Does Israel have a "right" to Palestine?

[YmirGF]

Evil evil Israel. Reacting to an act of war with war.

Is there no end to their heinous behavior?

 

[Sir Doom]

Every nation on this Earth was someone else's land before it became whatever nation it is today. I agree with Heathen Hammer on this one. They have a right to be there by virtue of their presence and everyone else's inability or complete lack of desire to move them.

This is how all nations endure. Its silly to bring something like 'rights' into question when talking about nations.

 

[jasonwill2]

Since this has already been ignored several times in this thread, and since this is central to the OP, I'll discuss it shortly again.
The reasons for creating Israel are not because Jews around the world suddenly decided to reclaim the Promised Land. The prime reason was an attempt to find a solution to European Jewry's status in Europe. Let's remember that this is a community who went from being highly active in the German military during WWI, to being expelled from practically all walks of life a few short decades later as WWII was brewing.
Furthermore, we are not discussing a monolithic military invasion of Jews into Palestine. Jews have immigrated to the land, dried swamps, worked the land and created towns and communities already since the 19th century when Palestine was under Turkish rule (and later British rule).

But why Palestine? Why that specific place? That couldn't of been a coincidence.

You could benefit from a thread i started a while back.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/middle-eastern-politics/70821-palestine-clearing-up-dust.html

Part of my thread:

Interesting, I shall look at that.

Every nation on this Earth was someone else's land before it became whatever nation it is today. I agree with Heathen Hammer on this one. They have a right to be there by virtue of their presence and everyone else's inability or complete lack of desire to move them.

This is how all nations endure. Its silly to bring something like 'rights' into question when talking about nations.

The fact that it is so modern is what makes it different.

 

[Alceste]

Evil evil Israel. Reacting to an act of war with war.

Well there's a nicely context-free interpretation of my post.

If you're not going to follow the conversation, why comment?

 

[Sylvan]

I have read this thread up to this point and while I can see sound arguments on both sides one thing I cannot find justification for is current aggressive settlement activities. Cutting indigenous farmers off from their water sources, fields, orchards, etc, is inhumane. Stealing those fields is an act of war/oppression. That "it has been done before" is a pretty weak justification among those who claim to live in a 'civilized' society. So the supporters of the state of Israel need to justify that activity as long as the state of Israel does nothing to end it. Keep in mind I am speaking as a resident but certainly not a supporter of the state of the United States of America. And a direct beneficiary of my ancestors slaughter of native populations. I also realize, as a friend of a few dual Israeli-US citizens who grew up in secular Zionist households, that this is not an uncomplicated issue. I do however think that just telling them all to 'go to Jordan' is pretty childish.

Lets also acknowledge that Israel is a victim of circumstance as one of the last nations to have forged itself in blood before the "United Nations" has attempted to routinize the process. As a result they are unfairly portrayed. However, there are things going on in Israel regarding the treatment of the Palestinian population which are despicable. This is a fact, and one which has been little addressed in this thread. I'd like to hear the justification for that activity.

 

[Poisonshady313]

However, there are things going on in Israel regarding the treatment of the Palestinian population which are despicable.

Such as?

 

[England my lionheart]

But why Palestine? Why that specific place? That couldn't of been a coincidence.

WW1 the Ottoman Empire was on the losing side and lost the control of Palestine to the British,read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_(legal_instrument) during this time a young Egyptian Officer Haj Amin al-Husseini was honing his skills in Turkeys genocide of Armenians,later he was to become the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and during WW2 was an ally of Germanys Nazi party and quite a fan of the Holocaust and there was even an Muslim SS Hanjar division and death camps had they won.

,
In the early days Jews and Muslims lived side by side in peace then with the emergence of The Grand Mufti who after having some people assasinated including opposing high ranking Muslims incited violence against the Jews,the massacre of the Jews of Hebron being just one incident,as well as the Grand Mufti there were the founders of the Muslim Brotherhood,Egyptians Hassan Al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb,Imam Hassan Al Banna was the Spur for Hamas and Qutb for Osama Bin Laden.

