Hi,

I'm a far right-wing zionist, and I'd love the opportunity to debate about Israel's right to exist with someone that disagrees.

Anyone out there?
Jeremy

Hell we cna blame it all on just about any one from God to well the crusaders to the sinful nature of the people of israel but now everyone just needs to deal with the fact that israel isn't going any where

so therefore on Christians?

Well actually ICE Israel owns that land historically so in the ned we cna blame the whole thing on the crusades and be done with it

As someone who doesn't live there...I have very little ability to understand the situation. However...if I was a Palestinian, I'd freaking hate Israel for taking my land from me. Palestine is the victim in this conflict, not Israel.

quote:

Originally posted by guysmiley00:

quote:

Originally posted by Lucpol:
Liberate Palestine from a foreign occupier?How did you come to this conclusion? We must not forget that it is Israel who won the war (after it was attacked) and therefore has the right to exist in that territory! That also means that Palestine is the foreign occupier on the land that they should be evicted from?!

If you are referring to the '67 war, you'd best be doing a bit more reading - even Begin and Rabin have admitted that Israel was the unprovoked aggressor in that war, that Egypt was in no position to strike at Israel, and that the whole affair was a land-grab along biblical-Zionist lines. Look it up.

Oh, and the acquisition of territory via conquest was repudiated in the formation of the UN - so unless you think World Wars are keen (New and Improved! Now with Nukes!), you'd do well to support that particular notion.

Notion noted. May i point out that even though it is Israel that appeared to be hostile, it was in fact the UN who should receive the blame, or should it not?As far as Palestine and surrounding countries are concerned they have always feared/disliked the iSRAELLIS, even before the war too place.

quote:

Originally posted by jeremysroberts:
The Palestinians CAUSE problems. Whilst Palestinian and Arab spokespeople often claim that the recent Palestinian campaign of terror is a result of Israeli “occupation”, the assumption that “occupation” causes terrorism is historically flawed. Arab and Palestinian terrorism against Israel existed prior to the establishment of the State of Israel in May 1948, as well as prior to the beginning of Israeli control over the West Bank and Gaza as a result of the 1967 Six-Day War.

It is your logic that is flawed. Simply because terrorism has existed without occupation does not exclude occupation as a cause of terrorism - you might as well say that, because fire existed before matches, matches cannot possibly create fire. All you've proven is that occupation is not the only cause of terrorism.

quote:

The PLO was established by the Arab League in Cairo, Egypt in 1964, three years before the Six-Day War and the supposed “occupation.” The deadly assault against Israel began long before the West Bank of the Jordan River was in Israeli hands.

Yes, and anti-Semitism is bad, and Israel cannot possibly be removed wholesale from the map, just as the continental US cannot be returned to the Natives, morally-justified or not. None of that excuses Israel's continued occupation of foreign land.

quote:

Arab terror was stepped up on the eve of the UN Partition Plan of 1947, which led to the joint Arab invasion of 1948-49 and which delineated the boundaries of the newly established State of Israel.

All of which is quite irrelevant, especially since it can be generally agreed that the process of Israel's creation was greatly flawed. Britain had no right to "give away" lands it had colonially occupied, just as I cannot legally retain a gift which is discovered to be stolen property.

quote:

Additionally, terrorism was at its highest levels when occupation was closest to ending, during the height of the Oslo process in the mid-1990s and in 2000, soon after the Camp David II talks.

What sources do you provide for these claims?

quote:

Originally posted by Lucpol:
Liberate Palestine from a foreign occupier?How did you come to this conclusion? We must not forget that it is Israel who won the war (after it was attacked) and therefore has the right to exist in that territory! That also means that Palestine is the foreign occupier on the land that they should be evicted from?!

If you are referring to the '67 war, you'd best be doing a bit more reading - even Begin and Rabin have admitted that Israel was the unprovoked aggressor in that war, that Egypt was in no position to strike at Israel, and that the whole affair was a land-grab along biblical-Zionist lines. Look it up.

Oh, and the acquisition of territory via conquest was repudiated in the formation of the UN - so unless you think World Wars are keen (New and Improved! Now with Nukes!), you'd do well to support that particular notion.

The Palestinians CAUSE problems. Whilst Palestinian and Arab spokespeople often claim that the recent Palestinian campaign of terror is a result of Israeli “occupation”, the assumption that “occupation” causes terrorism is historically flawed. Arab and Palestinian terrorism against Israel existed prior to the establishment of the State of Israel in May 1948, as well as prior to the beginning of Israeli control over the West Bank and Gaza as a result of the 1967 Six-Day War. The PLO was established by the Arab League in Cairo, Egypt in 1964, three years before the Six-Day War and the supposed “occupation.” The deadly assault against Israel began long before the West Bank of the Jordan River was in Israeli hands.

