Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In 1948, following the Holocaust, it was considered by many, including US President Harry Truman, that a Jewish state was needed as a haven. The Jewish people had been stateless for 1900 years.
The UN came up with an partition plan that gave them 50% of the area known as Palestine. It excluded important areas including Judea, Samaria, and the West Bank. Jews reluctantly accepted the plan. Jews were used to negotiating from a position of weakness. Arabs were a people of conquest, and so they, summarily rejected the plan. Instead they went to war against the Jews in 1948. The war ended in Nov. 1948, leaving the Jews now with 80% of Palestine.
In 1949, Jews offered negotiation, including return of some of the territory in exchange for final resolution of the borders. The Arabs refused to talk directly with them. They worked through the UN to demand a return to the UN partition boundaries, which they had never recognized.
I was hoping that you or Pruzhany might offer an objective reply to my comment #109, and it would also be nice if rather than always presenting this history in the way you do, begin with the source of the "friction" in the first place and then write in more balanced terms as to who did what to whom and why...
Beginning with what some people believed was appropriate following the Holocaust, say there were enough people who agreed "a Jewish state was needed as a haven." At the time, I think most people firmly believed all people needed a haven against the likes of the Nazis and of course the Nazis were dealt with accordingly. If only that were the end of the story...
Now, what is the right way to address what happened to the Jews in Nazis, Germany? Would be nice to think there might be a shared satisfaction about beating the Axis powers, so the rest of the world could go back to living without such a threat. Right? I have little doubt Jewish people would be doing just as well all over the world today if Zionism had not emerged, just as they are generally doing all over the world outside of Israel despite antiSemitism. No matter of course, because that's a lot of "water under the bridge" that can't be turned back. (Lots of unnecessary blood too).
Okay. Can't undue history. Sure, but start there with the Holocaust in Nazi Germany, and then consider all options as an Arab might consider them from then going forward. Follow that line of reasoning, that history, what transpired from there, and only then can one objectively consider how all involved would view the right or wrong of what followed. What is "defense" and what is "offense."
Hint: gays were also persecuted by the Nazis, thousands arrested as homosexuals, incarcerated and murdered in Nazi concentration camps. In fact, gays experienced even more exceptional cruelty (if that can be imagined). What was done for them after the Holocaust? Pretty much nothing. In fact more like what was done to them. Some even re-arrested and imprisoned after the war. Only in 2005, did the European Parliament adopt a resolution on the Holocaust which included the persecution of homosexuals.
Now, in similar fashion, what is the REASONABLE thing to do about these persecuted people too? Still being persecuted all over the world to this day I might add. Is the answer necessarily their own country? Indeed, what has the answer been instead and what has it cost in terms of dollars and lives instead? How is the alternative working instead? For all concerned...
Evidence? There were tons of terrorists attacks and murders of Jews by Arabs from the beginning. You also forget that, between 1948 and 1967 over 500,000 Jews were expelled from Islamic nations like Morocco, Iraq, Yemen etc., where in some cases Jews had been living for several thousand years.
Show me where the Jews caused 500,000 Arabs to become refugees.
This ain’t about those other nations. This is about Palestine. Wanna talk about mass expulsions? Why not implicate European nations in the LARGEST expulsion of Jews instead of just talking about what happened in Arab countries?
Show you where Jews caused 500k Arabs to become refugees? Jesus Christ...we’re talking about Palestine here! Israelis caused at LEAST 750,000 Arabs to become refugees by expelling them from their homes and towns and expropriating everything they owned. They refused to allow them to return to their homes. That’s against international law.
So if you’re gonna give sanction to gangsterism, then don’t try to hold up Israel as a beacon when they behaved no differently than the Arab nations did.
I was hoping that you or Pruzhany might offer an objective reply to my comment #109, and it would also be nice if rather than always presenting this history in the way you do, begin with the source of the "friction" in the first place and then write in more balanced terms as to who did what to whom and why...
