Please explain the Israel/Palestine conflict

[August]

I don't think I will ever understand the conflict in that region.  I saw the FDR presentation on this topic and, while it was informative, did not really change how I viewed the situation.  It only confirmed my suspicions. 

 

Someone I know has posted a link to this page which is about how Jon Lovitz posted a tweet stating, "If you don’t want a fight with Israel, don’t pick one". Now, I don't have any reverence for Mr. Lovitz, especially not as a political commentator, but there appears to be a rally behind his comment.  Given the history between Israel and Palestine, I cannot understand how people can crowd behind Israel in such a self-righteous manner. It seems to me that if one were to just shift his/her perspective, it would be clear that Israel is not exactly taking a moral high ground. 

 

Is there someone here that has a better grasp of what's going on and is able to explain this reaction?

 

[cab21]

neither side is pro capitalism, so neither side has a legit moral high ground, if free market capitalism is to be considered a moral high ground.

[PGP]

This video released today. Norman Finkelstein. It centres mainly on the current escalation but puts historical context on it also. I've been following the current affairs on the region since the Oslo accords at the tender age of 8 or 9. That is to say, I know a little more than nothing about the region and the conflict. Enjoy!!!

 

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

The land of Israel is the historic homeland of the jewish people.

We were forcibly removed from it, and we have forcibly reclaimed our property.

 

As was demonstrated by the Dreyfus affair and to a much larger extent by the Holocaust, the jews need a state of their own.

In this context I would like to note that after the holocaust there were persecutions against jews mainly by polish

murdering holocaust survivors who came to reclaim their own homes (how different are they from the arabs?). 

After the downfall of the 2nd temple, several other jewish states existed outside israel

but all of them were short lived.

Apparently, a jews will not fight for a state which isn't located in Israel.

Hence to summarize, the jews need a state and it must be in Israel

which is their rightful property anyway.

 

 

Most of the people in the land of israel, jews & arabs, are new immigrants.

Jews have came after being disappointed from the emancipation process in Europe

and arabs migrated due to the work opportunities created by jews and later british.

For example, it is well known that most christians in northern Israel came from lebanon after WWI.

 

Palestine was a land without a people for a people without a land.

The sparse local arab population saw themselves as residents of southern Syria .

 

The PLO was created by foreign arab nations  at 1965

after they have given up hope of challenging Israel at the battlefield.

 

The palestinian people was invented as a PR stunt

and was meant as an anti thesis to Zionist claims 

that no other people sees Israel as their homeland

(although this claim is not essential for the zionistic argument).

 

In support of my assertions above, I propose the following facts:

1. The so called Palestinians never revolted against the jordanian occupation in the west bank

nor agianst the Egyptian occupation in the gaza strip.

2. The PLO constitution is destructive in nature

and it speaks about the abolishment of Israel

rather than the construction of their own state. 

In fact they bending over backwards

 in an effort to eternalise the so called "arab refugees"

poor living conditions

On the other hand, Israel has rehabilitated jewish refugees who were expelled from arab lands.

Almost needless to say, that Hamas constitution follows suit with the PLO constitution.

3. Prior to 1965, on various attempts, local arab leaders requested that 'Eretz Yisrael' would be incorporated as part of Syria.

 

 

The question does arise,

why does the arab fight over a land which doesn't belong to them?

I believe that it is ultimately due to the european occupation of arab lands 

which created a sense of inferiority among the arabs, this together with their identification of Israel with Europe

explains the willingness to finance and propagate the Palestinian myth.

 

Hence, although some mistakingly identify israel with european colonisation

the trough is that Israel is one of the main victims of that historic movement.

[luxfelix]

If the information in the following video is true, it sounds like they are both ultimately in danger from neighboring states with competing claims (from a state/geo-political perspective):

 

 

Though I wonder, could a stateless society of Jews and Palestinians working together resist pressure from their neighbors?

 

I'd hope so; and I'd hope also that all in the region could reconcile as individuals where it seems the states don't.

[PGP]

Look at this disgraceful anti-israel agitprop. Disgraceful.

