Israel

[Rebiu]

I stumbled onto this link Israel

 

Since many do not have much background on Israel I thought this would be of interest.

[mooeypoo]

So is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel

and this: http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm

and this: http://www.1000traveltips.org/jeruzale.htm

and that: http://www.goisrael.com/tourism_eng

 

and so many more, too, in all different subjects.

 

 

Can you specify the point of this thread, though? Is it "general information" about Israel? Is it "Discussion of Israel's reaction to its neighbors" debate? There are so many aspects that can be debated in relation to Israel and its region, many of them are either already debated presently, or have been debated before.

 

What, exactly, are we to address?

 

~moo

[Rebiu]

So is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel

and this: http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm

and this: http://www.1000traveltips.org/jeruzale.htm

and that: http://www.goisrael.com/tourism_eng

 

and so many more' date=' too, in all different subjects.[/quote']Since it is the origional post it is the subject of the thread.

 

 

Can you specify the point of this thread' date=' though? Is it "general information" about Israel? Is it "Discussion of Israel's reaction to its neighbors" debate? There are so many aspects that can be debated in relation to Israel and its region, many of them are either already debated presently, or have been debated before.

 

What, exactly, are we to address?

 

~moo[/quote']It enumerates Israels policies and how they have not worked in regards to terrorism.

[Aardvark]

Since it is the origional post it is the subject of the thread.

 

Your original post doesn't give any subject for discussion. It's just a random link to an Anti Israeli opinion piece.

 

Perhaps you'd like to give your opinion on the matter and indictate what exactly you do want to discuss in this thread?

 

Or are you just making randon points without context?

(bit of a character trait that;) )

[Severian]

Since this thread seems to have very little direction, let me ask a question. Would it be better or worse for world peace in the long term, if the state of Israel ceased to exist?

[Sayonara]

This thread is on 24hr suicide watch.

[ecoli]

Since this thread seems to have very little direction, let me ask a question. Would it be better or worse for world peace in the long term, if the state of Israel ceased to exist?

 

for a long term peace, worse (assuming that is was dissolved due to pressure from Islamic extremism)

[ParanoiA]

Since this thread seems to have very little direction, let me ask a question. Would it be better or worse for world peace in the long term, if the state of Israel ceased to exist?

 

It would be better, but that's it.

[ecoli]

It would be better, but that's it.

 

care to defend that more fully?

[Skye]

It would depend entirely on whether the new state was allied to the US. If so, then things wouldn't change much. If not, then there'd be a war. Actually there'd be a serious war in the creation of such a state, most likely. TheUS went to all that trouble just to get Iraq on side, imagine the fireworks for the new Palestine. The US support (in terms of arms sales) every state in the region I can think of, aside from Syria. That's not by accident, Israel was used to show the superiority of US kit over Soviet.

[ParanoiA]

care to defend that more fully?

 

Sure. I think it would be better because they are dramatically outnumbered by people who hate them and who's religion advocates their destruction. America's support of the state of Israel is constantly used as an excuse by the Arab region to hate us and drags us into this centuries long childish mess. All because of a bad real estate decision.

 

But, like I said, it would only make it better, it wouldn't solve a damn thing. They'd still terrorize us and the Jews where ever they moved. That's what they do.

 

I didn't go into more detail earlier because I think there was already a thread on this, and I went on and on about it. I figured you all would be bored with my rehash.

[Rebiu]

Is this true?

"Palestinian terrorism is not random violence directed against Israel or ‘the West’; it is largely a response to Israel’s prolonged campaign to colonise the West Bank and Gaza Strip."

 

If it is not how does one explain Palestinian terrorism?

[Aardvark]

Is this true?

"Palestinian terrorism is not random violence directed against Israel or ‘the West’; it is largely a response to Israel’s prolonged campaign to colonise the West Bank and Gaza Strip."

 

Palestinian terrorism increased when Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip. Therefore that statement is untrue.

 

If it is not how does one explain Palestinian terrorism?

 

Xenophobia. combined with Islamic fanaticism.

[Sisyphus]

Agreed with ParanoiA.

 

I don't know whether that's off-topic, since I don't really understand the point of this thread.

[ecoli]

Agreed with ParanoiA.

