[quote name='ryanbph']Israel is capable of defending themselves, but they shouldn't have to do it alone. The PLO got everything that wanted in the meeting in the US with Cinton...Arafat pulled out...I don't believe they should give back the land. They were attacked by several nations, and won...the spoils of war belong to israel. Besides the fact that they are high ground overlooking there nation. It would be stupid to just give back such a strategic milatary locations. Palestinians, have never been a country, it is a made up word for the 1960's or so. Why don't fellow Muslim nations take them in, several nations including syria and egypt don't want them. [/quote]
Every other nation there has to defend themselves alone, Israel shouldn't be any different. And Arafat did not get everything he wanted, there was significant land he did not get. The final offer gave Israel anywhere from 10-20% of the west bank, significant loss in water and quality land, and the palestinian state would not have been continuous. The offer was not something he should have accepted. You can criticize him for not making significant counter offers, but it would have been a mistake to take what was offered.
And another country taking over would be pointless, and the suggestion itself is ridiculous. The Palestinian Liberation Organization (actually Fatah, which later controlled the PLO) originally fought jordan, which controlled the palestinian territories at that time. The palestinians want independence, not independence from the israeli's, but independence from everyone. They want their own state, that was the point of the PLO and all other liberation organizations.
The "spoils of war" argument is not one I care to discuss, it's a basic concept you either agree or disagree with. I don't, you do. But, it has no place here. None of those nations that attacked Israel were palestinian, and the palestinians had no place in those wars. Since the palestnians never attacked israel in those wars (egypt, syria etc. were involved), there land should never enter into the discussions on the "spoils of war". In fact, in 1967 when they were taken over, the palestinian militant groups were focused on fighting Jordan, their then occupier.
The term palestine was brought back into use by the british in the the 1920's, but it was originally used by the romans around 100 a.d. The term had been used before that, but not to define a specific state or area. Either way, that doesn't mean the people there don't have a history. The term was eventually adopted by them, but the people were always there.
I don't think we need to be proactive in our support, but we shouldn't ditch them either. We should also take the leash off of them and let them handle the situations as they feel fit. While your ideal of a unified state is ideal, and would be the best solution, with humans involved and our need for power, I just don't feel that will be an option. You have the schooling of young muslim children in the middle east to hate israel and the usa...how can one make a deal with someone that has been bred to hate one and your race. IMO, I don't think religion is completly behind the hate, I feel the radicals on both sides use it as a crutch to gain support. My belief is that they are pissed off that Israel was able to develop a succesful society on shitty lands, something they have yet to accomplish.
The palestinians are pissed off because many had to flee their lands due to fear of the Israeli army, and then the land was taken over for use by Israeli's, leaving millions in refugee camps. If the land was not taken from them (as some Israeli's claim), common practice would be to allow them to return when the area was safe again. The fact that a brutal occupation has destroyed their economy, killed many palestinians, made it one of the poorer parts of the world, and has left them powerless in the own land are other reasons they are pissed. You can debate specifics about that, but that's what happened in their mind, and that's why they're pissed. There was a study done on text books at hebrew university, here are some highlights:
The texts teach Palestinian students to respect human rights, justice, peace, equality, freedom, and tolerance, in terms of both self and others. They caution students to avoid extremism and stereotypes, and encourage them to treat all people equally. The books also encourage tolerance among religions and ask students to respect the freedom of religion....
Students learn about Gandhi and his form of civil disobedience, and are asked to relate to other stories of peaceful forms of conflict resolution. We found no incitement for the use of violence at all.
The new Palestinian textbooks define the future independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders as described in UN Resolutions. ........
The books portray Jews throughout history in a positive manner and avoid negative stereotypes. However, according to the everyday experience of Palestinians, modern-day Israelis are presented as occupiers. ........
Israeli Textbooks
The secular textbooks also include stories about Arab children (Jordanian and Palestinian) who play or would like to play with their Israeli peers. Messages of peace with the neighbors are integrated explicitly and implicitly into the texts.....
The textbooks used in the state religious primary schools are as Zionist as the books designated for secular schools, but in a different way. These texts enhance religious- national education, strongly emphasizing the collective values connected to the history of the Jewish nation in "their land" and God's promises to the Jews that give them an absolute right on the land. The land of Eretz Israel described in the books includes the territories of the PNA from 1967. In addition, stories and poems about religious and national holidays are based on the existential threat posed to Jews and Israelis by the "others." These stories include wars, loss, and pain caused by the "others" through the generations......
The Palestinians, as such, are not found in any of the three types of primary-level textbooks. In these readers, the Palestinian minority in Israel and the PNA Palestinians are referred to as Arabs. Tolerance and peace-oriented texts with the "others" were found only in the secular primary-level textbooks.
http://conflict-religion.boker.tv/conflicts/judaism/palestine_israel_comparing_palestinian_and_israeli_textbooks?eZSESSIDnews=4e9b2bf90665cf511270ba01d0b607e6
Yes, there are bad jewish leaders, just like there are bad leaders in every nations/religion/society. Some may have used the anti semite phrase to often, but the level of hate for the jewish society in europe is as high as it was before WW2. That is unacceptable, I don't feel the need to destroy all Muslims, even though they did attack us, so why is it acceptable for countries to cry for the destruction of Israel. For what, the fact they are on your holy land, because the said you were anti semetic, because after being attacked by a sole bomber, they strike back with a miltary that destroys entire area's. If the Palestinians had the organized milatary and weapon assets that Israel had, do you think there even would be an Israel left?
Zionism, once denounced by prominent Jewish Rabbi's, once a decidedly non religious jewish movement, has become essential to many jews. The attack of anti semitism is used by many high ranking Israeli's official, none more high ranking than Ariel Sharon.
Some radical islamic factions have declared war on the u.s., not muslims. Israel is a particular country, people can denounce a particular country when that country acts in a way they do not approve. Since it was formed in a unique manner, using a combination of native jews and (mostly) european jews, it is not a natural state. Much of the population was imported from around the world simply to build a large enough population to form a state there, and one that only treats jews as 100% equal. That is the only reason why people say israel should be destroyed, and why you never hear that directed at other countries.
But the Israeli's faced decades of mostly peaceful resistance. Sure, there were militant groups, but until recently most resistance has been peaceful. Even today, peaceful Palestinian protests (and there are some groups who engage in this) usually end in Israeli guns being fired at the protestors. Though, you seem to think it's pointless to denounce them from destroying whole areas in response to a sole bomber, isn't that just a little out of proportion? Also consider that fatalities are only one side, many, many more are left homeless.
Israel really shot themselves in the foot in the 1980's though. They aided Hamas as a counterbalance to the PLO, unfortunately the PLO moderated itself and entered the realm of politics, while Hamas gained strength and may even be powerfull enough to defeat the current palestinian government, and it's at least powerfull enough that the government knows it's to risky to tackle head on. Hamas also benefits from the massive increase in poverty since Israel clamped down on palestinian territories, since they have a massive network of orphanages, hospitals, schools and other social services that the government cannot provide, yet the people need. This is the backbone of their support among palestinians.
ing shit PAD. You can't even begin to generalize all muslims by the actions of one asshole. If you have actually ever read the Quran, or been within 30 feet of a copy of it, which I'm sure you haven't.[/QUOTE]
