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.
No need to explain the 1948 war as it was of course the Arab states response to the establishment of Israel.
How about the other three? Was there a reason these three other wars were fought? Please enlighten us.
Well, those were all aftershocks of the first one, but we need a little more background. After the Israeli "War of Independence" the Palestinian Arabs fled for their lives, the Arab countries invaded on behalf of their fellow Arabs and were beaten back, and Israel seized 78% percent of Palestine instead of the 55% they got under the terms of the proposed UN partition. They then applied for UN membership and were accepted as a member of the General Assembly in 1949 on the condition that they accept UN Resolution 194, which required the repatriation of Arab refugees. They were admitted to the UN and immediately reneged on enforcing the resolution, hence creating the refugee problem that to an extent still exists.
After that there was no peace in sight between the Arabs and Israelis, and there was a lot of cross-border fighting. In 1956 the socialist government of Nasser in Egypt seized the Suez Canal. The Israelis, along with the British and French whose investors in the canal had been expropriated, responded by invading Egypt and taking the canal back. Interestingly, the US and the USSR both agreed that this was illegal and coerced the alliance to leave the Suez.
In 1967 Nasser decided to close the Suez as support for a blockade against Israel. Israel responded by preemptively invading Egypt, Syria and Jordan and seizing major swaths of territory including the entire Sinai Peninsula. The Israeli air force also took the occasion to attack an American ship in international waters, the USS Liberty, killing 34 American sailors. It's generally believed that this was because the Liberty held intelligence proving that the Israelis started the fighting.
In 1973 Nasser's successor Sadat, who had been looking for a peace deal with Israel and trying to no avail to get President Nixon's attention as a potential ally (for example expelling his Soviet advisers in 1970) stuck back along with the Syrians and fought the Israelis to a near-stalemate. As a result the Israelis agreed to surrender the Sinai Peninsula and certain occupied areas of Syria.
I never knew that having a list of people who you care enough to pray for was offensive or a thing that people mocked. That really makes me sad. I have a number of people I pray for on a regular basis and others I pray for when they are facing a crisis situation. It is done from a place of love and faith and why it should amuse you is beyond me.
I am sorry, did I appear to be mocking her prayer list? I don't recall showing any "amusement" towards it. You really shouldn't put words in people's mouths. I simply stated that to show what type of Christian she was, because, to be perfectly honest, there are only two Christians I know that keep such a "list" of people they are praying for, and they are of the more fundamentalist types. Frankly, one is a hypocrite if you ask me but that is besides the point. I don't think your run of the mill Christian keeps lists of those that need "saving"
Quote:
Originally Posted by LML
The Bible does say, when speaking of Israel; "I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you." So those of us who do take God's words seriously also take that seriously.
Well, that explains it in more detail then, thanks. So sending our money is like blessing Israel, is that it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LML
But, even if I were not a Christian, I would support Israel. I would support Israel because of historical knowledge of what is done to the Jews when they had no country of their own...
So, in your Christian, I support Israel because of what happened to the Jews, opinion, what rights do the Palestinians have, exactly, in this situation? Do they have any? Did they have any in the early 1900's. Just wondering what the "Christian" perspective on this is as my Step-Aunt wasn't able to explain.
I agree that what happened to the Jews was an unspeakable, unimaginable tragedy of epic proportion and the world sat by and watched, doing nothing about it. However, because this happened does not justify or explain the US's unwavering, unilateral support for Israel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques
Well, those were all aftershocks of the first one, but we need a little more background. After the Israeli "War of Independence" the Palestinian Arabs fled for their lives, the Arab countries invaded on behalf of their fellow Arabs and were beaten back, and Israel seized 78% percent of Palestine instead of the 55% they got under the terms of the proposed UN partition. They then applied for UN membership and were accepted as a member of the General Assembly in 1949 on the condition that they accept UN Resolution 194, which required the repatriation of Arab refugees. They were admitted to the UN and immediately reneged on enforcing the resolution, hence creating the refugee problem that to an extent still exists.
After that there was no peace in sight between the Arabs and Israelis, and there was a lot of cross-border fighting. In 1956 the socialist government of Nasser in Egypt seized the Suez Canal. The Israelis, along with the British and French whose investors in the canal had been expropriated, responded by invading Egypt and taking the canal back. Interestingly, the US and the USSR both agreed that this was illegal and coerced the alliance to leave the Suez.
So Nasser had the nerve to attempt to gain control of the Suez Canal that happened to be in EGYPT. And the British, French and Israelis invaded and took their canal back? OK.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques
In 1967 Nasser decided to close the Suez as support for a blockade against Israel. Israel responded by preemptively invading Egypt, Syria and Jordan and seizing major swaths of territory including the entire Sinai Peninsula. The Israeli air force also took the occasion to attack an American ship in international waters, the USS Liberty, killing 34 American sailors. It's generally believed that this was because the Liberty held intelligence proving that the Israelis started the fighting.
