Argentina, Brazil recognize Palestine; Israel miffed

pretend the jews made the desert bloom of course you believe this your a bigot. see others can do it too.
if Israel can sustain its self why doesn't???? its the most modernized because it didn't have to spend the money get there. if you give an equal percentage wise money to one of the arab countries around Israel and I garnentee it would be in the same level of modernity. ISrael weather you want it or not exist as the economic and military power it is today because of foriegn funding

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I am. Those are both examples of leaders of polities whose power had already failed. Neither did anything to break down such power as such - they simply accepted the situation dealt to them and responded as best they could.

Not really. Jewish nationality is at least as old as most of the other sorts (and in particular the Arab varieties). Depending on how you define it, Jewish nationality would actually be among the oldest nationalities still extant (been around for literally thousands of years).

Unless you meant to say "grand scheme of states," but, again, there's no shortage of states of comparable or newer vintage.

You are confusing national mythologies for reality. Nationalism is a relatively new phenomenon, and most present-day nationalities are not particularly old as such (the ethnicities that they base themselves on, and attempt to subsume, are a different story). A great many of the nations of the world didn't exist as such before the 20th century, and almost none before the 19th century. The only major nationalities that can credibly claim earlier vintage (late 18th century) are American and French.

I'd again suggest that you're thinking of states, but they tend to be even younger. So you must be thinking of ethnicity, or just plain mythology, or something.

Right: power.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, much of the contention appears to be the very existence of a Jewish nation in that area. There is - yes - the issue of the treatment of Arabs and of border conflicts with those nations, but again much of it seems to be the result of the very existence of Israel. Israel is missing on some maps of that region, and I don't believe human rights violations are the reason for this oversight; unless the map-makers and their paymasters are more than a little biased, given the existence of the same range of violations worldwide? Does North Korea exist on such maps? China? The United States?

Except in Egypt, Jordan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey, the Sudan, and others. I apologize if I've missed any.

I don't know that the IDF actually "guarantees" that luxury. I know that security forces in Egypt do indeed guarantee - and even participate - in violence against Christians.

Well, I think intolerance would not play out in such a scenario as you envision...but of course, this is not the absolute case in Israel, nor in any of the nations diametrically opposed to its existence, and so it does not strike me as a very realistic scenario. The Copts could probably supply you with their own not-unique experiences of the supposed protections of 'universal' human rights in a secular-cum-Islamic state such as the one being proposed here. I think, as I have always done, that two-state is the only reasonable solution. In short, it is of importance to consider who will dispense law and protection; religious minorities in Indonesia could supply in turn their experiences of such idealized constitutional protection in name but not in fact.

Goodness, friend Strawdog! Hyperbolize much? I regret that I am merely a humble observer of the facts. It is not my fault if they are not to everyone's liking.

I agree that anything in theory is possible: it's just that no religious minority fares particularly well in an Islamic state, so that whatever the economic outcome, it is unlikely to be matched by equal advances or protections in social welfare. It is all well that you suppose that a secular state could be great, but it isn't reasonable to think that such an amalgam would indeed be secular. To illustrate: you're very adept at pointing at Israeli departures from secularist ideas. You have perhaps noticed similar trends in Islamic nations, no?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What a very bizarre assertion, considering the term Jew is much younger than the term Hindu or Iranian and nonexistent before the 18th century. If we go by ethnicity = nation, then almost everyone with a state today has Judaism beat as a nation. And if we go by religion = nation then both the Vedas and Avesta predate Judaism. Even if we go by "bunch of people with common beliefs about nationhood" = nation then the Pashtuns, Parsis, Syrian Christians, Copts, Kurds, Romanis etc predate the "Jewish" nation

How about narrative?

I'd say much of the "history" of the Jewish nation is just narrative, created for the purpose of establishing a modern state, neither myth nor race nor religion. I recommend "The Invention of the Jewish People" by Shlomo Sand as a look at the colourful history of the Jewish nation. Its not entirely objective having a political bent, but its a good start. We already know of the havoc that archaeology has played with the "chronology" of the Hebrew Bible - the lack of any evidence of the Jewish nation as claimed by the present day "nation" of Israel is evidence of the role of narrative in this "chronology". Even if we take the Bible as sacred truth, its only in the book of Ezra, when the Persian courtier preached monotheism to the exiled Judeans - separating the Pharisees [Parsis?] from the Sadducees who did not believe in the ideologies that pass for Judaism today - that we come across any "nation" of a bunch of immigrants who pick up religious notions from their rulers under exile - none of which is supported by any archaeological or historical evidence.

Sand on the other hand, traces the claim of the Jewish people as a nation from the 1880s, when scholars like Heinrich Graetz described the work of Julius Wellhausen, the father of modern Biblical Criticism, as anti-Jewish

 

That's an incredibly weak argument. I could show pictures of nice cities and scenery from pre-war NAZI Germany and then contrast that with the rubble of Berlin immediately after. Would you take that as an argument that we shouldn't have stopped them? I agree the Palestinians have suffered over the last 60 years, but I don't think your contrast does anyone real justice. Would also be nice to see you go after SAM and her attempts to depict Israel as a post-Christian, post-Islamic fictional European creation the same way you're attacking Fedr here.

