[quote=sgtdmski;68072]First, there never was a Palestinian state, the Palenstine was used to refer to a region of land. Israel however, was a recognized kingdom dating back to 900 BCE. Israel was established as a nation by the UN, you remember them don't you in 1947.
Well if we are going to discuss the viability of Israel as a state ( which this thread isn't about) then so be it.
PRIOR ownership is NOT a justification. It may be a theological justification, but it can NEVER be a LEGAL justification. If it were, then the Red Indians would have every right to deman dthat all you non-indian folks get the hell out of their land.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtdmski  1) The land in dispute was taken by Israel in war. Starting first in 1948, followed by the 1967 war. It was the Arab nations that did not recognize Israel's right to exist in 1947. Jordan and Egypt also captured land during this war as well. |
OF COURSE the ARAB nations did not recognize Israel's right to exist in 1947. Israel was IMPOSED on the region by ther more powerful western states. That would be like Mexico taking california, transporting millions of mexicans there and then bitching about not being recognized by the US. Come on dude.. that's jsut crazy talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtdmski 2) Let us forget not that it was Israel that accepted the terms of the treaty presented by then President Clinton, including returning land in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Nor should we forget that even more recently, Israel itself has removed some of its own people from land in the Gaza Strip even at the point of a gun. Yet it was the PLO that walked from the table after being given everything they wanted. |
Israel has YET to adhere to all UN resolution passed regarding Palestinian self determination. The illegal settlements have not stopped. In fact Olmert has just annouced that new settlements will be initiated in the West bank very soon.
What good is the West Bank and the Gaza strip if it comes with water, air and land access in Israeli control? That is not a sovereign state.. THAT is a RESERVATION ( sort of like how the white immigrants locked up the Indians in their own land. The handover is rhetorical ( so to speak) and not actually of any benefit to anybody.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtdmski 3) This is a Muslim problem and not one of Israel. Until such time as the Muslims recognize Israel's right to existence, Israel has the right to defend itself. |
Well you seem to have a grave misconception. Not all muslim nations refuse to recognise Israel. Eqypt, Jordan and Turkey are already past that crap. As are Malaysia and Indonesia. At the moment the Pakistani government is contacting Israel on a diplomatic level to clear matters out.
So it's not a "muslim" problem. Opposition to Israel is NOT anti-semitism, and it is NOT only muslims who are against the existence of Israel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtdmski 4) Perhaps if this land was not used to smuggle in weapons in which there only purpose is the destruction of Israel, Israel would not have a need to act in this manner. |
Oh ok.. So you assume that a people that is discriminated against, living in refugeee camps, without possibility of self determination, without control of their own land,airspace and water, and without possibility for trade or commerce should shut up and remain silent and peaceful until the great nation of Israel decides they "deserve" a bone.
Man just once in awhile i wish america would find itself in the same situation as the palestinians. I would really like to know if you would remain just as morally superior then.
And does it occur to you that maybe they want weapons to keep Israeli bulldozers from levelling their houses? Israel is so MASSIVELY superior to Palestine militarily that even if the palestinians were free to import any weapons they wish, they would STILL not be able to destroy Israel. That is simple hysteria.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtdmski Philistine, Canaan, and Palestine all referred to a region of land. Canaan became Israel after the migration for Egypt. Philistine came about following the fall of Israel, and finally Palenstine came into existence. If we wish to be historically accurate, Israel existed before Palenstine, therefore, its existence is historically more accurate than that of Palenstine. Furthermore, some 56% of the land that should be the State of Palenstine was taken by Egypt and Jordan, where as Israel itself has only taken some 26%. If anything the Palestinians real problem lies with those two countries.
dmk |
That is actually new information to me and quite interesting. You got a source i can check out?
Even so the problem does not lie with Eqypt of jordan simply because they are not hostile nations. Israel on the other hand IS hostile. And you can't say the palestinians started it. 6000 years away MAKES the jews OUTSIDERS who decided to come and squat on palestinian land.
Imposition of an alien state on foreign land is a HOSTILE action. Would you not feel the same if Mexico did the california thing?