So again, Nasser tried to control the canal, which was in EGYPT! How dare he! And so Israel in return occupied the whole Sinai Peninsula (and other areas in Jordan and Syria).
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques
In 1973 Nasser's successor Sadat, who had been looking for a peace deal with Israel and trying to no avail to get President Nixon's attention as a potential ally (for example expelling his Soviet advisers in 1970) stuck back along with the Syrians and fought the Israelis to a near-stalemate. As a result the Israelis agreed to surrender the Sinai Peninsula and certain occupied areas of Syria.
So this war is when Egypt decided they wanted the Sinai back and felt prepared enough to fight for it?
Hmmmmm. Yes this Arab aggression on Israel is totallyuncalled for.
Thanks for explaining why the "Arab states have jointly waged four full scale wars against Israel"
I think the whole israeli situation is a bunch of self fulfilling prophesy....
Attitudes after world war 2 were that the world owed something to the jews because of the halocaust... and basically western powers gave them something that was no longer theirs. Granted we do know even from roman times that the particular area WAS indeed inhabited and controlled by the jews..
So, I think jewish claim to the land there is similar to native american's claims to land here...
The american government has set up reservations... in the same regards as the western powers have set up zones for jewish settlement. Problem is.. western nations just forced this upon the people that were living there already.
So the question is...to be fair, must we look to history in determining who's entitled to what land? Is posession 9 tenths of the law or is historical sins of the fathers play a heavier role in determining things?
Whatever the mess over there... It certainly could have been handled differently...and as noted previously.. the swiftness in all of it does warrant some questioning...
Both sides need to be held accountable for hindering the peace process. It is blatantly clear that islam like every other religion says one thing and does another... and I have not seen any tolerance of religious diversity in that part of the world by the dominant islamic religion. That in itself should not be discounted in approaching the issue NOW. hindsight is always 20/20. but what can be done now? I really question anything will happen sometime soon. Because such deep seeded hatreds and intolerance tends to span generations... and this kind of hate is tied to religion.. which makes it even worse...
I am not a religious person... in fact I think its absolute crap... but I will say that islam has a lot of evolving to do if it is to be taken seriously. That religion is spreading further and further reaching in that area of the world.. and it is not anything like missionaries or preachers... it is with an iron fist.. and that personally puts THAT religion at the bottom of my list of taking seriously if AT ALL
Is posession 9 tenths of the law or is historical sins of the fathers play a heavier role in determining things?
Whatever the mess over there... It certainly could have been handled differently...and as noted previously.. the swiftness in all of it does warrant some questioning...
Well, when the territory in question is surrounded by hostile nations, some of whom possess nookular weapons, and said territory's existence continues only because of backing of the US (which is going through the worst recession since 1929), maybe the history books should be reviewed again in more detail.
BTW, does the UK, France, Poland, the Soviet Union, etc. contribute significantly to Israel as well, or is it just the US?
They should have annexed a portion of Germany after the war and established Israel there.
The funny part about that is that Jewish Americans typically vote Democrat and the Republican Party is the one that really pushes the Israeli support because of Biblical ties.
Crazy world.
Very true. I know many Jews and they all vote Democratic. I don't understand our financial support of Israel either. Jews in this country are powerful, but overall, they are a minority. They don't need our money. I think a lot of it is due to the fact that Christians feel that we need to protect Israel so when Christ returns, the land is intact. But I think the belief is that the Jews will then perish for being non-Christians? The Jewish lobby is very strong. I do feel it's as if we're paying to be their "friends". I'd rather see the money doled out here to inner city poor, people in the Appalachians, US veterans, VA hospitals and so on.
This is an interesting discussion. Thanks to all who are contributing!
Something that I don't think has been mentioned, that is also interesting, is that there are said to be some 100,000 Christians in Palestine. I wonder how the rest of the world's Christians who are staunch supporters of Israel, view these Palestinian Christians. It complicates one's thoughts a bit, doesn't it.
As for protection of Israel being rooted in Christian beliefs about the return of Christ to this geographic location at Armageddon, I don't think that's a valid assumption. A Christian is called to support the Jewish people, but the Government is not doing it because of religious beliefs. It's strictly a matter of security and survival for our countries, and others. To the extent that Islamization is spreading in the world, religion is involved but only because of the threat of violence that Islam presents (a bit of an understatement to call the goal of annihilation of peoples "a threat of violence"). Our government is doing all it can to keep this from our shores and therefore is helping sustain an important democratic ally in the region.
This is an interesting discussion. Thanks to all who are contributing!
Something that I don't think has been mentioned, that is also interesting, is that there are said to be some 100,000 Christians in Palestine. I wonder how the rest of the world's Christians who are staunch supporters of Israel, view these Palestinian Christians. It complicates one's thoughts a bit, doesn't it.