The reality is the Jewish people of Europe and Russia were either forced out of their respective countries or exterminated,there was ample opportunity for the countries attending the Evian conference to take them in,no go, and the fact that Palestine was the ancestral home of these people and the courage of the survivors of all the above to actually grab the Bull by the horns and make a State for themselves it makes sense.

IMO Israel is an Oasis in an ocean of mind ****,sure the settlements are a massive problem,this problem could have been prevented by accepting a two State solution a very long time ago with drawing a line on a map,instead Hamas are happier being proxy warriors for Iran.

 

[fallingblood]

Nice cop out of the actual issues and contention. What there's no room for in rational discussion is completely avoiding the issue of "Jordan is Palestine" and then saying that such a solution of implementing a population transfer which the Palestinians are already planning for the Jews if they get a state should be out of the question. If you don't want to rationally discuss the actual historical objectivity and geopolitik of the situation without resorting to emotional appeals that undercut the facts on the ground, feel free to not reply.

It's not a cop out. I simply pointed out that you pretended to know what I was thinking (and then created a strawman argument), and then went on about something I never said.

I stated that it is ridiculous to force people out of their homes simply because they are deemed different. That is intolerant, hateful, and does nothing to solve anything. It just causes more problems as it is unjust, and intolerant. Hate only breeds hate. And I went no further than this on what my plans would be.

Please explain how exactly what I said has no basis in what you're saying. You are definitely a level 9 cop-outer, I am impressed. You have expertly dodged the entire issue of how Jordan is already their state and it's only fair for the victorious party in a war the other team started to dictate the terms, especially when they have their own state.

I didn't dodge it. I simply think it is ridiculous to force people from their homes because they are deemed to be different. I don't care who is victorious in war, as that doesn't excuse atrocities.

How do you plan to tell the Palestinians to not kick the Jews out of Judea-Samaria as part of the 2 state solution, and do you think a 2 state solution should go through even if it involves Ethnic cleansing of Jews? I don't see what's wrong with fighting fire with fire, especially when the other side already has a state which comprises 80% of the territory claimed as "Palestine".

Did I state anything about a 2 state solution? No I did not. I'm fine with a one state solution. I'm fine with Israel being Israel. At least for now. So really, your argument has no bearing on anything I said or think. You made a strawman, and tried to act as if it had any bearing in what I said.

And really, in the end, to evils don't make a right.

 

[fallingblood]

But why Palestine? Why that specific place? That couldn't of been a coincidence.

Not a coincidence. But it is where many Jews were already living, and building up. And in fact, it is where they had lived for centuries. It was a centralized area, that was already building itself into this. So it makes logical sense.

It would be very similar to if Native Americans started buying land here, where they already lived. And then started building a society. They aren't doing it for religious purposes, they are doing it because it is already home.

 

[Shermana]

It's not a cop out. I simply pointed out that you pretended to know what I was thinking (and then created a strawman argument), and then went on about something I never said.

I stated that it is ridiculous to force people out of their homes simply because they are deemed different. That is intolerant, hateful, and does nothing to solve anything. It just causes more problems as it is unjust, and intolerant. Hate only breeds hate. And I went no further than this on what my plans would be.
I didn't dodge it. I simply think it is ridiculous to force people from their homes because they are deemed to be different. I don't care who is victorious in war, as that doesn't excuse atrocities.
Did I state anything about a 2 state solution? No I did not. I'm fine with a one state solution. I'm fine with Israel being Israel. At least for now. So really, your argument has no bearing on anything I said or think. You made a strawman, and tried to act as if it had any bearing in what I said.

And really, in the end, to evils don't make a right.

Well I don't see my Jordanian transfer plan as evil or an atrocity, and there's the rub. And I'm willing to defend my "evil atrocity" as a very sound, fair, legitimate plan that would solve everything and be the BEST POSSIBLE solution. Like I said, all such criticism of the plan is writing off the details for a big emotional appeal, when in fact this would be the best way to solve the situation. The only other solution, the 2 state solution that everyone talks about, involves the same thing being done to the Jews, but no one seems to have any problem with that or want to discuss that. Why does no one want to discuss the fact that the 2 state solution involves ETHNIC CLEANSING OF THE JEWS FROM JUDEA SAMARIA? You think its merely about kicking them out because they're different, do you really believe it's just about that?