 

 

Michael Ratner: A RECENT release by Wikileaks founder Julian Assange shows brutal depths of Israeli policy towards Gaza

 

[J-William]

 

 

The land of Israel is the historic homeland of the jewish people.

We were forcibly removed from it, and we have forcibly reclaimed our property.

 

ummm..... wow.... those are some very interesting claims.

 

I just have some very simple questions that I want to know your answer to first...

 

What is a jew, and how does one define a jew?

What is a homeland?

If your grandpa shot my grandpa and stole his home, and you still live in that home. Is it fine if I shoot you and take it back?

Who drove these jews off their homeland, are any of the people involved still alive?

Who owns the land that the europeans took by force from native americans?

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

 

 

 

ummm..... wow.... those are some very interesting claims.

 

I just have some very simple questions that I want to know your answer to first...

 

What is a jew, and how does one define a jew?

What is a homeland?

If your grandpa shot my grandpa and stole his home, and you still live in that home. Is it fine if I shoot you and take it back?

Who drove these jews off their homeland, are any of the people involved still alive?

Who owns the land that the europeans took by force from native americans?

 

Excellent questions!

I'll gladly answer them one by one.

 

The jews are a nation.

According to jewish law all jews are descendants of Avaraham & Sara.

For example, a convert to judaism is considered, by law,

a direct descendant of out founding fathers & mothers (Avraham, Sara, Yitzchak, etc.).

As such he has he inherits from them their rights over the land of Israel.

Rights which they acquired by a combination of purchase, fighting & homesteading.

 

Some anti-semites try to claim that the jews are not biological descendants of the ancient hebrews

however, this can be shown to be wrong according to genetic evidence

and even if it wasn't it doesn't matter because the rights in Eretz Yisrael 

are passed to converts as well.

 

A homeland is a land which is held in communion

by all members of a nation.

Therefore the sale of allodial title to any part of it

is an illegitimate transaction regardless of circumstances.

In theory, if all past, present and future generations will agree to the transaction

than it can be made but this is a bit impractical :-)

Furthernote that leasing even for unlimited time is possible

but the allodial title is not for sale.

 

If your property was taken by force from you,

than you have a right to claim it back.

It doesn't matter if the original purpetrotor

abandon it or gave it away to a third party. 

The question whether the original aggressor of any of its ancestors is still alive is irrelevant.

 

The jews were driven out of Israel by several conquers 

it is a little bit known fact that the main reason why

there weren't many jews in Israel at the beginning of SHIVAT TZIYON

(return of the sons of Israel to the land of Israel)

is that the byzantine empire decimated the jewish inhabitants to next to nothing.

This makes the assertion that the arabs were the majority in Eretz Yisrael

before the time of SHIVAT TZIYON

extremely cynical.

 

I'm not knowledgable in native american history, law & customs

therefore I rather not comments about it.

 

I hope it was helpful :-)

[gausian]

Hi Adam.

 

How do you align your arguments with the anarchist approach?

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

Hi Adam.

 

How do you align your arguments with the anarchist approach?

 

In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas 

 

When the orcs swarmed helm's deep

I doubt if the knights pondered minute aspects of rothbardian philosophy.

 

Similarly, it may not be the best time to push for anarchy at Israel

while the self proclaimed "leaders of the free world"

preoccupy themselves with tying the hand of the Israeli leadership behind her back

while she attempts to protect the civilian population from attacks directed at them

by a murderous gang of thugs.

 

 

Statists like to commit others to impossible "moral" standards

while exempting them selves and their chorines.

For example, european & american soldiers carpet bomb vast areas in

iraq, afganistan & else where

and don't even shy from using depleted uranium weapons

marly becouse there is a theoretical possibility that some residents of those 

areas might some day make a terror attack on a western country 

(doesn't this assertion hold for everyone?)

Israel on the other hand only reacts against ticking bombs

and makes by far the least collateral damage to civilian population

although its enemies routinely use their own civilian population

(whose interests they pretend to represent)

as human shields and launch missiles 

(directed against israeli civilians) from schools, hospitals, kindergartens etc.

