-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
Israel's Legal Founding [W:89]
- Thread starter NO1
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 31,057
- Reaction score
- 3,969
- Location
- not here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
I think that Israel WAS legally established. Pilgrims and emigres have been going there for generations, as a state, it was matter of agreement, just like the Arab countries following WWI. I think that, Israel has - overreached with its territorial possessiveness however in dispersing Palestinians from their territories over the last generations. The enmity between the two is very old, but we live in a modern age, and Israel, in my view, owes US some sort of peace as a return on our investments. It would go along way toward simmering down the region.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,418
- Reaction score
- 1,903
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 31,057
- Reaction score
- 3,969
- Location
- not here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
So Israel has no responsibility to it's main benefactor to insist on keeping the peace in order to lessen the reactionary responses to the US?
And if Israel went all out for peace, it wouldn't help.
Interesting.
How do you arrive at those conclusions?
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2015
- Messages
- 3,852
- Reaction score
- 947
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Can terrorist legally found a nation? If so will we have to recognize ISIS
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 31,057
- Reaction score
- 3,969
- Location
- not here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Interesting. What terrorists are trying to found a nation, the Palesintians? and if said nation is recognized internationally, the same way Hamass won elections, then the nation is legitimate.
Ireland is a recognized nation, and their "terrorism" started 847 years ago, before there was a nation.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2015
- Messages
- 3,852
- Reaction score
- 947
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
A short history of israel's terrorist founding.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...c811fe-b938-11e4-9423-f3d0a1ec335c_story.html
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2016
- Messages
- 8,351
- Reaction score
- 4,259
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
There is an alternative view. If Israel 'went all out for peace' by giving up territory essential for its security it would be destroyed by the enemies that surround it. That seems to be President Obama's preferred out-come. Is it yours?
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2015
- Messages
- 10,573
- Reaction score
- 5,173
- Location
- America's Heartland
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
This is unfortunately very true.
Israel's pressure on the Arab people living in Gaza, the West Bank and Golan is the RESULT of the necessity for Israel to defend itself. Israel reacts to the the attacks against it -- it does not start skirmishes with peaceful people.
Israel does react strongly, but it must to deter the constant attacks.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,418
- Reaction score
- 1,903
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
1. No. Israel has no responsibility to fundamentally weaken its security position with an enemy that has no intention of making peace in order to assuage those in the US that would sell out the Israelis in a second for their own self-interest.
2. No, if Israel went "all out for peace", like, say, offering the Palestinians independence on 95%+ of the WB and all of Gaza in exchange for the Palestinians ending their conflict against the Jews, that would not help. Since it has already been offered and the response was a 5 year long terrorist war where the key tactic was to sneak bombers past soldiers to massacre civilians. And your point originally was about "simmering tensions in the region". that's just the standard (and wrong) view that Israel is the linchpin to stability in the middle east, which is such an obvious fiction (and now is especially obvious in light of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Yemen, Libya etc) that it is really nothing more than the standard "if it wasn't for the Jews everything would be great" nonsense morphed into another form.
3. By paying attention.
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 31,057
- Reaction score
- 3,969
- Location
- not here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Yeah, there is plenty of blame to go around that's for sure. During WWI a Jewish spy for the British, Aaron Aaronsohn was indeed a devout Zionist. At the time, it was the Ottoman Empire that controlled the whole territory and after the war, Nationhood was formed in the ME. The desire for a state of Israel is pretty old, and why not? The ME as a whole is pretty Much sectarian.
The trouble comes with expansionism. We did the very same thing in America and brought about the very same results with the Indians... So, I think that it is now in Israel's shoulders to stop, look and listen as they say. Going the way it's going has only brought more trouble for themselves and for US.
ido_
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
- Messages
- 3,406
- Reaction score
- 1,561
- Location
- Israel
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Israel didn't build any official settlements since 1998. And even this one (Kfar Haoranim) is considered from the Israeli side to be inside Israel (a dispute concerning the thickness of the green line on the map, I kid you not).