Arab terrorism was widespread during a wave of anti-Jewish riots in 1920-21, as well as during the 'Disturbances' of 1929, the Arab Revolt of 1936-39, and in numerous other incidents of anti-Jewish aggression throughout the pre-state period. Arab terror was stepped up on the eve of the UN Partition Plan of 1947, which led to the joint Arab invasion of 1948-49 and which delineated the boundaries of the newly established State of Israel. Additionally, terrorism was at its highest levels when occupation was closest to ending, during the height of the Oslo process in the mid-1990s and in 2000, soon after the Camp David II talks.

They didn't cause the problems there, they were victims of problems there.

They were evicted from it so they went to Syria (now Jordan) and tried to overthrow the govermeant there, the Syrians kicked their asses right out and so they returned to Israle to cause problems there again

Liberate Palestine from a foreign occupier?How did you come to this conclusion? We must not forget that it is Israel who won the war (after it was attacked) and therefore has the right to exist in that territory! That also means that Palestine is the foreign occupier on the land that they should be evicted from?!

quote:

no actually their goals are to liberate palestine from a foreign occupier.

There are more peaceful ways to achieve such a goal...Israel is willing to give them land if the bombings stop.

quote:

The PA are terrorists. They support actual terrorist organisations whose goals are to cause terror.

no actually their goals are to liberate palestine from a foreign occupier.

quote:

Originally posted by Sphinx:
The same thing, except that in Israel's case it's an army that conducts terrorism and in Palestine's it is militia. Israel's killing is endorsed by the government but the PA is try to lock up terrorists (the ones that Israel didn't get first, that is). There's a real difference between unauthorised terrorism that breaks laws and an army that continually breaks laws.

Terrorism= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism

Basically the goal of terrorism is to cause terror...Israel's goal is to defend itself, not to cause terror. Therefore the Israeli army is not a terrorist organisation.
The PA are terrorists. They support actual terrorist organisations whose goals are to cause terror.

quote:

Originally posted by bluedemocrat:

quote:

The Israeli Army killed Palestinian civilians in retaliation to those suicide bombings. They didn't bother to differentiate between combatants and non-combatants.

Just as the Palestinians killed Israeli civilians...neither is right. However, what can Israel do?? Sit back and let their people be killed. I know that it just creates an endless cycle of violence, but even if Israel stopped retaliating there is no indication that the suicide bombers would stop. Also, it is so difficult to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. The suicide bombers are people who would be considered non-combatants.

And I said before, at least Israel has made some concessions. I don't see the Palestinian leaders doing that.

At least Israel is going after militants...not purposfully killing civilians.

The same thing, except that in Israel's case it's an army that conducts terrorism and in Palestine's it is militia. Israel's killing is endorsed by the government but the PA is try to lock up terrorists (the ones that Israel didn't get first, that is). There's a real difference between unauthorised terrorism that breaks laws and an army that continually breaks laws.

quote:

The Israeli army breaks international laws and kills people who don't deserve to die.

and what do the palestinian terroists do is what exactly?

...Nope, no proof. But there is plenty going on that has been documented, read about Rachel Corrie or Mohammad Dura, or the toddler who was shot while sitting in her family car last year. The Israeli army breaks international laws and kills people who don't deserve to die.

I'm sorry I meant that, to everyone else, the PA has no authority, as in they aren't taken seriously internationally. If the militants were already in jail then I see no reason for the Israeli army to kidnap them.

And I didn't mean that Israel is exactly like Iran, it's just Lucpol was applauding Israel for doing whatever they want and ignoring international opinion while everyone is attacking Iran for the same thing.

From the Rachel Corrie memorial website:

quote:

As we approach March 16 [anniversary of Corrie's death], residents and citizens of the United States should ask themselves how it is that an unarmed U.S. citizen can be killed with impunity by a soldier from an allied nation receiving massive U.S. aid, using a product manufactured in the United States by a U.S. corporation and paid for with U.S. tax dollars. When three Americans were killed, presumably by Palestinians, in an explosion on Oct. 15, 2003, as they traveled through Gaza, the FBI came within 24 hours to investigate the deaths. After one year, neither the FBI nor any other U.S.-led team has done anything to investigate the death of an American killed by an Israeli.

Why the double standard? Perhaps this reveals the most disturbing truth of all.

quote:

If I did I would have put it all over the internet by now. The truth is it happened and you can accept that or not.

But you have no proof....

quote:

The prison assault was completely rediculous. They're completely undermining the PA by stealing the prisoners right out of a jail, and then they'll turn around and blame the PA for not controlling Palestinian militants. The PA has no authority and no power in that area... and stealing their prisoners is just stupid. What does Israel want with them?

Umm. Well the PA really can't control the militants. It's for the safety of the state of Israel, obviously. You're contradicting yourself by saying that Israel is undermining the PA and then that the PA has no authority, anyway. So what exactly is Israel undermining? If the PA isn't going to do its job, then someone has to and Israel is thinking of its safety.

quote:

Why do you trust Israel if you know they'll just do whatever the hell they want and ignore international laws?

Israel will do what it takes to protect its existence and its people. The world is full of anti-semitics and anti-zionists. Israel is acting in defense, whereas Iran is being offensive and threatening to attack Israel.