Still the criticism is mainly directed towards Israel.

 

In regard to anarchy, I do believe that under anarchy the jews will be able to better defend themselves.

For example, the Israeli army made only faint attempts to stop the rocket launching

while it was restricted to a relatively narrow band around gaza.

Under anarchy the inhabitants of this region and their supporters would have assembled their own military force

and react as they see fit.

[J-William]

I hope it was helpful :-)

 

 

Thank you for your response. I am glad you replied civilly. the last Israeli I talked to launched into an offensive immediately.

 

So, first problem I run into with your answer... 

 

When the orcs swarmed helm's deep

I doubt if the knights pondered minute aspects of rothbardian philosophy.

 I think you illuminate the answer quite well, since Orcs and helm's deep are every bit as fictional as any jewish god or jewish law. There is no jewish god, so therefore jewish law is something made up by members of a bloody brutal tribe a few thousand years ago.

 

What does anti-semitic mean? If people can be called that for simply thinking it highly unlikely that all jews are descended from common ancestors it kinda has no meaning.... it's certainly not a synonym for Nazi that many people use it as.

 

In your answer about reclaiming your ancestors' property you didn't make it clear whether you thought it was right to kill the person or people currently occupying the land. Is it?

 

Your use of the word nation and saying that a homeland is held in common... does not hold up philosophically.

 

Do you think it would be right for a member of British aristocracy to forcefully take land in France that belonged to his family, that by the european laws of the time he has a "right" to?

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

 

 

Thank you for your response. I am glad you replied civilly. the last Israeli I talked to launched into an offensive immediately.

 

So, first problem I run into with your answer... 

 I think you illuminate the answer quite well, since Orcs and helm's deep are every bit as fictional as any jewish god or jewish law. There is no jewish god, so therefore jewish law is something made up by members of a bloody brutal tribe a few thousand years ago.

 

If you refer to jews, the people who introduced morality to the world, as brutal 

than I don't wish to engage in a discussion with you.

[gausian]

Adam,Just to make sure we are on the same page, do you consider yourself an anarchist?If your answer is yes then how are you putting "jewish nation" into the anarchist vue?If you are an anarchist then clearly religion, nation, state, has no meaning to you, does it?

If you refer to jews, the people who introduced morality to the world, as brutal than I don't wish to engage in a discussion with you.

Saying that clearly shows that you have an emotional attachment to your religion and nationality.

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

Adam,Just to make sure we are on the same page, do you consider yourself an anarchist?If your answer is yes then how are you putting "jewish nation" into the anarchist vue?If you are an anarchist then clearly religion, nation, state, has no meaning to you, does it?Saying that clearly shows that you have an emotional attachment to your religion and nationality.

Excellent question!

 

I do cosier myself to by part of Am Yisrael (nation of Israel)

I don't identify with the state of Israel as I'm not a statist

I'm also not religious.

 

I believe that the alluvial title to Eretz Yisrael is owned in communion by all the jews

(in the sense that every jew owns all of Eretz Yisrael)

not because god had given it to us (I'm not religious) but be because our ancestors

worked, conquered and purchased it

(like the ancestors of every other nation on earth)

and we have inherited it from us

the same way parents inherit their house to their children.

 

I believe that the best way to enforce this property right is through anarchy.

The Israeli army response to murderous attacks by our neighbours is too mellow

and doesn't do full justice to the property rights of the residents of the attacked settlements.

 

I believe that we would be best serve by a private armies.

[PGP]

Excellent question!

 

I do cosier myself to by part of Am Yisrael (nation of Israel)

I don't identify with the state of Israel as I'm not a statist

I'm also not religious.

 

I believe that the alluvial title to Eretz Yisrael is owned in communion by all the jews

(in the sense that every jew owns all of Eretz Yisrael)

not because god had given it to us (I'm not religious) but be because our ancestors

worked, conquered and purchased it

(like the ancestors of every other nation on earth)

and we have inherited it from us

the same way parents inherit their house to their children.

 

I believe that the best way to enforce this property right is through anarchy.