As for protection of Israel being rooted in Christian beliefs about the return of Christ to this geographic location at Armageddon, I don't think that's a valid assumption. A Christian is called to support the Jewish people, but the Government is not doing it because of religious beliefs. It's strictly a matter of security and survival for our countries, and others. To the extent that Islamization is spreading in the world, religion is involved but only because of the threat of violence that Islam presents (a bit of an understatement to call the goal of annihilation of peoples "a threat of violence"). Our government is doing all it can to keep this from our shores and therefore is helping sustain an important democratic ally in the region.
Southward, your second paragraph above contradicts your third, which I think you are in the process of realizing. The rise of Islamism itself has a LOT to do with the failure of secular Arab governments to protect and vindicate the rights of the Palestinians against the Western invaders. Israel is not a line of defense against the Islamist threat, it is a major precipitating cause of it.
When one grasps this fully, it's clear how utterly suicidal our policy has been and continues to be.
Also: whether a country is democratic has zero to do with whether it is a reliable U.S. ally. If democracy spread all over the Middle East, we'd be a lot more screwed than we are right now. So would Israel, incidentally.
I think the whole israeli situation is a bunch of self fulfilling prophesy....
Attitudes after world war 2 were that the world owed something to the jews because of the halocaust... and basically western powers gave them something that was no longer theirs. Granted we do know even from roman times that the particular area WAS indeed inhabited and controlled by the jews..
So, I think jewish claim to the land there is similar to native american's claims to land here...
The american government has set up reservations... in the same regards as the western powers have set up zones for jewish settlement. Problem is.. western nations just forced this upon the people that were living there already.
So the question is...to be fair, must we look to history in determining who's entitled to what land? Is posession 9 tenths of the law or is historical sins of the fathers play a heavier role in determining things?
Whatever the mess over there... It certainly could have been handled differently...and as noted previously.. the swiftness in all of it does warrant some questioning...
Possession is 9 tenths of the law. Unfortunately, you may be right and herein lies the problem.
And I would need more info before calling the Native Americans and Palestinians a fair comparison.
We definitely arrived and pushed the Native Americans out. They fought and lost. At this point they are US citizens, with all the rights of US citizens and more. There lands are considered sovereign territory in the US. They can vote. If they would like to leave the reservations, they are free to move about the country.
I am not sure that the Palestinians have ever been afforded that opportunity. A Palestinian in Israel, or in the occupied territories, does not have these freedoms. If you are not free to come and go, then you are not free.
If a Palestinian is not a "Palestinian" but they are also not Israeli, then what are they? What nation do they have citizenship from? When they have children, where do the children have the right to call home? If I go to the other end of the world and have a baby, my child is AMERICAN. They have the rights of an American Citizen. What rights do the Palestinians have? Where do their children fit in? And they are not all terrorists. All the Japanese we threw into internment camps were not guilty of a crime, but we rounded 'em all up, just in case. Imagine if we did that, then left them there for 50 or 60 years?
This is what concerns me as a human being. Yes, Israel at this point has the right to exist. Did it before? Well, I suppose so considering the World's view at the time of carving up "undeveloped" lands and divvying them up. Anyhow, they are there. Israeli children have been born there and they have as much right to their country as the Palestinians do. Therefore, they have to stay. But the Palestinians must be dealt with fairly, in a humane and dignified way, in a way that they are allowed to prosper. Being suppressed and oppressed and restricted and humiliated is not the way to get people to just accept the political reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boiseguy
Both sides need to be held accountable for hindering the peace process. It is blatantly clear that islam like every other religion says one thing and does another... and I have not seen any tolerance of religious diversity in that part of the world by the dominant islamic religion. That in itself should not be discounted in approaching the issue NOW. hindsight is always 20/20. but what can be done now? I really question anything will happen sometime soon. Because such deep seeded hatreds and intolerance tends to span generations... and this kind of hate is tied to religion.. which makes it even worse...
I am not a religious person... in fact I think its absolute crap... but I will say that islam has a lot of evolving to do if it is to be taken seriously. That religion is spreading further and further reaching in that area of the world.. and it is not anything like missionaries or preachers... it is with an iron fist.. and that personally puts THAT religion at the bottom of my list of taking seriously if AT ALL
Islam and the spread of it may be a hindrance to the peace process now, if you'd like to call it that, but Islam and Judaism and Christianity peacefully coexisted in Palestine for centuries.
I know a woman, born in Haifa (then Palestine), who fled, FLED, from Haifa as a 4 year old girl, in the back of a van.
She is Christian, not Muslim.
As far as I understand it, the Palestinian Christians were as afraid of the Israeli army at the time as the Muslim Palestinians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques
Southward, your second paragraph above contradicts your third, which I think you are in the process of realizing. The rise of Islamism itself has a LOT to do with the failure of secular Arab governments to protect and vindicate the rights of the Palestinians against the Western invaders. Israel is not a line of defense against the Islamist threat, it is a major precipitating cause of it.
When one grasps this fully, it's clear how utterly suicidal our policy has been and continues to be.
Two very good points.
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.
