The Jewish problem

[sobo]

I may be wrong, or it may be my Western media sources, but it seems to me that every time Israel throws a few missiles or launches a couple of airstrikes across the border, it was preceded by an attack from outside its borders, i.e., Hamas, or Fatah or the PLO in earlier times. I cannot recall a time when the IDF launched a pre-emptive attack, except in 1967, and that was in response to Egypt expelling the UN peacekeeping force immediately before the Six-Day War broke out.

 

Also the bombing of the Iranian Iraqi nuclear plant. [correction made by sobo]

 

Then there was the revengeful Wrath of God, though some would argue that those folks were assassinated because they remained to be threats.

OK Gary, fair point about the Iraqi reactor and it being a pre-emptive strike. I'd forgotten about that one.

But research indicates that no persons were harmed. Gotta give the Israelis props for thinking ahead about safety at least, huh? BBC News link

 

...The attack took place on a Sunday, they [the Israelis] said, to prevent harming the French workers at the site who would have taken the day off. There have been no reported casualties...

 

However, I must call BS on the Wrath of God comment. The Wrath of God assassinations were in direct response to the Palestinian militant organization Black September and its PLO allies killing 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich. Surely you must remember that from your history, yes? Once again, a response to an attack from outside its borders, and not a pre-emptive strike.

 

STP-

Nice video. My 4-year-old daughter thought it was a righteous find. Quote: "That awesome, Daddy."

[Fairweather]

In Fairweather's orwellian reality the killing of innocent civilians isn't murder, but of course I'd be the one playing semantics. Jackass.

 

 

So who, exactly, is/was Hamas targeting with their indiscriminate rocket fire into small Israeli towns? The Israeli military? Where is your outrage? Are you claiming it's ok for Hamas to target civilians because they're really, really, really angry? Again, where is your outrage? You have none, because you agree with those who want to exterminate Jews. Yes.

[j_b]

Which borders? Israel is occupying much territory beyond the 48 and beyond the 67 borders. What's a pre-emptive attack? If you followed attentively events, you'd see there isn't one side starting violence and the other only reacting to it. That version is pure propaganda.

 

 

Here is letter to Obama on Israel by Uri Avnery, former member of the Knesset and founder of the israeli peace movement: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090112/avnery?rel=hp_currently

[j_b]

For the 3rd time: the only person here advocating violence against semitic people is you Fairweather. Quit parsing my words to change their meaning. Jackass.

[sobo]

Which borders? Israel is occupying much territory beyond the 48 and beyond the 67 borders. What's a pre-emptive attack? If you followed attentively events, you'd see there isn't one side starting violence and the other only reacting to it. That version is pure propaganda.

Israel's borders, whose do you think? Israel, as a new state, was "granted" borders in 1948 by the UN, despite the inhabitant's displeasure with their new neighbors, never mind the fact that millenia ago it had been inhabited by Jews before the Romans expelled them. The world didn't notice in 1948, nor did it care if it did notice. It had just concluded a world conflict, and was probably tired of "little disagreements" in a faraway corner of the globe.

 

Fast forward to 1967. The entire Arab world was ganging up on Israel with the stated intent of wiping it from the map. In an act of state self-preservation, it launched a pre-emptive strike against a superior force and cold-cocked them back to the 6th century. The fact that Israel gained so much ground during the offensive is a result of good intelligence, battle planning, and execution. And probably a will to continue to exist.

 

I do not begrudge Israel the gains they made in their several wars, because if the Arab armies had succeeded in defeating Israel, it would not exist today. Because Israel typically wins its wars, it is fitting that they increase their territory. This is the age-old nature of warfare. However, I suspect they could engender much goodwill in the Middle East if they would give the gained lands back and return to their 1948 UN-described borders. They forcibly evicted their own citizens from a few settlements in the West Bank and all settlements in the Gaza Strip in August and September of 2005, and offered to do as much with the Golan Heights last year in exchange for a peace agreement with Syria. Syria, however, refused to sever its ties with terrorist organizations bent on destroying Israel as part of the conditions of the exchange, and the agreement fell through. But I would also posit that if Israel were to embark upon a wholesale land return, it should reasonably expect to be left alone and not have to suffer incessant and indiscriminate rocket and mortar attacks from Hamas and/or other terrorist organizations as a way of life. Don't you agree?

[pc313]

STP seems to always find awesome videos,i've emailed some of them to friends,how dose he do it?