The Israeli army response to murderous attacks by our neighbours is too mellow

and doesn't do full justice to the property rights of the residents of the attacked settlements.

 

I believe that we would be best serve by a private armies.

That's some crazy, dangerous shit. Helms Deep, orcs, Palestinians? 

[powder]

Wow,...  Adam's responses here, and the fellow from the other thread who has been blocked, are the reason I suggested that FDR stay away from wading into this debate with facts and 'the truth' (the truth about video) and instead stick to philosophy. 

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

Wow,...  Adam's responses here, and the fellow from the other thread who has been blocked, are the reason I suggested that FDR stay away from wading into this debate with facts and 'the truth' (the truth about video) and instead stick to philosophy. 

 

I think that there is a serious philosophical issue here

that wasn't adequately addressed before.

 

If your property is taken away from you by force

and than the aggressor abandons it

or gives it away to a 3rd party.

To whom this property belongs?

 

My answer is that it belongs to the original owner

from which it was initially robbed.

 

Now, it is easy to apply this principle to the case of Israel & the jewish people.

[LovePrevails]

After the second world war jews from all over Europe went to Palestine, which was given to them by the government of the UK on behalf of the people living there who had no say in the matter

the land which was inhabited by only 5% jews at the time was taken by the European jews, they ran 700,000+/- Palestinians out of their homes

the surrounding arab nations attacked the new state of Israel which was stolen from the indigenous population whom they basically turned into slaves and serfs over the last 60-70 years

Israel won the war and grabbed land from neighbouring countries 

 

under international law it is illegal to retain occupied territories but Israel has been reluctant to give the West Bank back to the arabic populations who live there

instead they have been building settlements for jews only in all the strategic areas and areas with water or resources, sometimes they divert water from palestinian villages to jewish ones

they have also built this wall separating palestinian farmers from the land they used to farm on

and enacted this blockade to "put them on a diet"

they are basically persecuting the arab population because they want to annex the land for the jewish state

 

even few years they go in there and kill a couple of thousand palestinians to scare the shit out of them and show them who is boss

it is a deliberate tactic to get them to surrender and take it lying down like a quiet rape victim

 

pretty sick stuff but they have a real entitled mentality such as this kind of thing:

 

The land of Israel is the historic homeland of the jewish people.

We were forcibly removed from it, and we have forcibly reclaimed our property.

 

 

coming from a Jewish background myself I saw first hand how cultural it is to always claim you are the victim while you are the perpetrator

my mother did exactly this in my family (she is Israeli) she constantly causes other people misery but claims she is the victim and justifies what she is doing by claiming victimhood

that's what the jews do in Israel, they are perpetrators  who play the victim card

[PGP]

After the second world war jews from all over Europe went to Palestine, which was given to them by the government of the UK on behalf of the people living there who had no say in the matter

the land which was inhabited by only 5% jews at the time was taken by the European jews, they ran 700,000+/- Palestinians out of their homes

the surrounding arab nations attacked the new state of Israel which was stolen from the indigenous population whom they basically turned into slaves and serfs over the last 60-70 years

Israel won the war and grabbed land from neighbouring countries 

 

under international law it is illegal to retain occupied territories but Israel has been reluctant to give the West Bank back to the arabic populations who live there

instead they have been building settlements for jews only in all the strategic areas and areas with water or resources, sometimes they divert water from palestinian villages to jewish ones

they have also built this wall separating palestinian farmers from the land they used to farm on

and enacted this blockade to "put them on a diet"

they are basically persecuting the arab population because they want to annex the land for the jewish state

 

even few years they go in there and kill a couple of thousand palestinians to scare the shit out of them and show them who is boss

it is a deliberate tactic to get them to surrender and take it lying down like a quiet rape victim

 

pretty sick stuff but they have a real entitled mentality such as this kind of thing:

 

 

coming from a Jewish background myself I saw first hand how cultural it is to always claim you are the victim while you are the perpetrator

my mother did exactly this in my family (she is Israeli) she constantly causes other people misery but claims she is the victim and justifies what she is doing by claiming victimhood

that's what the jews do in Israel, they are perpetrators  who play the victim card

Hey man. You crazy? If you just agreed with the "arguments" given and identified as jewish, you'd have a house an a plot waiting for you in the land called israel. I'm sure they'd clear the place of the smell of Palestinian before you got there. Sweet deal!!!