 

I think we have to be realistic and accept that the Jewish demographic will neither be wiped out nor subjugated by Islamic bullies.

Well Israel had no trouble accepting the displaced Jews fleeing the Islamic world, I fail to see why the Arabs have failed so miserably to do the same for their Palestinian vanguard, despite having literally 100 times the territory and treasure at their disposal. And you just blink at that?

I.e. they should just give up and accept their extermination with grace? I must need laser eye correction, did you have a successful model of a growing and thriving mideast Christian minority you wanted to point out and I somehow missed?

Last I checked, America still leads the world in GDP by a substantial longshot. Indeed, if China wanted to come even close to what the US produces every year, well, with the way they manage their economy and power supplies, there ain't even enough oil on the planet to fuel it. Iran is only a threat because it's viewed as possibly suicidal, and Israel (along with the Palestinians) are particularly vulnerable even to a small scale Iranian atomic attack, given their tiny geography. You seem pretty hopeful the US will completely fall apart in your lifetime. Do you go even further and advocate that a thorough mutually-destructive war in the Middle East is preferable to a 2 state solution?

Israel might yet screw itself down the road by alienating the US, but otherwise, if it shows a willingness to make reasonable compromises, Muslims don't stand a chance of overrunning it, they're still waiting for a sky fairy to come down and solve their problems for them.

 

I doubt you could even name 50, much less several hundred.

I could see how you'd think that way, given your very selective definition of who and what constitutes a culture. I will admit as far as South America was concerned, my statement was with regards to territory snatched in wars where Christians and Muslims were mutually involved. If the Islamic world had known the Earth was round and had sent its ships westward in the times of Columbus or earlier, I don't know what would have happened. As it was, South America came under a wave of infectious diseases which did far more damage than what the small number of colonists could ever hope to do by intent. And in the end, I ask who do the majority of South Americans racially identify with today? They speak Spanish and their superstitions are now focussed on Catholicism, but they remember who they were and if they didn't, I wouldn't be hearing their gripes through you every time you find them convenient to use for a completely different cause.

As for Africa, my understanding is that when it came to slave purchases, Americans and Europeans were buying from Muslims, I've never read anything about substantial slave trading in the other direction. On that note, I am grateful to fate that the South Sudanese have finally won the opportunity to declare their independence from the Arab colonists who've raped them for centuries and nearly wiped them out altogether in recent times.

I qualified that statement, did I not? Maybe I should have said 400 years so I could include the massacres committed by the Ghaznavids and their ilk in India. Claiming the Islamic world to be a victim and never an aggressor or oppressor is what truly borders on slanderous propaganda.

 

I'll be happy to see whatever evidence you have to refute the same. If you like we can create a thread on the topic. I've been reading on the influences of Zoroastrianism on Judaism and it would be great to hear other opinions on the topic - mythology aside, if you have any evidence of an Israel which is not post-Christian or post-Islamic and not of European creation, I'd most certainly love to see it.

 

What about when a Muslim speaks fondly of the golden age of "spreading Islam"? How does that rub you?

The UN, with assistance from the people who tried to outright exterminate it. And the same will be true for the remaining claimants to the Ottoman province of Palestine, if they accept an independent state. Going prior to that, there was a great deal of Jewish history in that land from the ancient eras and from modern eras alike. I don't see a reason why the mass immigration of Holocaust survivors to Israel should delegitimize it, given that this immigration was into largely unused territory (mostly in the lands of the originally-proposed 1947 partition) which already passed through the hands of multiple empires. If it were an excuse to delegitimize Israel's existence, you could use more extreme examples from history to delegitimize a great deal of the Muslim world too. Muslims control 99% of the territory in the middle east yet this cocky 1% called "Israel" occupies their minds like a mental obsession. You don't find such trends seriously disturbing?

Not far off from the prevalent attitude in the middle east. To prove Israel wasn't created by goblins, do you think Israel should hand itself off wholesale to the people who make such accusations?

Did you read the article? Did you note the mentions that Europe didn't have much of a presence in the interior of Africa until the late 19th century at best, when Britain and its navy had already banned the slave trade? Prior to then, Europe simply didn't have the resources or population to barge into the African interior without strong local assistance. Most of the slaves Americans bought were first captured in warfare between rival African kingdoms, warfare with Muslim nations in the region, and local mercenaries. My question was whether anyone could find solid evidence of Americans and Europeans going out, capturing slaves and then selling them to Islamic countries.

 

No. In fact they both countered and overcame massive resistance from within the existing power cabal. Conversely they both enjoyed massive public support in their initiatives.

IMO they were luminaries who could see further down the road than their contemporaries. They dowsed the flames preventing the looming inferno. Both bloodless achievements. :m:

Hm. But not as a single State eh? Thats kinda brand new.

