing when they are attempted. The refusal to talk because the enemy is the enemy is not a reason, it is just a refusal to talk.

Not really. Israel talked with Egypt only after Sadat came to Jerusalem, addressed the Knesset and thus acknowledged that at least some form or within some boundaries.

[Figleaf]

Mr. A sticks his thumb in Mr. B's eye and tells him he'll only take it out when Mr. B stops making a fuss about it.

[marcinmoka]

Mr. A sticks his thumb in Mr. B's eye and tells him he'll only take it out when Mr. B stops making a fuss about it.

Mr. A = Palestinian radicals

Mr. B = Israeli citizens

[jbg]

Mr. A sticks his thumb in Mr. B's eye and tells him he'll only take it out when Mr. B stops making a fuss about it.

Huh????