 

[Alceste]

Well I don't see my Jordanian transfer plan as evil or an atrocity, and there's the rub. And I'm willing to defend my "evil atrocity" as a very sound, fair, legitimate plan that would solve everything and be the BEST POSSIBLE solution. Like I said, all such criticism of the plan is writing off the details for a big emotional appeal, when in fact this would be the best way to solve the situation. The only other solution, the 2 state solution that everyone talks about, involves the same thing being done to the Jews, but no one seems to have any problem with that or want to discuss that. Why does no one want to discuss the fact that the 2 state solution involves ETHNIC CLEANSING OF THE JEWS FROM JUDEA SAMARIA? You think its merely about kicking them out because they're different, do you really believe it's just about that?

As far as I can see, you are the only advocate of ethnic cleansing in this thread. I don't see how your mind can withstand the hypocrisy of thinking it's inhumane to ask Israel to repatriate the illegal settlers in the West Bank, but completely humane to ask the Palestinian majority to move to Jordan. I don't address it much because, frankly, I think it's so irrational and fanatical I wouldn't even know where to begin.

 

[Shermana]

As far as I can see, you are the only advocate of ethnic cleansing in this thread. I don't see how your mind can withstand the hypocrisy of thinking it's inhumane to ask Israel to repatriate the illegal settlers in the West Bank, but completely humane to ask the Palestinian majority to move to Jordan. I don't address it much because, frankly, I think it's so irrational and fanatical I wouldn't even know where to begin.

In this thread perhaps, but I think you're deliberately avoiding, like everyone else who defends the 2 state solution, that it involves the Jews being kicked out. And like the others, all you do is call it "irrational" as if you can just throw everything else out because of some emotional appeal as if the facts themselves don't matter. In fact, by the way you say "Illegal settlement", I think I see a hint of you supporting the idea that the Jews should leave from Judea-Samaria in the first place, or am I wrong on that?

Nowfor the term "Illegal settlers". There's another rub. You are clearly biased against the West Bank settlers as "Illegal" but don't apply the same concept of being "Squatters" to the Palestinians. Why are they illegal? So I assume you would have no problem then if the Palestinians threw these "illegal settlers" as you call them out? Should I make a thread on just how "illegal" these settlers are? If you're going to start the argument calling the West Bank settlers "illegal", well then, what does that say? How are we supposed to have a rational discussion when you've already bought into the Pro-Palestinian propaganda that the settlements are "illegal"? Illegal To the UN? You really want to get into that discussion? I'll 1x1 on that if you want. Those settlers have every right to live on land that their army took in a defensive war, I see no example in history that a country that was attacked first was forced to give up land gained in a defensive war. And yes, Jordan attacked first. The Palestinians however, why is their squatting now acceptable? What country in history would tolerate this illegal squatting in land they conquered fair and square by the people who were trying to drive them to the sea for decades?

What if I said your idea of labeling the Settlers as illegal was "irrational and fanatical"? Shall we call American settlements and Canadian settlements illegal too? Shall we call Iranian settlements in Kurdish land illegal? Since when did the UN rubric get involved?

Well what peace plan do YOU have in mind? If none, please don't criticize mine without addressing the details which is 100% fair and would provide the Palestinians with the best possible lives.

So if anyone else would like to explain why the Palestinians shouldn't be happy with their state called Jordan and why Israel shouldn't help transfer these defeated-warriors of the war they started against Israel to this state that they've already this whole time without getting into mere emotional appeals? Anyone want to discuss the actual facts and geopolitik and serious realities?

And if anyone wants to defend why the settlements are illegal, please do so, I'll be happy to school you on the actual facts on the ground and why the UN resolution is not only meaningless but doesn't even apply. If anything, the land being occupied is from Jordan who occupied it from Israel first.

