perhaps now you understand why Israel isn't liked very much.
too many people (mostly crypto Zionists) get all militant when Israel criticized.
You may be surprised by this but I understood why Israel isn't liked very much by many people before this thread started.
However, the way you phrased things earlier it came over as saying there should be no Jewish country and I found that a bit odd considering there are other countries in the region that have state religions and that do have a class system of sorts based on what religion people are. I wondered why there should be a different set of standards expected of one country than others. (In exactly the same way as people question why countries in the region shouldn't have nuclear weapons when one does already. There needs to be some consistency in criticism.
I hope you weren't calling me a crypto Zionist though. The labels Zionist or Anti Semite are immensely powerful and are bandied around by one side or the other when they see views they don't care for.
You would remove the right of Native Americans to have reservations then?
There is no sovereign state in North America run by Native American Indians as far as I am aware.
Such resevations form part of the US, and fall, apart from relatively minor issues, under US federal law (although they don't try too hard to solve such crime).
All your are doing is trying change the subject. I get suspicious of people who try to divert from the topic.
you certainly have the traits.
I think you are being offensive and unfair. The fact you took so long to answer my question and the fact your original statement was phrased in such a way left you looking as though you displayed certain traits too, especially since you phrased it in such a one sided way. If anyone that doesn't automatically damn Israel is going to be labelled as some sort of Zionist it's just as bad as the old habit of calling people anti Semitic when they criticize Israel. To say you want rid of the Jewish state and to suggest someone is a Zionist or that they have traits because they bring up the comparison of the Islamic republic (a neighbouring state with a state religion and a tier system (and say thats off topic) makes your remarks hypocritical at best. Sadly you're as bad as those you despise Thomas. I shall leave you to it. It would appear only one sided views are acceptable.
I think you are being offensive and unfair. The fact you took so long to answer my question and the fact your original statement was phrased in such a way left you looking as though you displayed certain traits too, especially since you phrased it in such a one sided way. If anyone that doesn't automatically damn Israel is going to be labelled as some sort of Zionist it's just as bad as the old habit of calling people anti Semitic when they criticize Israel. To say you want rid of the Jewish state and to suggest someone is a Zionist or that they have traits because they bring up the comparison of the Islamic republic (a neighbouring state with a state religion and a tier system (and say thats off topic) makes your remarks hypocritical at best. Sadly you're as bad as those you despise Thomas. I shall leave you to it. It would appear only one sided views are acceptable.
Don't worry about it, Thomas has been spreading his "views" on every thread to so much as mention the word Israel, since time began and treating everyone who dares question him with the contempt he deserves.
There is no sovereign state in North America run by Native American Indians as far as I am aware.
Such resevations form part of the US, and fall, apart from relatively minor issues, under US federal law (although they don't try too hard to solve such crime).
So you limit the ban on ethnic ascendancy to 'sovereign states'? The minor issues you refer to include the right to decide who can be excluded from living in specific areas based only on their ethnicity. It has also empowered some groups to evict black groups from the reservations whose families have been there generations.
They fall under US law and US law allows this. I assume from your answer you would not move to ban this group from following their ethnic specific policies?
I think you are being offensive and unfair. The fact you took so long to answer my question and the fact your original statement was phrased in such a way left you looking as though you displayed certain traits too, especially since you phrased it in such a one sided way. If anyone that doesn't automatically damn Israel is going to be labelled as some sort of Zionist it's just as bad as the old habit of calling people anti Semitic when they criticize Israel. To say you want rid of the Jewish state and to suggest someone is a Zionist or that they have traits because they bring up the comparison of the Islamic republic (a neighbouring state with a state religion and a tier system (and say thats off topic) makes your remarks hypocritical at best. Sadly you're as bad as those you despise Thomas. I shall leave you to it. It would appear only one sided views are acceptable.
yeah i must be some anti-semetic jew hater. heard it all before.
yeah i must be some anti-semetic jew hater. heard it all before.
I didn't say that, I said you were busy labelling other people unfairly and living down to the level you accuse others of. In fact you are the only person throwing personal accusations around. At least get it partially right.
I ask this question purely based on the fact that without American military backing it is likely it would crumble. I recalled them unilaterally declaring the state of israel without American backing initially, they later fell in line. The "Holy Land" on which Israel claims dominion was never meant to be claimed for one individual faith or religion. It is interesting how the majority Islamic countries do not recognise Israel, or have no diplomatic relations. Based on past and current U.N. charters Israel doesn't even have a right to exist, yet it is remarkable how it is recognised by most Western economies. Interestingly some see the establishment of Zion as acceptable based on the results of the holocaust (is so which holocaust as there was more than one?). Israel has declared dominion over a land which was never intended to belong to one people. Sadly we have the terrible situation in which many human rights abuses are committed by Israel, in how they treat Palestinians not allowing free
trade.
Does the state of Israel have a legal right to exist based on interational law and conventions?
