The Israeli Situation

jnifw3nloi · 05-17-2007, 07:45 AM

While I am no anti-semite, I hold that the creation of Israel was a mistake. In the attempt to creat a homeland for a people that have been scattered for centuries, many millions have been made refugees and thousands killed in the conflicts that resulted. It was very foolish to displace millions of natives, who had lived their long before the idea of modern Israel was though up. The following conflicts have also caused huge losses of life and at times very uncivilized conduct by both the Islam nations and Israel, particularly the 6 day war and the Lebanon war.
It was not justified to claim a portion of land for a certain people just because they may have, at one point in history, lived there. They left. Other people had called the land home for hundreds of years. And they were still living there when the Zionists decided to move in. While I in no way condone the suffering of the Jews, it seems very stupid for them to begin abusing others.

H-AuB10.13.29 · 05-21-2007, 04:59 PM

Well, I'm lebanese and I lived through the war, and I know the suffering that not many of you know!But, I was lucky!Many people in south Lebanon were displaced, and many were killed, and thousands of children were left in shock, while bombs are killing their loved ones!I was certainly lucky!
I admit that Hizbollah started the war by kidnapping TWO SOLDIERS, but israel didn't have the right to do this to us, to lebanon..Lebanon is a wonderful country, but was seriously damaged by Israel, and all we can do is thank those country who helped us in Paris 3, to reduce the damages, especially France and Saudi Arabia..
and as my friend Neo said, It is a dirty game..

FutureNavyMan08 · 05-22-2007, 04:30 AM

Isreal defended herself (countries are commonly described in female terms, I want to say that before someone makes a weak attempt to insult my intelligence) against an act of aggression. The goverment of Lebanon and Hezbollah brought that on themselves. What we have here is a goverment so focused on going after Isreal that it would put itself at risk of destruction.

jnifw3nloi · 05-23-2007, 03:46 AM

If Israel was interested in defence against terrorism, such defence could have been accomplished by many ways rather than just killing civilians and destroying the infrastructure of another country.
The situation is likely to get worse however. An international peace-keeping force, one not led by the US, may become important in keeping "peace". Lasting resolutions need to be created and if the parties are unwilling to compromise, the civilians of the region must be protected by force, unfortunately. If all fails, perhaps Israel should be dismanteled.

H-AuB10.13.29 · 05-23-2007, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FutureNavyMan08

Isreal defended herself (countries are commonly described in female terms, I want to say that before someone makes a weak attempt to insult my intelligence) against an act of aggression. The goverment of Lebanon and Hezbollah brought that on themselves. What we have here is a goverment so focused on going after Isreal that it would put itself at risk of destruction.

DON'T TALK ABOUT LEBANON IF U DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT "IT"!!

This governemt u're talking about is against Hizbollah and its PM is with america and if u've seen him kissing condeliza rice on the cheek u'd be convinced:P!!!!
so I'm begging u, if u don't know anything about the situation in lebanon don't talk!!!!!

jnifw3nloi · 05-24-2007, 05:49 AM

Like Neo said, the US is very pro-Israle, primarily because Israel is a "democratic" ally of the US in the Middle East. The US populace cannot help falling victim to the US propaganda of how Israel is a saint and all Muslims are vicious, mindless killers.

FutureNavyMan08 · 05-24-2007, 08:20 AM

If Americans think all Muslims are terrorists (sorry to note quote you exactly, I wished to simplify things) than how come more and more are being elected to office? By popular vote, even? Please think about what you say before you say it.

Now, America's relationship with Isreal is based on several things. First off, it is a succesful democracy. Second, guilt. Those who make decisions in our country recall the days where jewish refugees fleeing the Holocaust were sent back. Many of theese refugees died. Anti-semitism has always been a problem, that is a historical fact. At the end of World War II, an effort was made to make a haven for Jews, something which would reduce chances of events like the Holocaust from ever happening again. Third, Isreal is a major military and intelligence power. Deny this all you want, history would serve to contradict you.