 

[Alceste]

I say the settlements are illegal because they are illegal. International law and Israeli settlements - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's a mainstream view, not a fanatical and irrational one.

Again, if mass eviction is bad / wrong for Jewish Israelis, how can it be good / right for Palestinians? If you consider it bad but necessary, doesn't it make more sense to evict the smaller population of the two, to limit the impact? If you consider it good and desirable, shouldn't Israeli settlers be pleased and delighted to return to the embrace of a strong, Jewish state?

Your position is totally irrational. How can you ever expect to convince a neutral person that mass eviction is either a terrible crime or perfectly humane based solely on the ethnicity of the victims (or beneficiaries)? Surely you understand that all a rational and objective outsider is going to see in such a position is hypocrisy and bigotry?

 

[Shermana]

They are not illegal. The cited "international community" has notoriously been anti-Israel at the UN while putting Ahmadinijad in a Human rights council seat, ignoring every other country in the world. They don't actually fit the description of illegal, and with that, I don't see when UN law actually applied in the last 30 years. I will 1x1 on the issue.

Your position is totally irrational.

Again, all you are capable of doing is calling it this or that without discussing the specifics because obviously the facts and geopolitik (as well as fairness) don't matter at all. We can just call it irrational without examining the facts. I think my position is the MOST rational position, and those who are opposed to it I think are completely irrational and naive liberal ideological bleeding hearts whose emotions only go one way and who don't let facts get in the way with their feelings.

How can you ever expect to convince a neutral person

If you think the Israeli settlements are illegal, you're already not neutral. I would expect to convince a RATIONAL neutral person who is willing to actually address the facts and not resort to emotional appeals in an attempt to undercut the harsh realities. So if the neutral person is not willing to actually listen and just wants to cry "IRRATIONAL!!!", why would I waste my time? If anything I'm just showing that you have no actual counter argument to everyone else reading. No matter how much someone may say it's "ridiculous", I'm not looking at this from a Care bear perspective, I'm looking from a completely fact-based perspective. When you remove the care-bear emotions from the situation and all the facts are laid out, I think anyone with half a brain and an ounce of common sense would easily see that the Jordan-is-Palestine plan is by far and large the best, most feasible, longest-lasting, and most secure solution for this historic pickle.

that mass eviction is either a terrible crime or perfectly humane based solely on the ethnicity of the victims (or beneficiaries)?

That's what the Palestinians want for the Jews, so any argument that "two evils don't make a right" get thrown out the window for me, because to me its a matter of actual facts on the ground and realpolitik, not petty one-sided emotional appeals that don't involve the actual specifics.

Surely you understand that all a rational and objective outsider is going to see in such a position is hypocrisy and bigotry?

I can see why someone who doesn't want to discuss the actual facts might see it as hypocrisy and bigotry but I am 100% confident that a completely objective person would see that my plan is the most humane, sensible solution to dealing with an otherwise unsolvable Gordion Knot, and they'd recognize there is no other solution other than to ethnically cleanse the Jewish "illegal settlers" from Judea-Samaria. I asked you if you can find a solution, I'm guessing you can't. Well I can. Just some people may not like it. It'd be the best possible thing for the Palestinians and Jordanians in my view, shall I make a whole thread on it?

 

[Alceste]

I don't see how we can discuss it any more, Shermana. I will never understand where you are coming from. Illegal acts are actually legal, but nobody cares about "the facts", millions should be evicted to prevent the eviction of thousands. It's OK to do evil to those who wish evil upon us, etc. These are ways of thinking that are completely alien to me. There is so little overlap between your reality and the mainstream view of "the facts" I can't even find a way to respond to your claims.

 

[lunakilo]

... Those settlers have every right to live on land that their army took in a defensive war, I see no example in history that a country that was attacked first was forced to give up land gained in a defensive war. And yes, Jordan attacked first. ... in land they conquered fair and square...

... why the Palestinians shouldn't be happy with their state called Jordan and why Israel shouldn't help transfer these defeated-warriors ...

