Cut Israel Off

[jb_1430]

The Jews weren't the only people inhabiting the land, so they didn't have the right to draw up a country based on their religion in the area.

What, is this something reserved for the British? Britain did it in Jordan, Why cant the Israelis do it in Israel.

 

[Coyote]

What, is this something reserved for the British? Britain did it in Jordan, Why cant the Israelis do it in Israel.

Because that occurred almost a century ago. Times and ethics and international law changes.

 

[jb_1430]

Because that occurred almost a century ago. Times and ethics and international law changes.

Your point? Jordan was created in 1946, Israel in 1948. Did the rules change in between those two dates. Or is it silly of me to presume you have a point?

 

[Coyote]

Your point? Jordan was created in 1946, Israel in 1948. Did the rules change in between those two dates. Or is it silly of me to presume you have a point?

The Middle East was carved up by world powers after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

In 1948, after a brief war, Israel's borders were set, Israel annouced a constitution and a country was defined.

According to a 1920 census, the population of the area included: approximately 750,000 people such as Bedouin Arabs, Jews (who comprised some 11% of the total) and smaller groups of Druze, Syrians, Sudanese, Circassians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Hejazi Arabs. By 1945, due to immigration, the Jewish population was 31%.

What gives that 31% the right to unilaterally define the borders of it's country? The UN/League of Nations and the legacy of colonial attitudes that certain countries/cultures new better how to create nations then other countries/cultures (like the wonderful idea that created the partition of India).

Utlimately, it doesn't matter because Israel is a done deal, it's here to stay and the Arabs have got to accept it. Most of them have. However, that also doesn't mean Israel has the unilateral "right" through force of arms to take and keep territory that is not theirs (such as the currently labeled "occupied territories". If territory can be held by right of conquest then of what use is international law? That is where times have changed. Since the ending of two major world wars the international community no longer tolerates that...at least theoretically.

So what are Israel's rightful borders? What ever it can claim through right of force? (note: Isreal was an equal instigator in the 1967 war). If so, then by what right did we have in condemning Saddam for invading Kuwait or other nations for their aggression?

Second, if Israel is going to lay claim to the occupied territories it has a real problem on it's hands beyond the issue of security. It is holding subject a large population of people with no rights, no voice in governance, and neither self-determination nor citizenship. Israel can not continue to lay claim to the occupied territories, expanding it's settlements through land confiscation and still claim to be the only real democracy in the Middle East. It isn't a democracy at this point and if it were any other country such a situation would not be tolerated by the international community.

And that isn't to hold the Palestinians or Arabs blameless. But the Palestinians at this point have nothing - nothing. The Palestinian Authority is a farce. It has no real power - only what ever authority Israel willing to grant it, and it can be unilaterally overuled at any time; no territorial integrity; and Israel has the ability to shut down trade, roads, access to hospitals or communities at any point for any reason. The Palestinian Authority is a farce because in addition - it doesn't even really speak for the people and it has been from the start riddled with corruption because, in a closed society under occupation or dictatorship - corruption is often the only way to get things done. The end result is Israel has no negotiating partner who can speak from a position of strength and the Palestinians have no government that has any real power.

 

[jb_1430]

The Middle East was carved up by world powers after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

Soooo only "world powers" can define borders???

In 1948, after a brief war, Israel's borders were set, Israel annouced a constitution and a country was defined.

According to a 1920 census,

Well, that was over 100 years ago.

it's here to stay and the Arabs have got to accept it. Most of them have.

??? You dwell in an alternate reality.

If territory can be held by right of conquest then of what use is international law?

??? Most nations were formed in such a manner. Do you have special rules for the Jews?

 

[jb_1430]

Revealing to watch you and sublime so effortlessly abandon one arguement to embrace another.

 

[Andy]

I think I will let this go. I believe I made my argument fairly cleanly. Coyote, despite starting off fairly logically... has degraded to vague unsupportable or clearly wrong statements.

The Arabs do not, have not, will not, accept Israel's existence.

International law has always been a joke. The UN did not do jack squat when Saddam tossed out the UN inspector, and if not for us, nothing would have happened.

He also re-asked the question 'what gives Israel the right' when I already made that case on more than a few levels. Further not one single ground has been given for anyone else to have 'right'.

I'm forced to conclude that either he simply willfully refuses to accept logical premise, or that his world view is detached from reality.

 

[Coyote]

Soooo only "world powers" can define borders???

Did I say that? No.

Well, that was over 100 years ago.

That wasn't the point I was trying to make.

??? You dwell in an alternate reality.

Egypt, Jordan, Mauritania and Qatar recognize Israel. It is quite likely that many more will if the situation with the Palestinians is ever resolved equitably.

??? Most nations were formed in such a manner. Do you have special rules for the Jews?

So, are you saying that any nation, at this point, can invade any other nation and determine it's own boundaries as a result of simply having the power to do so? If you feel that, then why do you reserve that right for Israel only?

First: something else to keep in mind. This isn't about "Jews" as your snide implication of antisemitism seems to indicate. This is about a political state - a national entity called Israel. This is about their policies in the international arena - not about Jews, the Jewish faith, or even most Jewish people since most do not even reside in Isreal.

Second: since you feel that this okie dokie, how do you propose they should deal with the large and disenfranchised Palestinian population in the occupied territories you seem to feel belong to Israel? Or do you have different rules for Arabs?

 

[Coyote]

I think I will let this go. I believe I made my argument fairly cleanly. Coyote, despite starting off fairly logically... has degraded to vague unsupportable or clearly wrong statements.

The Arabs do not, have not, will not, accept Israel's existence.