[sobo]

I suspect it is in much the same way that Couloir finds those fetching avatar pics of his...

[STP]

It just seems to constantly go round and round but there's even a social price to be paid for seemingly momentary victory: Former Israeli Soldiers "Flipping Out" in India--Jewish Post

 

At some point, even if the funding and the supply of weapons is curtailed, ideology lies at the heart of the issue and a large part of that ideology is identity.

 

"Just one more personal word on the question of partition. I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state. Apart from practical consideration, my awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain--especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks, against which we have already had to fight strongly, even without a Jewish state."

 

... If external necessity should after all compel us to assume this burden, let us bear it with tact and patience."

--Albert Einstein, Our Debt to Zionism , 1938

[JoshK]

Blood is on the hands of body sides in this conflict. First of all, everybody seems to have missed a very key concept, and that is Jew does not equal Israeli. Just because I am Jewish does not mean I agree with the approach the Israeli government is currently taking. For the few that have suggested "the jews" somehow invaded this area and imprisoned the people that were there, you have no clue what you are talking about.

 

Let us remember that Israel was founded out of an International (UN) consensus that a Jewish homeland was a necessity. This was immediately following the single largest genocidal event in human history; one directly and clearly aimed at eliminating the Jewish people in their entirety. Over the next several decades, Israel was the subject of several attempts at invasion by its Arab neighbors, all intended to eliminate Israel as a state. Does it surprise you that they take defense seriously considering their enemies are not opposed to just their actions but to their very existance?

 

The fanatics in this situation exist on both sides. Yes, they voted Hamas in to power, and that is clearly their own faults. To some extent their population as a whole needs to take ownership of the problems a minority of their people are causing. If they truly want a shot at a future where they can entirely self-govern and build a thriving society and economy, their moderate populations need to step up and eliminate the terrorists amongst them themselves. Until then, what can you expect innocent Israeli citizens who are the victims of random rocket attacks to think of them?

 

On the other hand, Israel's reactions are often overagressive. The amount of collateral damage and loss of innocent life they are willing to accept in order to retaliate is sad. What can you expect innocent Palestinians to think of Israel if their innocent child is just as likely to be killed in retaliation against terrorists as the terrorists themselves?

 

It's time for the moderate populations on both sides to step up and say there needs to be a reasonable solution to this question, and soon. Both sides need to realize they are going to have to compriomise if they want to be able to live without constant fear of being killed by rockets or bombs. This may not be ideal in the minds of either side, but it is simple reality that neither side will get everything they want.

 

Those of you that side strongly with either faction and blame the other are confused and don't understand the issue, plain and simple. I'm glad, however, to see that fairweather is as ridiculous as ever, even when I likely agree with him on this more than not. Are you still keeping a list of the "cc.com nazis", buddy?

[j_b]

Well, I am for everyone to live in peace but for peace to be made the parties have to be honest and rhetoric has to be matched by actual behavior. A return to the 48 borders would be quite unexpected since israeli colonists continue with new illegal settlements on palestinian territory today. Avnery's letter to Obama which I posted above briefly discusses this dichotomy between discourse and practice and how Israel hasn't shown they wanted a neighboring palestinian state. To be honest, I don't know what is the solution, especially since israeli law makes non-jews de-facto second-class citizens, and that demographics in Palestine and in Israel aren't favorable to israeli jews.

[j_b]

First of all, everybody seems to have missed a very key concept, and that is Jew does not equal Israeli.

 

I didn't miss it. I have consistantly talked about Israel and not about jews, until my last post when I mentionned demographics.

 

I also note that nowhere in your post do you mention Israel's expansionist policies.

Edited January 4, 2009 by j_b

[Fairweather]

Which borders? Israel is occupying much territory beyond the 48 and beyond the 67 borders. What's a pre-emptive attack? If you followed attentively events, you'd see there isn't one side starting violence and the other only reacting to it. That version is pure propaganda.

 

 

 

Um, Lemme guess j_b:

 

The Moon landings never happened.

Second shooter on the grassy knoll.

WT #7 controlled demolition.

Melting point of steel.

Bush planned 9/11.

FDR knew of imminent Japanese attack.

The Builderburgers.

Illuminati. (Of course!)

Masonic order.

Skull and Bones.

 

Does this about sum up the dark corners of your belief system, j_b?