Now, in similar fashion, what is the REASONABLE thing to do about these persecuted people too? Still being persecuted all over the world to this day I might add...
What is the reasonable thing for WHO to do about WHO?
It surely should not involve the US Congress, with so much real to do, spending a lot of time making sure it become illegal for anyone NOT to trade with them.
I'm Jewish, BTW.
The really reasonable thing to do is obvious....but not in the cards. That is, there is lots of land in the world where one is not surrounded by enemies.....enemies, we should note, who were not generally responsible for the Holocaust and the like.
But being as we already are not being reasonable, the question has to be more specific. Who should be suggesting doing what about who? Should a single (innocent) American youth die fighting Arabs for Israel? I use the world innocent there because if one wants to sign up and do it - be my guest! But I'm not sending my children in that direction.
The friction, in simple terms, has to do with Europe wanting to offshore their problems. Not much different than the Irish or the Scots-Irish or whoever they always wanted to get rid of. They've done a fine job of it.
This is a religious war in a sense....and not against Islam. It's Christians and Catholics who are (IMHO) largely responsible for the "Jewish problem". There is no problem.....really. Certainly Jews are no more of a problem than Mormons or anyone else...in the modern day. In fact, the opposite is true - it's very rare for a relatively small number of people to have added as much good to the modern world as those of Jewish extraction.
Personally, tho, I separate Jews and Israel. One is a geo-political situation rising out of the Wars and the other is simply a heritage based on traditions.
Why must it be an either or question?
I neither support Israel or am against Israel.
I am however, against the unconditional support our country gives Israel. It is undeserved and undermines our credibility in the region.
This is my exact position. Neither for nor against. I just don’t wanna be peed on and told that it’s raining.
No one as of yet has been able to explain to me why all of America’s eggs should be placed in an Israeli basket. No one as of yet has been able to tell me what we get from the Israelis that we can’t procure elsewhere. No one has ever explained to me why gaining ONE so called ally in the Middle East was worth losing every other friend we had there...and our friends list was quite extensive.
What is the reasonable thing for WHO to do about WHO?
It surely should not involve the US Congress, with so much real to do, spending a lot of time making sure it become illegal for anyone NOT to trade with them.
I'm Jewish, BTW.
The really reasonable thing to do is obvious....but not in the cards. That is, there is lots of land in the world where one is not surrounded by enemies.....enemies, we should note, who were not generally responsible for the Holocaust and the like.
But being as we already are not being reasonable, the question has to be more specific. Who should be suggesting doing what about who? Should a single (innocent) American youth die fighting Arabs for Israel? I use the world innocent there because if one wants to sign up and do it - be my guest! But I'm not sending my children in that direction.
The friction, in simple terms, has to do with Europe wanting to offshore their problems. Not much different than the Irish or the Scots-Irish or whoever they always wanted to get rid of. They've done a fine job of it.
This is a religious war in a sense....and not against Islam. It's Christians and Catholics who are (IMHO) largely responsible for the "Jewish problem". There is no problem.....really. Certainly Jews are no more of a problem than Mormons or anyone else...in the modern day. In fact, the opposite is true - it's very rare for a relatively small number of people to have added as much good to the modern world as those of Jewish extraction.
Personally, tho, I separate Jews and Israel. One is a geo-political situation rising out of the Wars and the other is simply a heritage based on traditions.
To me, Jews and Israel have little to do with each other. I don’t even see Israel as a “Jewish State” per se. Seems to me that the intention of many early Zionists was to have a secular pluralist state where Jews would be safe among many other groups of people, and there’d be strong and robust debates about affairs of state and domestic politics. That at least SEEMS to embody the spirit of many of the Jewish philosophers and social scientists that I’ve read about. People like Hannah Arendt.
What is the reasonable thing for WHO to do about WHO?
It surely should not involve the US Congress, with so much real to do, spending a lot of time making sure it become illegal for anyone NOT to trade with them.