Taking Isreal out of the picture is not possible. What we could do, however, is move it. But do to the temprament of Isrealis in general and the sacredness of the land in general, I doubt her inhabitants would agree with this idea.

jnifw3nloi · 05-24-2007, 08:36 AM

Guilt? What of it? So what if they feel guilty? You are saying they should not feel guilty for all the people they have forced off of their land? Land which they had inhabited for many generations, despite the Jews being there at some point in the past. The holocaust, no matter how terrible, does not give anyone the right to deny people their land, their freedom or their life. The creation of Israel, and the treatement of the people whos land was taken, land that they had inhabited for generations back, is nothing better than what the Nazis did during World War II.
People cannot claim land they have not inhabited for centuries. They cannot evict people who not only have lived there for generations but may have lived longer on that land than the apparent owners.
Don't speak of sacredness. They did not move there because it was sacred. They were not helped to make a nation there because it was sacred. They were put there to further the ambitions of the US. Af far as I am concerned, Israel is a tool of Western imperialism, nothing more. Its existance, an excuse to gain a foothold in a strategically valiable region. Its people, pawns in politics. And the truth? As always, veiled behind the guise of compassion.

FutureNavyMan08 · 05-25-2007, 03:02 AM

Isreal is an independant nation. She accepts US help, but only to a point. If hadn't heard, an Isreali Navy ship attacked and sunk a US Navy spy ship carrying out survalence on Iran. So Isreal is not the "pawn" you beleive it to be.

jnifw3nloi · 05-25-2007, 06:58 AM

One ship one time, versus a life-long servitude to western politics. Hardly evidence to the contrary.
It is like pardoning a mass-murderer for not killing one person who happend to be in the general area of the murder.

jnifw3nloi · 05-26-2007, 04:32 AM

But what to do about Israel? Harsh sanctions perhaps to control them perhaps.

Jade Trickster · 05-26-2007, 04:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jnifw3nloi

Guilt? What of it? So what if they feel guilty? You are saying they should not feel guilty for all the people they have forced off of their land? Land which they had inhabited for many generations, despite the Jews being there at some point in the past. The holocaust, no matter how terrible, does not give anyone the right to deny people their land, their freedom or their life. The creation of Israel, and the treatement of the people whos land was taken, land that they had inhabited for generations back, is nothing better than what the Nazis did during World War II.
People cannot claim land they have not inhabited for centuries. They cannot evict people who not only have lived there for generations but may have lived longer on that land than the apparent owners.
Don't speak of sacredness. They did not move there because it was sacred. They were not helped to make a nation there because it was sacred. They were put there to further the ambitions of the US. Af far as I am concerned, Israel is a tool of Western imperialism, nothing more. Its existance, an excuse to gain a foothold in a strategically valiable region. Its people, pawns in politics. And the truth? As always, veiled behind the guise of compassion.

I agree. Israel is nothing but a pawn of the US. After all, why fight when you can trick someone else into fighting for you & look good at the same time? (Other than the fact that it just should'nt be done)

jnifw3nloi · 05-27-2007, 04:06 AM

If any states, it would be North and South Dakota. Those are practically deserted.

FutureNavyMan08 · 05-29-2007, 09:21 AM

If Isreal is such a pawn and ally of the United States, why would they commit a blatant act of war? And yes, attacking vessels belonging to another country when war has not been declared is considerd an act of war.

One thing about the Isreal-Lebannon conflict. Who made the first move? Lebannon. Ultimately, the goverment of Lebannon brought its own fate upon itself. I think that if Isreal, as a nuclear and conventional military world power, had sought to truly destroy Lebannon, they would have done so.

And I might add that in addition to protection of the US- which in my opinion should be reveiwed- Isreal is also under the protection of the United Nations, for what little thats worth. Since its protection has not been questioned with the world governing body recently, we can conclude that there are leaders outside the US that support Isreal.

jnifw3nloi · 05-29-2007, 09:36 AM

You show your naevity of international affairs. An attack against a military vessel or even a civilian taarget does not necceserily constitute an act of war. Reagan boarded a number of Iranian vessels during the 1980s and while that would have constituted an act of war by your logic war was miraculously averted.

It was not the Lebanese government that attacked Israel, it was a terrorist organization. To combat that terrorist organization the United States could have attacked the terrorists, not bombed civilian targets such as apartements and factories.

The protection of Israel, that you speak of, is from the point of view of an American. Believeing that only the countries mentioned in your books or on the news are the only ones with opinions that matter. There are countless others that opposed Israel during its creation, and even at this moment. Furthermore, I would not call the UN a world governing body. If the UN was a world governing body then the US could, and should, be reprimanded for wantonly invading sovereign nations.