 

[Fairweather]

I'm glad, however, to see that fairweather is as ridiculous as ever, even when I likely agree with him on this more than not. Are you still keeping a list of the "cc.com nazis", buddy?

 

Nah, my last project was the Sarah Palin hate collage. Unfortunately, the glue wouldn't stick with all the liberal misogynist hypocrisy dripping down the face of the work and the finished project turned out worse than the portrait of Dorian Gray. I'll share it with you via PM if you like--it's really u-g-l-y. Nice to see you're on the correct side of at least one issue, but I think you're being too kind to those who really do want to assign blame certain to Jews. I guess it was the title of this thread and its obvious implication that bothered me the most.

[sobo]

JoshK's comments are spot on, and readily apparent to anyone paying even the slightest amount of attention to the matter.

And I did not miss the "key concept" nuance of Jew vis-a-vis Israeli, either.

 

Yes, there is blood on the hands of both sides. Yes, there are rocket attacks from Hamas and its predecessors. Yes, there is Israeli retaliation for those attacks, and more often than not it is overly punitive. Yes, there is guilt on the hands of the UN and the other nations that forced the Israeli state into being in 1948 and partitioned an area already settled by Palestinians (again, I remind the reader that Jews have lived in this same area in millenia past and have an equal claim to the traditional area as just about anyone else in the Middle East). And yes, it is up to the moderates to wrest control of their respective nations' governments and their fates to bring this situation under some semblance of control.

 

j_b, I think the first thing that Israel must do, if they intend to develop a ME peace process, would be to return to the 1948 borders. That would also entail compelling its citizens to respect those borders. I would not consider this action to be unexpected. Why not? Look what Israel did in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank to its own citizens in mid-2005 for your answer.

 

Israel's borders were set up by an international organization with a global mission to establish peace. Whether the Palestinians like it or not is immaterial at this point in time. On the opposite side of the coin, it is up to the Israeli government to exercise its control over its own citizens and prevent them from (dare I say, force them to stop) developing settlements in disputed areas and/or those lands not within the 1948 UN borders.

 

As I said above, I think that act alone would go a long way toward engendering some consideration and cooperation from a more moderate Palestinian and/or Hamas government, and the Arab world in general. But Hamas must respond in kind and get control over their own citizens and compel them to stop shelling Jewish residential settlements, whether those settlements be in Israel or in any disputed/captured territory. A cease-fire must be established and maintained. Hamas broke the last one...

[Fairweather]

If Israel returned to the 1948 boundaries I don't think it would change anything. There are plenty of groups (including Hamas), and even nation-states (Iran), that continue to call for the complete destruction of Israel. Do you honestly think this would change? I'll bet it would only embolden.

[JoshK]

I guess it was the title of this thread and its obvious implication that bothered me the most.

 

I agree, this was a sickening and anti-semetic thing to name a thread. Do you realize the nazis spoke of the "the final solution to the jewish problem", the solution, of course, being the holocaust??

 

I managed to remain civil in my previous post, but to the creator of this thread: go to hell you bigot.

[pc313]

Which borders? Israel is occupying much territory beyond the 48 and beyond the 67 borders. What's a pre-emptive attack? If you followed attentively events, you'd see there isn't one side starting violence and the other only reacting to it. That version is pure propaganda.

 

 

 

Um, Lemme guess j_b:

 

The Moon landing never happened.

Second shooter on the grassy knoll.

WT #7 controlled demolition.

Melting point of steel.

Bush planned 9/11.

FDR knew of imminent Japanese attack.

The Builderburgers.

Illuminati. (Of course!)

Masonic order.

Skull and Bones.

 

Does this about sum up the dark corners of your belief system, j_b?

 

 

You forgot the CLinton Chronicles and WHITEWATER !

 

BTW i was the second gunman on the grassy Knoll!

[sobo]

FW,

I still think that a return to the 1948 borders is a good faith effort first step. It would give them some needed credibility and solidify Israel's position with the world community, or at the very least the UN member states, if they were to return to their 1948 borders and abide by UN Resolution #242. At the very least, they would have "right on their side" which is a good first step if you're looking for support from a global organization ostensibly dedicated to world peace. If rogue Arab states and/or terrorist groups/states want to continue to press the issue of refusing Israel's right to exist, it would be a whole helluva lot easier to assemble a UN coalition to do something to thwart that if Israel came back into line first.