I'm Jewish, BTW.
The really reasonable thing to do is obvious....but not in the cards. That is, there is lots of land in the world where one is not surrounded by enemies.....enemies, we should note, who were not generally responsible for the Holocaust and the like.
But being as we already are not being reasonable, the question has to be more specific. Who should be suggesting doing what about who? Should a single (innocent) American youth die fighting Arabs for Israel? I use the world innocent there because if one wants to sign up and do it - be my guest! But I'm not sending my children in that direction.
The friction, in simple terms, has to do with Europe wanting to offshore their problems. Not much different than the Irish or the Scots-Irish or whoever they always wanted to get rid of. They've done a fine job of it.
This is a religious war in a sense....and not against Islam. It's Christians and Catholics who are (IMHO) largely responsible for the "Jewish problem". There is no problem.....really. Certainly Jews are no more of a problem than Mormons or anyone else...in the modern day. In fact, the opposite is true - it's very rare for a relatively small number of people to have added as much good to the modern world as those of Jewish extraction.
Personally, tho, I separate Jews and Israel. One is a geo-political situation rising out of the Wars and the other is simply a heritage based on traditions.
First answer is as I tried to suggest, perhaps not in strong or obvious enough terms?
That Travis T (and others who want to argue in similar one-sided fashion) consider more than just that one side from only those select points in time of history. Otherwise, call it all whatever you wish, what can't be undone can't be undone regardless. All we can do now is to try to make matters better not worse, and I believe this country can only move in that direction if we are fair, reasonable and objective about all there is to consider, including what you add as well.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,638,617 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed067
Why should I support Israel?
The long term narrative has been all because of the holocaust in Nazi Germany, so if you dare criticize one single thing about Israel, the anti-Semite card gets played
Certainly Jews are no more of a problem than Mormons or anyone else...in the modern day. In fact, the opposite is true - it's very rare for a relatively small number of people to have added as much good to the modern world as those of Jewish extraction.
But again what if not only the good is considered? What if the bad is added too? Again back to a more balanced objective assessment if we're going to make such assessments...
You mention Mormons too. The same "good" can be argued about Mormons as well. Right? But is this really the issue here? I find the comparison of history in this regard also very interesting (if not humorous).
"In 1831, Smith and his followers moved west, planning to build a communalistic American Zion. They first gathered in Kirtland, Ohio and established an outpost in Independence, Missouri which was intended to be Zion's "center place". During the 1830s, Smith sent out missionaries, published revelations, and supervised construction of the Kirtland Temple. The collapse of the church-sponsored Kirtland Safety Society Anti-Banking Company and violent skirmishes with non-Mormon Missourians caused Smith and his followers to establish a new settlement at Nauvoo, Illinois, where he became a spiritual and political leader. In 1844, Smith and the Nauvoo city council angered non-Mormons by destroying a newspaper that had criticized Smith's power and practice of polygamy. Smith was imprisoned in Carthage, Illinois, where he was killed when a mob stormed the jailhouse.
Smith published many revelations and other texts that his followers regard as scripture. His teachings discuss the nature of God, cosmology, family structures, political organization, and religious collectivism. His followers regard him as a prophet comparable to Moses and Elijah, and several religious denominations consider themselves the continuation of the church that he organized, including The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Community of Christ."
What is it, really, that people outside the following find it so hard to accept in these regards? Is there a term like antiSemitism with respect to people who don't like Mormons simply because they are Mormon? No, so it's a lot easier to be critical and/or objective about Mormonism without that sort of "creep" or noise that only tends to seriously confuse the issue...
The long term narrative has been all because of the holocaust in Nazi Germany, so if you dare criticize one single thing about Israel, the anti-Semite card gets played
I'm sure you'll repeat that one-sentence lie no matter how often you're presented with examples of members of Congress, newspapers, Israeli and other Jews, etc. criticizing Israel and there's not a peep about anti-Semitism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