... the land being occupied is from Jordan who occupied it from Israel first.

opcorn:

 

[Shermana]

I don't see how we can discuss it any more, Shermana. I will never understand where you are coming from. Illegal acts are actually legal, but nobody cares about "the facts", millions should be evicted to prevent the eviction of thousands. It's OK to do evil to those who wish evil upon us, etc. These are ways of thinking that are completely alien to me. There is so little overlap between your reality and the mainstream view of "the facts" I can't even find a way to respond to your claims.

Again, this "illegal acts". From here we are having a drift because of our interpretation. You take the "International Community" UN opinion of Israel's actions, which is the same community that gave Iran a Human Rights council seat, and I'll take the Israeli view of the settlements. It basically boils down to you having a UN- "Mainstream" perspective. And with that, we'd need a full on detailed debate about the specifics and facts.

And again, I think my plan would involve defusing the time bomb, any other plan involves them just festering even further and the water boiling even hotter. My plan involves taking them out of the tiny Judea-Samaria and putting them into relatively Gigantic, underdeveloped and fairly rich Jordan. What does your plan involve? My plan involves what would be a giant leap in the quality of life for the Palestinians in exchange for the land that THEY LOST IN WAR AGAINST ISRAEL in which no other country in history was forced to give up land they took in a defensive war. It would also involve renaming Jordan to Palestine, especially seeing it sits on 80% of the Palestinian mandate.

So if you have no plan for the situation, then you basically advocate more of the same, which is more death, more fighting, more hostility, more poverty. My plan involves a great new era for the Palestinian people to find great wealth and opprotunity among their Palestinian brethren in the state they already have. Who's the humane one now?

 

[lunakilo]

I would expect to convince a RATIONAL neutral person who is willing to actually address the facts and not resort to emotional appeals in an attempt to undercut the harsh realities.

I may have missed the part where you explained the facts of how deporting palestinians is just and good but deporting jews is unjust and evil.

Could you run those facts by me again please?

 

[Shermana]

I may have missed the part where you explained the facts of how deporting palestinians is just and good but deporting jews is unjust and evil.

Could you run those facts by me again please?

Sure, the Jews won the war against the Palestinians who attacked first and were trying to kill/deport the Jews. Start with that, and please explain any time in history that the winning party had to take terms from the losing party.

If you don't think its fair to have such power over the people who were trying to kill you first and refused to talk peace every time, we have different ideas of morality.

 

[Alceste]

Again, this "illegal acts". From here we are having a drift because of our interpretation. You take the "International Community" UN opinion of Israel's actions, which is the same community that gave Iran a Human Rights council seat, and I'll take the Israeli view of the settlements. It basically boils down to you having a UN- "Mainstream" perspective. And with that, we'd need a full on detailed debate about the specifics and facts.

And again, I think my plan would involve defusing the time bomb, any other plan involves them just festering even further and the water boiling even hotter. My plan involves taking them out of the tiny Judea-Samaria and putting them into relatively Gigantic, underdeveloped and fairly rich Jordan. What does your plan involve? My plan involves what would be a giant leap in the quality of life for the Palestinians in exchange for the land that THEY LOST IN WAR AGAINST ISRAEL in which no other country in history was forced to give up land they took in a defensive war.

So if you have no plan for the situation, then you basically advocate more of the same, which is more death, more fighting, more hostility, more poverty. My plan involves a great new era for the Palestinian people to find great wealth and opprotunity among their Palestinian brethren in the state they already have. Who's the humane one now?

My plan is either a two state solution, with a Palestinian majority in one state and a Jewish majority in the other, or a one state solution where Israel officially absorbs the West bank, extends full and equal civil rights to Palestinians, and gives up the Zionist fantasy of engineering an ethnic majority to last for all time.

Mass eviction is completely unacceptable, and also illegal. Ideally, Jewish people who wished to remain in Palestinian state would do so, as citizens with full and equal (not preferential) civil rights, and Palestinians who wished to remain in Israel would also do so. Land disputes between Palestinian farmers and settlers would be settled in court. Any land that was stolen would be returned to its rightful owner, and any that was legitimately purchased would remain with the purchaser.