 

I don't agree with PAranoiA, not because his argument is flawed, but he's missing one key point. Kicking Israel out of the middle east may make it more peaceful in the middle east, but I don't think that the world would be any safer because of it.

[Bettina]

This thread is on 24hr suicide watch.

 

I wish it was on 1 hour suicide watch....

 

Bee

[Sisyphus]

I don't agree with PAranoiA, not because his argument is flawed, but he's missing one key point. Kicking Israel out of the middle east may make it more peaceful in the middle east, but I don't think that the world would be any safer because of it.

 

The Middle East is part of the world, isn't it? Even beyond that, if you don't think the existence of Israel makes Islamic-Western tensions any worse, I don't know what world you've been living in. Is it the cause of everything? No. Would it's nonexistence solve everything (or anything)? Almost certainly not. But yes, it definitely makes things worse.

[ecoli]

The Middle East is part of the world, isn't it? Even beyond that, if you don't think the existence of Israel makes Islamic-Western tensions any[/i'] worse, I don't know what world you've been living in. Is it the cause of everything? No. Would it's nonexistence solve everything (or anything)? Almost certainly not. But yes, it definitely makes things worse.

 

I don't think, if Israel was to 'give-up' I don't think anywhere outside the middle east would be anymore peaceful. If anything, the extremists would take that as a sign that there cause is right. I could imagine them stepping up their violent campaign against the west.

 

 

You could make the argument that if Israel was never made in the first place, that tensions would be as high, but what's the point of doing so? I can make the same claim that if oil deposits weren't located in the middle east... What if scenerios are pointless.

[Jim]

Since this thread seems to have very little direction, let me ask a question. Would it be better or worse for world peace in the long term, if the state of Israel ceased to exist?

 

It depends on how the "state of Israel ceased to exist."

 

When I was a college debater a "few" years ago, one of the teams argued the US should surrender to the USSR. The resolution was something like "Resolved that the US should significantly increase its foreign military commitments." (Heh, googled that and I remembered it exactly!) An ivy league team argued that the US should not increase its commitments but should simply surrender. Communism would then moderate and show it's true benign face and everlasting world peace would ensue.

[Severian]

An ivy league team argued that the US should not increase its commitments but should simply surrender. Communism would then moderate and show it's true benign face and everlasting world peace would ensue.

 

And do you agree with this stance, or disagree?

[ParanoiA]

It depends on how the "state of Israel ceased to exist."

 

When I was a college debater a "few" years ago' date=' one of the teams argued the US should surrender to the USSR. The resolution was something like "Resolved that the US should significantly increase its foreign military commitments." (Heh, googled that and I remembered it exactly!) An ivy league team argued that the US should not increase its commitments but should simply surrender. Communism would then moderate and show it's true benign face and everlasting world peace would ensue.

 

The problem with that is it's not pragmatic. In the case of Israel, it's actually practical for them to move rather than continue killing and being killed for centuries to come. Simply because there's just a few million of them rather than hundreds of millions, such as the case with the US and USSR.

[Sisyphus]

I don't think, if Israel was to 'give-up' I don't think anywhere outside the middle east would be anymore peaceful. If anything, the extremists would take that as a sign that there cause is right. I could imagine them stepping up their violent campaign against the west.

 

Yes, I'm sure you can imagine all kinds of things. I myself am not at all convinced, and I honestly don't know what would happen. More peace, probably, but at the cost of a precedent of crazy racist fundamentalists getting their way with violence. I'm not advocating that Israel should annihilate itself, in any case.

 

You could make the argument that if Israel was never made in the first place, that tensions would be as high, but what's the point of doing so? I can make the same claim that if oil deposits weren't located in the middle east... What if scenerios are pointless.

 

Pointless inasmuch as they can't guide policy decisions, I suppose, but pointless is not the same as uninteresting. So sure, if Israel had never been formed, would there be more peace today? I don't think there's any question that there would be, but the ultimate result is still up in the air. Perhaps the presence of Israel will ultimately force the Islamic world to confront (and ultimately embrace) modernism sooner than it would otherwise. Or maybe it has the opposite effect, by making modernism into the enemy. I think that's a fair question.