 

Consider this analogy: States like Iran and groups like Hamas gain traction with their rhetoric because Israel is "behaving just as badly" and the world community feels like an exasperated parent trying to separate two bickering brats. When one of those brats shapes up into a decent kid, its a whole lot easier for the parent to determine which kid is acting out of line, and what to do about it.

 

Iran, Hamas, and other states are emboldened because Israel acts irresponsibly, too. Does anyone really take Kim Jong-il seriously? Sure, he gets some attention lavished upon him from time to time, but he's really just the "lone brat" in his little part of the world, and the "parents" all know how to deal with him. He has isolated himself and his nation, and made himself into nothing less than "that ADD kid" pariah we all avoided in grade school. He's a non-factor to whom no one gives any serious attention.

 

The same would become of Ahmadinejad and others if Israel started behaving in a less reactionary fashion and returned to its borders and retaliated less aggressively. I'm not saying that Israel should not defend itself against all comers. But a week-long bombing campaign (that has exacted a death toll roughly 100X that which the Israelis suffered) in response to a week-long rocket attack is a bit much, don't you think?

 

And just so we're all aware, Israel launched a ground invasion of the Gaza Strip today. Is this not a bit too over the top?

[pc313]

FW,

I still think that a return to the 1948 borders is a good faith effort first step. It would give them some needed credibility and solidify Israel's position with the world community, or at the very least the UN member states, if they were to return to their 1948 borders and abide by UN Resolution #242. At the very least, they would have "right on their side" which is a good first step if you're looking for support from a global organization ostensibly dedicated to world peace. If rogue Arab states and/or terrorist groups/states want to continue to press the issue of refusing Israel's right to exist, it would be a whole helluva lot easier to assemble a UN coalition to do something to thwart that if Israel came back into line first.

 

Consider this analogy: States like Iran and groups like Hamas gain traction with their rhetoric because Israel is "behaving just as badly" and the world community feels like an exasperated parent trying to separate two bickering brats. When one of those brats shapes up into a decent kid, its a whole lot easier for the parent to determine which kid is acting out of line, and what to do about it.

 

Iran, Hamas, and other states are emboldened because Israel acts irresponsibly, too. Does anyone really take Kim Jong-il seriously? Sure, he gets some attention lavished upon him from time to time, but he's really just the "lone brat" in his little part of the world, and the "parents" all know how to deal with him. He has isolated himself and his nation, and made himself into nothing less than "that ADD kid" pariah we all avoided in grade school. He's a non-factor to whom no one gives any serious attention.

 

The same would become of Ahmadinejad and others if Israel started behaving in a less reactionary fashion and returned to her borders and retaliated less aggressively. I'm not saying that Israel should not defend itself against all comers. But a week-long bombing campaign in response to a week-long rocket/mortar attack is a bit over the top, don't you think?

 

I was about to key in on the same lines but also add that Isreal needs to deal with land ownership with in the 48 boarders for some of that land is legally owned by Arabs pre 48 and these people sould have the same rights as jews in Isreal and not second class citizen,thay should be able to vote and run for office!IMO

[Fairweather]

FW,

I still think that a return to the 1948 borders is a good faith effort first step. It would give them some needed credibility and solidify Israel's position with the world community, or at the very least the UN member states, if they were to return to their 1948 borders and abide by UN Resolution #242. At the very least, they would have "right on their side" which is a good first step if you're looking for support from a global organization ostensibly dedicated to world peace. If rogue Arab states and/or terrorist groups/states want to continue to press the issue of refusing Israel's right to exist, it would be a whole helluva lot easier to assemble a UN coalition to do something to thwart that if Israel came back into line first.

 

Consider this analogy: States like Iran and groups like Hamas gain traction with their rhetoric because Israel is "behaving just as badly" and the world community feels like an exasperated parent trying to separate two bickering brats. When one of those brats shapes up into a decent kid, its a whole lot easier for the parent to determine which kid is acting out of line, and what to do about it.

 

Iran, Hamas, and other states are emboldened because Israel acts irresponsibly, too. Does anyone really take Kim Jong-il seriously? Sure, he gets some attention lavished upon him from time to time, but he's really just the "lone brat" in his little part of the world, and the "parents" all know how to deal with him. He has isolated himself and his nation, and made himself into nothing less than "that ADD kid" pariah we all avoided in grade school. He's a non-factor to whom no one gives any serious attention.