Of course, but we are not discussing them.

Persia to Iran. Ottoman Empire to Turkey. Ancient Japan to modern Japan. Ancient Egypt to modern Egypt. Same geography, same blood.

Call it what you want. We all know the wind changes direction. :m:

 

Well ... yes. A bunch of foreigners just squatted on MY farm, thrown me out of MY house into the stable, and now they want to charge ME rent. Contentious, sure. Understandable, sure. Rectifiable? Sure.

So the disappointment at being treated like human flotsam may manifest as resistance no? And perhaps deep seated hate no?

Absolutely, and there are real and valid reasons for such. Not yet addressed, but surmountable if approached in good faith.

I know someone who was repeatedly raped by her brother as a child. He has never apologized nor attempted reconciliation. Thus she has denied/ignored his existence for 40 years now. Is she unreasonable?

Come on. Best you point out the equivalent of a Gaza in any of your examples.

This is not about Egypt. So ... how come the settlers get away with their violence against Palestinians? Why are there more than 10 000 Palestinians, men, woman and children, languishing in gaol without charge? Who guarantees that luxury?

He he friend GeoffP. You are entitled to your opinions, and thanks for discussing them here.

Thats why an integrated Israel should NOT be an Islamic state.

Israel presently paints itself as a secular State, its just that they only allow adherents to a certain religion basic rights. Like the right of return, etc.

Of course I have. Thus entrench secularism in the constitution.

 

wrong no one cares that people of the jewish faith or there( or to placate the more fevorent a portion of the jewish nation). people care about the existence of a jewish state in an area where there was and should be a an arab majority.

 

why do I bother you always twist the definitions to make sure ISlam is the worst so you can justify your blind hatred of it.


and I like the assualt on my objectivity that has zero basis. classy but what should I expect from someone who is willing to defend a state that was founded on terrorism and the violation of international law and principle

 

The US dollar has been supplanted by the Euro as the Euro zone economic region dwarves Americas, it is on its way down.

As none of Israel’s Arab neighbours trade with Israel, that in order to make up for this imbalance 33% of all Israel’s exports go to America, and another 33% of Israel’s exports goes to the EU. This subsidizing of the Israeli economy is what keeps the Israeli economy artificially afloat, without it Israel will resemble Zimbabwe.

Iceland and the Baltic states was not a part of the EU, the banking sysem in Europe has stabilized, the losses for the British, Dutch and Irish Banking systems have been made good, on the hand the American banking sector is falling.

When America vacates the Mid East through the economic strain of this war on terror, Israel will be following it.

They cant stop it, 20 years and Jews will be sharing Israel with Palestinians, its as simple as that.

I think the real reason is that Palestinians never accepted the plan that they would simply settle and absorb themselves in Jordan.

Just face it, as in Europe which is a Christian continent, there never was a Moslem state nor a Jewish state, it simply would not be accepted by the majority. Same is applicable to the Mid East which is a Moslem region, the Jewish State which exists does so by artificial means, outside intervention and protection.

Economy of the European Union 2009 = $16.447 trillion
Economy of the United States 2009 = $14.266 trillion

The 2 state deal of the Oslo Accord of 1993 granted the Palestinians 22% of their historic nation, where the Palestinians had to agree to surrendering the remaining 78% to Israel as part of the Land-for-Peace that Oslo promised. Camp David the follow up to Oslo offered the Palestinians 91% of that 22% the concession was constantly being whittled away. So there you have it the 91% offer to Palestine was simply this: 3 separate land allotments , divested of prime agricultural real estate, diminished in water supply, surrounded by armed squatter settlements protected by Israeli troops, a human cage sealed off from its current international borders, and laden with toxic waste dumps. In other words a state destined to fail.There will not be two states as that issue is defunct, because of the 7 million Palestinians inside Israel, the Territories and outside. Israel will simply become at first a shared state, where eventually the majority will take control.

Iran is going from strength to strength on its own, without any economic assistance, unlike Israel which needs an economic umbilical cord with the West. Iran scares the shit out of Israel, eventually Iran will become the regions powerhouse along with Turkey.

 

I said there were 3 main factors in the capture process: mercenaries, rival African kingdoms, and Muslim countries. The Europeans and Americans simply didn't have the ability to project enough military power over those kinds of distances to penetrate the continent and capture large numbers of slaves. Pjdude said Christian nations were the worst meddlers and nation destroyers in sub-Saharan Africa, I was merely pointing out the general direction of the slave trade and the people involved in the initial pillaging. I also could have mentioned the enormous number of African slaves taken in by several countries in the Muslim world, which continues to this day. Not at all did I say Muslims were solely responsible for the African slave trade, I think you misunderstand my intent.

Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_trade#Sub-Saharan_Africa

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_slave_trade#Trans-Saharan_trade

 

So the slave trade in Africa = occupation of Palestine by European Jews because...?