All the rest of the settlements which were established between Oslo and today by private people, not by the state are considered in Israeli law as "illegal outposts", the settlements themselves have been expanded within their own borders so thats hardly expansionism
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 31,057
- Reaction score
- 3,969
- Location
- not here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Take a look at this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/01/opinion/dont-shoot-the-messenger-israel.html?_r=0
JAN. 31, 2016
It says that the Israeli government approved these new settlement homes, and of course Palestinians are probably going to be evicted. I mean, talk about eminent domain! And of course the US keeps feeding Israel with all of this going on.... Steele gates in order to go to work or get home. It's all so punitive.
This is what I'm talking about. Again, I think that - Israel has some responsibilities here to try and put the hammer away for a while. On the other hand, the US, Great Britain in particular, and other allies also have a responsibility to put pressure on Arab countries to knock off this "Israel has no right to exist" BS[/i]. It's degraded into a feud and it's hurting everybody. The US and our allies also have a responsibility to put pressure on Palestinians to knock off the bombings and rockets.
I also think sometimes, that a good idea would be to just turn our backs on them for a while. Things might change faster without big brother around.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,418
- Reaction score
- 1,903
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
The piece about "of course Palestinians are probably going to be evicted" is unsubstantiated and likely wrong. Most lands in the WB are unoccupied and owned by the state. This isn't downtown Manhattan.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 96,114
- Reaction score
- 33,457
- Location
- SE Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
It has signed at least 2 or 3 peace treaties, all failed.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,418
- Reaction score
- 1,903
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
The 2 peace treaties they have signed are continuing to succeed quite well.
Cause what matters when it comes to Israel being at peace or at war is the intention of its adversaries. When Israel's adversaries want peace, there is peace (see Egypt, Jordan). When they don't, there is no peace (see the Palestinians and their rejection of independence to launch a suicide bomb war against Israel's civilian population).
Cause Israel wants peace but it takes two to tango.
And the Palestinians clearly have no interest in peace.
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 31,057
- Reaction score
- 3,969
- Location
- not here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
The first that I remember was the '93 Oslo Agreement. No offense, but - what else is new. Look, Israel claims to be the better man, so I cannot how my thoughts on the subject could not be productive.
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,418
- Reaction score
- 1,903
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
That of course wasn't a peace treaty.
Israel signed a peace treaty with Egypt, which has held and will continue to hold for so long as Egypt intends to hold it (there was some risk when the Islamists took over that they would abandon it but thankfully that never happened).
And Israel signed a peace treaty with Jordan, which will hold as long as the Jordanians wish it to.
What we don't have is peace with the Palestinians. Because in spite of offering 95%+ of the WB and all of Gaza, the Palestinians refused to accept any peace with the Jews and responded by launching a terrorist war against Israel's civilian population.
I know blaming Israel for everything is all the rage (and pretty consistent with past rages of blaming a particular group of people for anything and everything that goes wrong), but the reality of the situation is there will only be peace when the Palestinians want it.
And they don't.
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- Messages
- 59,408
- Reaction score
- 38,974
- Location
- Best Coast Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Would that map have made Palestine a continuous state, or would there e Pal villages almost cut off from the rest of the new State? If you have a map handy it would be nice to view it.
What major settlements would Israel maintain in the WB?
Would these have been similiar to islands, surrounded by the Pal State?
Then Israel would have a major problem removing settlers from areas within the new Pal State? Yes - no?
Anyone with sense would know Israel cannot accept the Right of Return.
Arabs want restitution for property lost, yet the Jews driven from Arab countries- approx the same numbers on each side, received squat.
Israel would need to control borders with Jordan for example to prevent weapons and such from entering.
The Pal State would have no need for a Military- Police yes- Military no.
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 31,057
- Reaction score
- 3,969
- Location
- not here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Well, number one, I'm not placing blame, I'm suggesting a responsible follow up given the situation. So let's try and be clear there okay? I have nothing in the game other than living under the pressure like everybody else does.
Secondly, the Oslo accord "agreements" are in effect peace treaties, though technically - "agreements", but I'm sure you get the point. The treaty with Sadat was not a Palestinian treaty, so that's why I didn't mention it.
The bigger obstacle IS the blame game - you are correct. So, in your view, Israel should not take the lead in the peace process and thereby continue with the feud. Nor should the US and our allies pressure Arab states to recognize Israel.
Does that sum up your position?