Its more legal than almost any other state. it was established by the United Nations. Nearly all the other states all exist by right of conquest. All the moslem states are far more artificial - cobbled together by people drawing lines on maps after European wars - thats one reason why those states are so unsuccessful. and the pre-state tribal alternative they revert to is even less so. Much of tNe moslem world doesn't acknowledge Israel because they are anti-semitic, and have used the issue to provide a foreign enemy, and to have an excuse for their own political failure. Although some Palesinians claim bizarrely that there were never any Jews in Palestine, the Jews and the desire for their own state predate the holocaust.
Israel doesn't rely on the US. The US provides about a sixth of its defence budget and access to some types of arms - because France and the UK now prefer selling aircraft to even richer Arab states who stop them selling to Israel. . Israel provides most of its own army and naval equipment and missiles. In the past Israel has spent twice as much of its GNP on defence and could do so again. It also managed to thrash the vastly bigger Arab armies in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973 - all before it had any US aid budget . the current aid deal is to make up for the strategic costs of agreeing to the uS devised post 1973 peace agreements. Jordan and Egypt depend even more on their aid from the US under those agreements. The alternative would be that Israel would need to take the Sinai back and the Egyptian army would become useless as soon as anyone needed a spare part.
Israel clearly exists, but the question is has it jeopardised it's future with it's behaviour? What will be there in a 100 years time? As it's brutality and illegality continues unabated, and technologies move forward will we see a horrendous terror strike at some point, in the dirty bomb variety.
As for Israel 'not relying on the US' - what an utterly hilarious suggestion, they rely on them to consistently veto opposition at the UN.
Comments
You may be surprised by this but I understood why Israel isn't liked very much by many people before this thread started.
However, the way you phrased things earlier it came over as saying there should be no Jewish country and I found that a bit odd considering there are other countries in the region that have state religions and that do have a class system of sorts based on what religion people are. I wondered why there should be a different set of standards expected of one country than others. (In exactly the same way as people question why countries in the region shouldn't have nuclear weapons when one does already. There needs to be some consistency in criticism.
I hope you weren't calling me a crypto Zionist though. The labels Zionist or Anti Semite are immensely powerful and are bandied around by one side or the other when they see views they don't care for.
There is no sovereign state in North America run by Native American Indians as far as I am aware.
Such resevations form part of the US, and fall, apart from relatively minor issues, under US federal law (although they don't try too hard to solve such crime).
All your are doing is trying change the subject. I get suspicious of people who try to divert from the topic.
you certainly have the traits.
I think you are being offensive and unfair. The fact you took so long to answer my question and the fact your original statement was phrased in such a way left you looking as though you displayed certain traits too, especially since you phrased it in such a one sided way. If anyone that doesn't automatically damn Israel is going to be labelled as some sort of Zionist it's just as bad as the old habit of calling people anti Semitic when they criticize Israel. To say you want rid of the Jewish state and to suggest someone is a Zionist or that they have traits because they bring up the comparison of the Islamic republic (a neighbouring state with a state religion and a tier system (and say thats off topic) makes your remarks hypocritical at best. Sadly you're as bad as those you despise Thomas. I shall leave you to it. It would appear only one sided views are acceptable.
Don't worry about it, Thomas has been spreading his "views" on every thread to so much as mention the word Israel, since time began and treating everyone who dares question him with the contempt he deserves.
So you limit the ban on ethnic ascendancy to 'sovereign states'? The minor issues you refer to include the right to decide who can be excluded from living in specific areas based only on their ethnicity. It has also empowered some groups to evict black groups from the reservations whose families have been there generations.
They fall under US law and US law allows this. I assume from your answer you would not move to ban this group from following their ethnic specific policies?
yeah i must be some anti-semetic jew hater. heard it all before.
I didn't say that, I said you were busy labelling other people unfairly and living down to the level you accuse others of. In fact you are the only person throwing personal accusations around. At least get it partially right.
SHALOM thomas pain,
Its more legal than almost any other state. it was established by the United Nations. Nearly all the other states all exist by right of conquest. All the moslem states are far more artificial - cobbled together by people drawing lines on maps after European wars - thats one reason why those states are so unsuccessful. and the pre-state tribal alternative they revert to is even less so. Much of tNe moslem world doesn't acknowledge Israel because they are anti-semitic, and have used the issue to provide a foreign enemy, and to have an excuse for their own political failure. Although some Palesinians claim bizarrely that there were never any Jews in Palestine, the Jews and the desire for their own state predate the holocaust.
Israel doesn't rely on the US. The US provides about a sixth of its defence budget and access to some types of arms - because France and the UK now prefer selling aircraft to even richer Arab states who stop them selling to Israel. . Israel provides most of its own army and naval equipment and missiles. In the past Israel has spent twice as much of its GNP on defence and could do so again. It also managed to thrash the vastly bigger Arab armies in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973 - all before it had any US aid budget . the current aid deal is to make up for the strategic costs of agreeing to the uS devised post 1973 peace agreements. Jordan and Egypt depend even more on their aid from the US under those agreements. The alternative would be that Israel would need to take the Sinai back and the Egyptian army would become useless as soon as anyone needed a spare part.
As for Israel 'not relying on the US' - what an utterly hilarious suggestion, they rely on them to consistently veto opposition at the UN.