Incorrect. Four Arab states: Egypt, Jordan, Qatar and Mauritania recognize Israel. It is likely that if a serious and equitable effort were made to deal with the Palestinian situation and bring about peace more would.

International law has always been a joke. The UN did not do jack squat when Saddam tossed out the UN inspector, and if not for us, nothing would have happened.

International law certainly has been a joke. Look at how many UN resolutions Israel has defied and broke, with no repercussions. Iraq invades Kuwait and war is waged. Iraq is contained. Then what happens? The US invades Iraq based on an obvious pack of lies and - no repercussions. So...what lesson is learned? In international law - it's ok for some countries to defy it but not others.

He also re-asked the question 'what gives Israel the right' when I already made that case on more than a few levels. Further not one single ground has been given for anyone else to have 'right'.

You appear to give Israel a right to act in ways not allowed to other countries - ways which would normally bring about international condemnation and action - except for Israel. I find this utterly flabbergasting. I am not denying Isreal has the right to exist, or protect itself for that matter. But likewise - they do not have the right to build "settlements" on occupied territories unless those territories belong to Israel. If you deem those territories to belong to Israel then why is there not a sound from you about the humanitarian situation of the people there? How can you justify calling Israel a "democracy" when a huge portion of it's population is denied even the most basic rights? But of course - it's Israel, and to critisize the policies of that country is incorrect. In your view Israel can do no wrong despite ample evidence that Israel is every bit as culpable for the current mess as it's Arab neighbors. Oy ve!

I'm forced to conclude that either he simply willfully refuses to accept logical premise, or that his world view is detached from reality.

I provided facts for my statements. Have you?

 

[Coyote]

Revealing to watch you and sublime so effortlessly abandon one arguement to embrace another.

What argument? Mine is consistent.

 

[Andy]

Second: since you feel that this okie dokie, how do you propose they should deal with the large and disenfranchised Palestinian population in the occupied territories you seem to feel belong to Israel? Or do you have different rules for Arabs?

The Arabs have brought this on themselves by leaving in the first place, then acted like monsters blowing up their own kids to kill other kids. I propose we do nothing and let Israel deal with it as they see fit.

I still failed to see a case we should do anything at all, nor why Israel shouldn't be on that land.

You also have made conflicting remarks that indicate you don't see a reason the Jews should be kicked off either. Well that is exactly what would happen if we stopped Israel. The Arabs plan to completely wipe the Jewish populations off of Palestine. That is what they tried to do before, and that is what they openly state is the goal for the future.

So make a choice, do you support genocide or exile by choice?

 

[Andy]

Here's some supporting evidence.

Incorrect. Four Arab states: Egypt, Jordan, Qatar and Mauritania recognize Israel. It is likely that if a serious and equitable effort were made to deal with the Palestinian situation and bring about peace more would.

International law certainly has been a joke. Look at how many UN resolutions Israel has defied and broke, with no repercussions. Iraq invades Kuwait and war is waged. Iraq is contained. Then what happens? The US invades Iraq based on an obvious pack of lies and - no repercussions. So...what lesson is learned? In international law - it's ok for some countries to defy it but not others.

I provided facts for my statements. Have you?

But you haven't made a real point. The statements you made are nice neat, and irrelevant for the most part. And Even the above isn't really a point. It supports what we've been saying.

The UN did not stop Saddam... we did. The UN didn't stop Somalia either. The UN hasn't done anything. The reason stuff happens is because one nation defeats another. Iraq defeats Kuwait, US defeats Iraq, Israel defeats... fill in the blank. International law is nothing. It's simply a way for governments to support what they intend to do. If it doesn't, oh well. When China started doing military training near Taiwan, they tried to get support in the UN. It never came, they still did it. How many hundreds of times has that happened! A sovereign nation... is... sovereign!

Political bodies just use the UN when it fits what they want to do. Just like on this forum. People who support this or that, find a UN resolution and point to it as support for what they already believe. Best part is, like all political bodies, the UN often has conflicting resolutions, which results in people on opposite side of the same issue, both using the UN to justify their claims. It is ALL a joke. International Law, is a joke. Always was, always will be.

Correction, Qatar does not recognize Israel, but does have trade relations.
Yes, Egypt and Jordan do have peace treaties with Israel, and due to the fact Israel stomped both of them, which goes back to my point that peace will come after one side dominates the other. I was not aware of Mauritania. Perhaps I read up on that later.

No it was not based on 'obvious' lies. Maybe you should start a thread about that. But I am convinced we had good reason and supporting evidence, to go in and remove Saddam. Not sure where this looney idea we didn't came from. I'm a bit taken back by the sheer ignorance of this topic by my fellow forum posters that have been otherwise fairly knowledgeable.

As for Isreal and Arabs, read this:
Arab panel refuses to recognize Israel

Now to me, this ends it. Israel made it clear they will support an Arab state if they do one simple thing. Recognize Israel as a nation. I think that is very reasonable.

Instead, the Arabs refuse and would rather continue to complain and strap bombs to their own children. That isn't remotely reasonable on any level.

And you wonder why I support Israel?
I happen to know an Arab Palestinian. He works not far from here at a company I used to work for. I can't even try to type his name. But the interesting thing is, he grew up in the middle of all that. Unlike his fellow Arabs, he made a choice. He choose to not fight Israel. He got educated (in Israel), he got a job (in Israel), he saved some money, and he moved him and his family to America, and works for a living.

If he can choose to make something of his life instead of wasting it to try and kill Jews, why can't all of them? It's a choice Coyote. A choice. Some choose to be monsters and blow up their kids, and others choose to be like this man.