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,418
- Reaction score
- 1,903
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Not really. My position is that we all need to actually do things that can contribute to a peaceful solution that involves Palestinian independence. But the key to doing that is understanding why we can't get there from here and how to remove the obstacles in our way.
Regarding the Israelis, we saw how far they moved their population from the 1980s to 2000 and how, with the right set of circumstances, they would be prepared to come to an agreement with the Palestinians.
But we have also seen that the Palestinians are not really pursuing peace and have never really pursued peace. If they were pursuing peace the first thing they would jettison is refusing to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and the second would be the right to overwhelm Israel demographically through the "right of return".
Add to that the constant inciting to violence and death cult propaganda since Oslo, and we have a very clear picture of Israel's leadership making a decision to work towards peace and bring the population along, but a Palestinian leadership which viewed a "peace process" as something to leverage for tactical advantage in their continued efforts to destroy Israel. So while Israel was mobilizing the left during the 90s and preaching a settling of grievances and coexistence, the Palestinians were laying the seeds for the death cult of their suicide bomb war. Just like now what we have from the Palestinians is constant incitement and lionization of past and future terrorists.
And part of this goes back well before the 1990s. The core of zionism is a positive vision for the future, where the Jews have the ability to live together, in their own land, free from persecution and able to protect themselves and rely on themselves. The core of the Palestinian national identity, however, is strictly negative - Palestinian nationalism arose as a counter to zionism, an effort to negate zionism, and the core purpose of the Palestinian national identity is to oppose Jewish sovereignty in Israel.
In my view, in order to get to the outcome here that most people in the west want, what we need is for the Palestinians to be defeated and abandoned. Only then is there hope that they can move beyond the core goal of destroying Israel to settle on a positive vision of creating for themselves a peaceful, prosperous state and civil society, able to cooperate with their neighbours (including the Jews). They need to lose like the Japanese lost, with their entire social and political system destroyed and everythign they have ever stood for called into question by the population. Only then can they turn their back on what has driven their actions for 100 years and move towards a peaceful, prosperous future.
At that stage the Israelis will, or must be made to, give the Palestinians what they need to create a viable, functional state in which to pursue their collective aspirations, but until then anything that the Palestinians get will be used like all of that cement sent into Gaza - not for schools and cultural centres but for tunnels designed to infiltrate past soldiers and murder children.
Now of course this is also a bit of delusional fantasy in that while this may be the only way for things to work out, there is no way that it can happen in light of knee-jerk support for the Palestinians in Europe and the unwillingness of so many around the world to recognize the true motivations behind Palestinian rejectionism and violence. Cause the key t all of this is the world turning their backs on the Palestinians until they change their stripes. As long as the Palestinians and their poisonous leadership are supported by hundreds of billions in international donations and their violent depravity is shielded by foreign governments and international activists, they will never feel sufficient pressure to despair of their destructionist goals. And so they will never change them.
But the analysis is a sound one, and the policy prescription is the only real way of getting where we all say we want to be.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2011
- Messages
- 34,951
- Reaction score
- 16,311
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
Palestine already recognized Israel as a state while Israel has yet to recognize Palestine.. .
As I have pointed out to you numerous times only 10% of Palestinian refugees would return to their homes in Israel if given that option... That would not "end Israel as a Jewish state".
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
- Messages
- 5,418
- Reaction score
- 1,903
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
BS. The Palestinians have no problem mouthing empty words they don't mean (especially when it's nonsense like "sure I recognize you as a state but not a state of the jews who live there and also all my people get to live there too") and pointing to their meaningless statements, particularly where those statements were accompanied and continue to be accompanied by inciting violence and lionizing terrorist murderers, is fundamentally disingenuous.
Don't care. They are asking for 100% having the right as a core of their national identity and they have done nothing over the last 20 years to ready the population for anything less than 100%. If they were really interested in peace and independence they would have stated they want zero and just to be left to their own devices a long, long time ago.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2011
- Messages
- 34,951
- Reaction score
- 16,311
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
Ahhh I see... The "its all a lie" claim. :roll: Nothing but an easy cop out often used to justify inhumane and illegal Israeli activity.
So you dont care about the actual accuracy, just continue to make inaccurate claims. Gotcha! :thumbs: