POLITICS: Israeli Rabbis Pray For Peace Talk Failure

Originally posted by marg6043
No amount of prayer is going to fix the fact that Palestine is Arab and Israel is Christian, the fights between them will never stop.

Their conflict has become "The will of who's God is more powerful"

according to cia.gov factbook: (% of population)
Jewish 80.1%, Muslim 14.6% (mostly Sunni Muslim), Christian 2.1%, other 3.2% (1996 est.)

Originally posted by Muaddib
Even the Brittish empire gave the land of Israel to the Jewish people, it was not a mandate of God... Israel is a legal country, whether or not you agree with the religious implications is of no importance, what is important is that Israel, is legally a country, while Palestine is not a country yet... It is not a country mostly because Palestinians do not want a Palestine without the lands of Israel and all Jewish people gone...which is not going to happen...

They did not give the land of Israel to the Jewish people.
They issued the Balfour Declaration to establish a Jewish homeland within Palestine not in place of Palestine.

Even the 1947 partition plan did not give the land to the Jewish population, it gave 55% of the land to a Jewish state and it was not supposed to expel the Palestinians from that area. The British did not even vote in favor of the 1947 partition, they abstained from voting. Some of the other nations who voted in favor of the vote were pressured by the US. The resolution was close to not passing.

Intensely Lobbying the UN behind the scene, half a loaf by the Jerusalem Post

Even with the two superpowers supporting a Jewish state, the outcome of the General Assembly vote - initially set for Wednesday, November 26 - was so doubtful that partition advocates undertook a filibuster to stall the vote. A clear hint of impending failure had come two days earlier when the members of the assembly convened in a cumbersome bureaucratic procedure, as an ad-hoc committee to discuss the UNSCOP report in detail. After rejecting the federal proposal, the ad-hoc committee had voted to submit the partition plan to the assembly - that is, to itself - for formal consideration. The vote was 25 for, 13 against and 17 abstentions, which was one vote short of the two-thirds majority needed for General Assembly approval of a resolution. The Arab and Moslem states constituted a formidable bloc, and many of the other nations had no particular reason to defy Arab goodwill for the notion of a Jewish state.

The following day was Thanksgiving, which gave a day's respite, and on Friday the French asked for another day's delay.

"The French were waffling," recalls Rafael. "Their position was important to other countries, particularly Belgium." Lobbying during the three-day break reached frantic heights with the realization that a single vote could be decisive. It was not a pretty sight. Harvey Firestone, whose rubber company owned extensive plantations in Liberia, personally intervened with the president of that country to change its planned vote against partition after Jewish representatives threatened a boycott of Firestone tires.

President Truman would later say that the US did not pressure any country to vote for partition. That statement, however, would seem to be based on an interpretation of pressure as gunboats or White House stationery. Two US Supreme Court justices, Frank Murphy and Felix Frankfurter, contacted the Philippine ambassador in Washington and sent telegrams to Philippine president Carlos Rojas warning that a negative vote would alienate millions of Americans. Ten senators also cabled Rojas.

Those Rabbis aren't the only ones wanting the faliure of the peace process. The Neo Cons do to (surprise surprise):

ipsnews.net...
WASHINGTON, Nov 5 (IPS) - An influential foreign-policy neo-conservative with longstanding ties to top hawks in the administration of President George W Bush has laid out what he calls ''a checklist of the work the world will demand of this president and his subordinates in a second term.''

The list, which begins with the destruction of Fallujah in Iraq and ends with the development of ''appropriate strategies'' for dealing with threats posed by China, Russia and ''the emergence of a number of aggressively anti-American regimes in Latin America,'' also calls for ''regime change'' in Iran and North Korea.

The list's author, Frank Gaffney, the founder and president of the Centre for Security Policy (CSP), also warns that Bush should resist any pressure arising from the anticipated demise of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to resume peace talks that could result in Israel's giving up ''defensible boundaries.''

Originally posted by Muaddib

And does it give the Palestinians the right to attack by suicide bombings and using rockets against Israeli buildings?

I never said they had the right to do that either. If you read my full post you'd understand I was pointing out that both sides have done horrible things.

Originally posted by Muaddib
Doesn't Israel have the right to seek and take out those who are part of terrorist cells, including their leaders who keep encouraging terrorist attacks?... So, according to you Israel can't go after those who seek to create chaos and death in the State of Israel, but Palestinians can?....

Never said they dont have the right to take out the terrorist leaders. They dont have the right to flatten the family home of suicide bombers though. How would our society react to our criminals family homes being demolished and leaving parents, kids homeless?

Originally posted by Muaddib
Or Israelis are supposed just to stand by as they keep getting attacked constantly, just turning the other cheek and letting more of their people being murdered?...

Perhaps this kind of thing is to be expected when an entire population is uprooted and a country is usurped. I ask how would you react if the country you live in was split in half tomorrow and given to a minority (14 milion Jews in the entire world would constitute a minority). Would you just shrug your shoulders and say "oh well, cest la vie" or would you grab the nearest AK47 and fight for your country back?

Before you go bananas about that last line I should reitterate what I posted earlier in saying that they had the right to fight Israeli military but any targeting of innocent civilians is inexcusable - ON BOTH SIDES!

[edit on 8/2/05 by subz]