 

The same would become of Ahmadinejad and others if Israel started behaving in a less reactionary fashion and returned to her borders and retaliated less aggressively. I'm not saying that Israel should not defend itself against all comers. But a week-long bombing campaign in response to a week-long rocket/mortar attack is a bit over the top, don't you think?

 

I was about to key in on the same lines but also add that Isreal needs to deal with land ownership with in the 48 boarders for some of that land is legally owned by Arabs pre 48 and these people sould have the same rights as jews in Isreal and not second class citizen,thay should be able to vote and run for office!IMO

 

The population of Israel is 20% Arab, 76% Jewish, and 4% other. Arabs can vote and run for office in Israel proper, so I'm not sure where you got your information. The issue of land ownership inside the 1948 boundaries would have to be balanced by like issues of confiscated Jewish land outside the boundaries. How far back shall we go? As for palestinian "right of return", this would mean the end of Israel and it will never happen. Period.

Edited January 4, 2009 by Fairweather

[Bug]

Is

an Arab or a Jew?

Metaphoriacally speaking of course.

No association with animals intended either way.

Edited January 4, 2009 by Bug

[Hugh Conway]

Arabs can vote and run for office in Israel proper, so I'm not sure where you got your information. The issue of land ownership inside the 1948 boundaries would have to be balanced by like issues of confiscated Jewish land outside the boundaries. How far back shall we go? As for palestinian "right of return", this would mean the end of Israel and it will never happen. Period.

 

Most Israeli-Arabs don't have full Israeli citizenship. Ergo, more bullshit from the usual American Zionists and wannabe Zionists who know few Israelis and don't really care too.

 

I love Mr. Private Property rights going all Socialist. The Jews have been extraordinarily vocal about compensation for their property confiscated in the past, yet amazingly quiet in fair compensation for land confiscated by them.

 

I'm waiting for Conservatives to start caring about Liberia

[pc313]

Arabs can vote and run for office in Israel proper, so I'm not sure where you got your information. The issue of land ownership inside the 1948 boundaries would have to be balanced by like issues of confiscated Jewish land outside the boundaries. How far back shall we go? As for palestinian "right of return", this would mean the end of Israel and it will never happen. Period.

 

Most Israeli-Arabs don't have full Israeli citizenship. Ergo, more bullshit from the usual American Zionists and wannabe Zionists who know few Israelis and don't really care too.

 

I love Mr. Private Property rights going all Socialist. The Jews have been extraordinarily vocal about compensation for their property confiscated in the past, yet amazingly quiet in fair compensation for land confiscated by them.

 

I'm waiting for Conservatives to start caring about Liberia

 

A+

 

[STP]

I don't know much about the practical mechanics of a peace process (re: where to place reasonable boundaries). It would seem in that particular case to be predicated on certain assumptions. So, I happen to think that ideology and identity play a greater role in forging a future peace. It really has more to do with the ethics of place.

 

For instance, here's a short read: Can the Jewish People Survive Without an Enemy?--Time.com

Avrum Burg is the scion of one of Israel's founding families — his father was the deputy speaker of the first Knesset, and Burg himself later became speaker of the legislature, and a member of Israel's cabinet. His position at the heart of the Israeli establishment makes all the more remarkable his critique of the Jewish State, which he claims has lost its sense of moral purpose. In his new book The Holocaust Is Over: We Must Rise from Its Ashes (Palgrave/MacMillan), he argues that an obsession with an exaggerated sense of threats to Jewish survival cultivated by Israel and its most fervent backers actually impedes the realization of Judaism's higher goals. He discussed his ideas with TIME.com's Tony Karon.

 

What Avrum Burg says is more in line with the sentiments expressed by Albert Einstein, as mentioned in my earlier post.

 

Now for a particular example, take the Temple Mount and read Gershom Gorenberg's take on it ( Gershom Gorenberg on The Temple Mount--Religion and Ethics Newsweekly). I think there is wisdom in what he says.

 

As an aside, the following may not have relevance here or it may: Cursed is the man who moves his neighbor's boundary stone.

(Deuteronomy 27:17)

Now, I can't argue the finer points of theology. Of course, there may be more than meaning, for example, a literal meaning and another hidden meaning. Maybe Moses Maimonides has the answer.

 

 

[pc313]

Post Traumatic Stress Dissorder!

 

Most of us may never be hit this hard or think their stong enough to handle any thing life can throw at them,but we all have that braking point and there is no set level or 12 step program !

Edited January 4, 2009 by pc313