This post will take the form of a response to talklikeapirat
reply to post by talklikeapirat
The logical fallacy on your part is that you are equating being critical of the Israeli government policies and clearly seeing how destructive and
damaging they are for the Palestinian and the Israeli population, with being supportive of Hamas or radical Islam.
The first premise of your statement is that there is something wrong with Israels policies with regard to the Palestinians. First, any approach to
this subject has to be based on characterological features of the party in question, which can be had by analyzing their ideology and their history.
So whats the history of the Palestinians and the Israelis? We have to go far back, back to the decades of the late 19th century, in order to get at
the root of how Zionism came to be. Towards the end of the 19th century - and far before - Jews were being persecuted by the Tzarist government in
what was known as the pale of settlement (Belarus, Ukraine, Eastern Poland). The news spread across Europe and was known throughout Germany and
France. In the late 1800's, France was dealing with antisemitism which culminated in the Dreyfus trial. Theodore Herzl was working as a columnist at
the time in Paris and and wrote about it. This whole experience of his led to his taking up the "Zionist idea", which he picked up from the Jews who
were moving to the holy land at that time (which began in the late 1840's). This resulted in his book "The Jewish State". In the Jewish state, Herzl
talks about the underlying causes of Jew hatred. His conclusion: because Jews always lived as a minority amongst a foreign population, they became an
object of contempt; the solution? The Jews, just like the French, and the German, etc, deserved a land to call their own.
This is the historical basis for a Jewish state. The Jews were 'wanderers' not of their free will, but due to religious persecution by the dominant
population - whether Christians or Muslims. It's true that the Christians were far worse, but Jews suffered from time to time under the Muslims as
well. In all times, Jews were exploited by having to pay a hefty Jizya tax that left the community mostly impoverished. Only a few Jews managed to
'live well', as bankers or merchants or advisers, while the majority were the lowest of the low and the poorest of the poor. If it weren't for the
deep sense of community, and for the wealthy Jews who helped support the community, it would have been far worse for them. Jews also were forced to
wear special clothing, to address a Muslim in a tone of submission, to pay the tax in a self-deprecatory way, etc.
The Jewish Agency was setup by European Jews to buy land for Jewish immigration. Polish and Russian Jews were the people who turned the swamps and
deserts of Palestine into arable land fit for growing and building upon. The areas bought extended from as south as jaffah, up through Tel Aviv and
Haifa, to as far west as the Galilee. This was the "basis" of the 1937 Peel commissions partition plan, which was taken up again in the 1947 UN
So, first thing to dismiss is, the notion that somehow Zionism is akin to Nazism. It's quite a repulsive libel given the context in which Zionism
After the holocaust, the Jewish question reached the worlds ears. They saw for themselves how the persecution of Jewry over the centuries was what led
to the Nazi holocaust. They were guilty, and DESERVED to be guilty, because they were partly responsible. Christian antisemitism smoothly transitioned
into the ethnic-racial antisemitism of the 18th,19th, and 20th centuries. The Europeans knew this, but what about the Arabs? The Muslims didn't "do
anything" they later argued, to be punished for Europe's sins. But there's two problems with this problem. First, a completely lack of sensitivity to
the plight of the Jews. This was mainly due to the influx of Nazi propaganda into the Arab world during the 1940's, mostly in Cairo, Damascus,
Palestine and Baghdad. This network was set up by the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin El-Husseini, who spent the war years in Berlin with a staff of 80
beaming Arabic Nazi propaganda to the Arab world. So, after Germany loss, and the Mufti was being sought for war crimes against Jews and Serbs, the
Arab League pressured the French to extradite him to Egypt, which they did. The Mufti briefly became the "symbolic head" of Hassan Al Bannah's Muslim
Brotherhood during his stay in Egypt, and during his return to Palestine in the 50's he served as an agent of their cause. Thus, after the war, Arabs
had very little sympathy for the Jews, mostly because of the Nazi propaganda over the last decade combined with a nascent interest in the
Palestine-Jewish conflict. The second issue is Islams own responsibility towards their treatment of Jews. They weren't "sinless" either, as they
sanctimoniously imagine themselves to be. They too had 3.5 disenfranchised Jews without a place to call home, subject to a kleptocratic Jizya tax and
the humiliation of being regarded and treated as an inferior creature, following an inferior religion.
The Arabs lacked both sympathy for the Jews, and a willingness to allow them some space to establish a state for themselves. The current state of
Israel is the size of New Jersey or El Salvador. The total land area of the Arab League – the 22 Arab countries in existence – is 13,333,296 km2.
