Support For Israel

[Theland]

Should our government do more to support the state of Israel?
I believe they should

[Ctrak]

"Why do we believe the big lie, "Palestinian Land"?
There has never been a country there called Palestine. From 1948 to 1967 the West Bank was in Arab hands"

So because it wasn't officially a state, it was there for the taking? Because by your reasoning, your house isn't a nation-state in its own right and I can therefore burst in with a trusty AK47 and demand ownership.

You wouldn't happen to be either Jewish and/or Israeli, would you, because the bias here is astonishing...

[Theland]

Noxlumos - "My god is better than your god?"
Yes, there's a lot of sense in what you say.
So, O.K. Israel has tried to break the impasse by unilaterally withdrawing from Gaza, at very great cost to its people. Israel has further promised to withdraw from most of the West Bank, but can't find anybody who will sit still long enough with whom to negotiate.
I regard myself as reasonable. I know that you are reasonable. If we had a dispute we could sit down and talk, reason, compromise.
Israel is willing to do the same. She cannot do it alone.

[Theland]

Ctrak - Most of the land in Jewish hands prior to 1948 was bought, a process that had been going on from about 1890. The sovereignty of the land was Ottoman and then British, not automonously Palestinian. Many Arabs immigrated into the land as the Jews there began the transformation of that country. And why not? The Jews offered them employment and a higher standard of living. From the very beginning, it was Jewish ambition to live in peace, side by side with their Arab neighbours.

[Theland]

Ctrak - I simply don't buy the lies we are fed from a politically correct media, and successive governments that care more about upsetting the Arabs, and therefore compromising our oil supply.

[Ctrak]

UP TO 48, yes, but after? Pffft.

[Theland]

Ctrak - After 1948, Israel acquired additional land, after being attacked by Arab armies, beating them, and pushing them back further than where they had started from. They held on to land to give themselves more easily defensible borders. In the case of the Sinai peninsular, which they took from Egypt, this was given back in return for a treaty. Israel did not go on any missions to acquire more land as an end in itself.
The same is true of the Golan heights, which they still hold, to control the area in the face of Syrian threats.

[jno]

Clanad is right to point to British involvement in the formation of Israel. but this no longer applies; as the question suggests, Israel gets little support from the UK government these days. I think this has less to do with religious interests, or the presence of ravening Muslim hordes in Bradford, than with traditional British sympathy for the underdog: a century ago, Jews were oppressed; now Palestinians are.

[Ctrak]

For "held on" read "nicked".

[Theland]

Ctrak - O.K. then, nicked if you like. The land used to be controlled by the Arabs, then the Arabs attcked israel, Israel fought them off, and instead of retreating back to their original borders, they stayed put to better defend themselves next time. So what? Doesn't that make sense? Unless you want to invite another attack that is.

[Theland]

Jno - You say Palestinians are oppressed. They are. By whom?
Is it Israels fault that the "refugees" are used as political pawns in the game being played out by Arab countries to wage war against Israel?
As I said, from 1948 to 1967 the West Bank was in Arab hands. Why didn't they set up a Palestinian state then? They had twenty years to do it.

[maxximus]

not really an answer to the question, that would require a lengthy recap of factual history, something i see a lot of you are ignoring. but in response to some of the posts i've read, this letter may be of some interest to some. http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html

[jno]

here's an example of the sort of oppression I mean (from that communist rag the Financial Times):

http://search.ft.com/searchArticle?sortBy=date article&page=3&queryText=palestinian+economy&y =5&javascriptEnabled=true&id=060911000775&x=15

Nothing brutal (that only happens to the poor); just a subtle destruction of any attempt to build a Palestinian economy, followed by sniggering that they're such peasants they can't even run a successful business.

[Theland]

maxximus - Mark Twain travelled through the country in the nineteenth century, and wasn't too impressed at what he found, particularly Jerusalem, "I would not desire to live there."

The Jews trickled back into the country as a result of persecutions elsewhere. Can't blame them for that.

........ continued ....

They bought up land, with help from other rich Jewish philanthropists from overseas. All legal. No violence. As their numbers increased, so more land was transformed, attracting more Jews, and more Arabs who were also economic migrants into the area.

Jew and Arab were ruled soverignly by the Ottomans, and later, by the British, as part of the mandate.

The Jews aspired to a homeland of their own, and literally bought the real estate, transforming it miraculously, so that it became an attractive place to be. A land of promise.

Were the Jews living in the Land wrong for holding out the hand of friendship to their brothers who were being persecuted in Europe?

At this time, no Arabs were driven off their own land, but there was already a concerted effort to drive the Jews off, orchestrated by militant Arabs.

[Theland]

jno - What does Israel say about these restrictions? Could they be, I wonder, a response to the continuing threats from the Palestinians? It's only a few years since Yasser Arafat died, and his duplicitous legacy lives on, in Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aksa martyrs brigade. Can Israel be blamed for being nervous about allowing the totally free movement of people in and out of the territories?
Remember, Israel unilaterally walked out of Gaza. Stage two was to walk out of the West Bank. The great fear is that both of these areas will become staging posts for terrorism.
continued ...

[ummmm]

You really do not want to hear my opinion on this subject then!!!

[Theland]

Israel has even supplied arms to Mahmoud Abbas, at his request, for his security forces, needed to quell the extremists, (or even more extreme than him), in the hope that there would emerge a unity government that Israel could sit down and talk to. Arming their enemies? It doesn't make sense. Yet such is Israels' desire for peaceful coexistence, that they will even go to these extreme measures.

Your point, however, is valid, and I accept that in this area, Israel could possibly have done more to free up the territories without further compromising their security.

[Theland]

ummmmm - I'm desperate to hear your opinion.

[Theland]

So should our government do more to support the state of Israel?

Israel comprises about 1% of all of the lands claimed by Arabs. A land area about the same as Wales.

They are literally at the mercy of the Arab world, and need more political and moral support.

[jno]

yes, of course everything Israel does is in response to Arab outrages. A couple of soldiers are kidnapped, so naturally Israel goes to war against Lebanon (conveniently destroying another promising regional economy). Well, you would, wouldn't you. Obviously, anyone who wonders if this is monstrously disproportionate to any possible threat to Israel is either deluded or malign. Stands to reason. Everything is the fault of Arabs.