It’s total population is 400,652,486. Israel is 20,770 km2, or, 661 times smaller than the total area of the Arab Leagues 22 member countries. If
counting the Sephardic Jews who live in Israel alone – and not Ashkenazi Jews – you have 2 million people. 400 million (Arab League) divided by 2
million = 200. Yet, Israel is 661 times smaller than the Arab League. In short, if things were “fair” and we wanted to accord each people equal
plots of land according to their numbers, Sephardic Jews would be entitled to a good chunk more of land above what they have in Israel. This is just a
little experiment in population and land area, to highlight an area that is seldom mentioned, though I think it’s relevant in showing how entitled
Arabs feel with regard to the lands of the greater middle east. Jews, Kurds, or Berbs, essentially don’t matter; they’re unjustly asked to accept
minority status, even though the parts these groups live in – such as Kurdistan (parts of southern turkey, eastern Syria, northern Iraq and western
Iran) – is clearly ethnically Kurdish, speaks Kurdish..
Arab’s also lacked sympathy for the fact that Jews were forcibly evicted from the land by the Romans in the 2nd century. They were the only people
to have established a state there. The only ones to have left relics of an ancient civilization there – such as the Herordian architecture, ancient
synagogues, Dead Sea scrolls and countless coins found in the Temple Mount area and Jerusalem. These are more than physical relics of an ancient
civilization; they were signs of commonality, of the Jewish community, that has persisted from the most ancient of times to the present day. It is the
land of the Jewish tradition, the Hebrew Bible, the ideology, theology and spirituality which was born and thrived there. This surely must account for
something, just as I sense that Tibet means something very important to the Tibetan people and their tradition.
In the last decades the Palestinians have suffered the most in this conflict and this has started long before Hamas seized control of Gaza. You are
constantly trying to justify any actions of the Israeli government as a means of self defense.
Which brings me to my second part: Why does Israel feel threatened by the Palestinians?
Forget about the 1929 Hebron Massacre
1929 Safed Massacre
which saw 67 and 18 Jews murdered by crazed Arabs, the forerunners of
today's Palestinians. This was the first indication to the Jews how serious the Arabs were. What makes this so typical of Arab-Muslim extremism, was
that these Jews were natives of the land, Jews that had lived there for hundreds of years. Not immigrants from Europe. To the Muslims, it was "Jews"
period, the sheer notion of a self autonomous Jewish state in Dar Al Islam, that infuriated them. And, perhaps rightly so; the Arabs have been nursed
from a culture that stresses superiority, strength, power; Muslims believe in a God identified with will, power, as Al Ghazalli describes Allah as
being. The Jews able to live freely, according to their own law, in Al Quds (Jerusalem) infuriated them. Their religion teaches that Jerusalem - the
Jewish city - became Islamic territory (Al Quds) when they conquered the territory from the Byzantine Christians in the 7th century.
This has always, till this day, been the general attitude of the Muslims/Arabs towards Jews; one of bellicosity, and belligerence, where Arabs will
only live with Jews if Jews accept to live under Muslim rule. Any other situation is a Nakba - a "calamity".
It is either the Palestinians own fault and they should suffer for electing the Islamists or it is a simple necessity for Israels' self-preservation.
The Islamists are a "necessity for Israel's self preservation"? How so? They're an extension of the resurgent Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The Muslim
Brotherhood plotted its way into power, from being weak in the 1960s and made illegal by Nasr, to gaining strength in the 80's, 90's, and 2000's,
until gaining power. Israel should just leave them as and treat them as a 'necessity', as if they weren't actively plotting Israel's destruction? I
hope my sarcastic tone is making clear to you why Israel has responded as they have. They have no choice. They either die a slow death and let Hamas
grow slowly but surely; or, they try to do this, take a risk, defend themselves against moral relativists who will stoop to whatever moral low - such
as drawing in IDF soldiers, or planes, to kill Palestinian non-combatants.
WikiLeaks: Israel aimed to keep Gaza economy on brink of collapse
I can already tell you're too emotionally invested in this to think clearly, but i'll answer anyway.
If Hamas' growth means Israel's destruction, than Hamas' economy must be made to struggle. Economy is just another form of warfare. If Hamas were to
thrive economically, they'd get the money and means to fight Israel. Therefore, subverting their economy is a necessary measure towards isolating
Hamas. And again, if you are remotely interested and not only pretending an interest in peace, to let Hamas grow means Israel's destruction; it means
facilitating the advancement of Islamism in the region.
They are "equal" in that they are denying a large portion of their societies the right to live as they choose.
Oh, so delegate the intricate political difficulties to democracy? Let people choose? That is absurdly naive. As if their aren't parties actively
undermining each other. And the party mostly to be worried about are the Islamists. Not the Israelis, who have given back large swathes of land to
edit on 19-11-2012 by dontreally because: (no reason given)