[powder]

I think that there is a serious philosophical issue here

that wasn't adequately addressed before.

 

If your property is taken away from you by force

and than the aggressor abandons it

or gives it away to a 3rd party.

To whom this property belongs?

 

My answer is that it belongs to the original owner

from which it was initially robbed.

 

Now, it is easy to apply this principle to the case of Israel & the jewish people.

I understand where you are coming from, you are totally owned.  I get that.  Debating this kind of thing on a forum dedicated to philosophy and anarchy is just so outlandish to me - there is no Israel! There are no Jews!  

[gausian]

Excellent question! I do cosier myself to by part of Am Yisrael (nation of Israel)I don't identify with the state of Israel as I'm not a statistI'm also not religious. I believe that the alluvial title to Eretz Yisrael is owned in communion by all the jews(in the sense that every jew owns all of Eretz Yisrael)not because god had given it to us (I'm not religious) but be because our ancestorsworked, conquered and purchased it(like the ancestors of every other nation on earth)and we have inherited it from usthe same way parents inherit their house to their children.

I dont think your argument is valid because when I give my child a property I ownI will provide some agreement to my child that shows directly me giving to him my propertie.This would be only the propetie I personnaly own, not the hole region surrounding my propertie.As far as I know only a small part of land was actualy privatly owned the rest of the land was taken by forceWith just a pretence of ownership.Isn't the nation of israel just another divide between human beeings like state, religion?

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

Wow you were fed anti zionist propoganda

with a large spoon :-)

 

I'll refute your claims

but observe that you raise petty objections 

because you can not argue with my general arguments.

 

 

After the second world war jews from all over Europe went to Palestine, which was given to them by the government of the UK on behalf of the people living there who had no say in the matter

the land which was inhabited by only 5% jews at the time was taken by the European jews, they ran 700,000+/- Palestinians out of their homes

the surrounding arab nations attacked the new state of Israel which was stolen from the indigenous population whom they basically turned into slaves and serfs over the last 60-70 years

Israel won the war and grabbed land from neighbouring countries 

 

 

It is very convenient for an anti-zionist to begin their narrative at recent times.

The land of Israel belongs to the Jews

like Japan belongs to the Japanese

and burma to the burmease.

 

Anyway, if you argue that ownership expires after a certain period

than the same hold for the arab claim to the land of Israel.

 

Furthermore, it is more than a bit cynical to base your argument on the small number of of jews living in Israel

prior to the age of SHIVAT TZIYON

as the reason for the small number is that they were killed, exiled, robbed & humiliated

by the conquerers including the arabs.

 

 

under international law it is illegal to retain occupied territories but Israel has been reluctant to give the West Bank back to the arabic populations who live there

instead they have been building settlements for jews only in all the strategic areas and areas with water or resources, sometimes they divert water from palestinian villages to jewish ones

they have also built this wall separating palestinian farmers from the land they used to farm on

and enacted this blockade to "put them on a diet"

they are basically persecuting the arab population because they want to annex the land for the jewish state

 

International law doesn't say that.

Again you have swallowed anti zionist propaganda without even checking your sources.

 

 

The wall was build to stop terror attacks against Israeli civilians.

The jewish settelements are also fenced from the same reason.

The blockade is meant to stop terror organisation smuggle weapons to Gaza.

They receive more supplies than they pay for.

 

 

Both the west bank & Gaza are integral part of the land of Israel

and jews have every right to build their home there

it also means that international law is morally invalid there.

I've never trusted the United Nations anyway.

 

The arabs in west bank and Gaza have access to water

in a quantity larger than they could have derived  from local sources.

 

even few years they go in there and kill a couple of thousand palestinians to scare the shit out of them and show them who is boss

it is a deliberate tactic to get them to surrender and take it lying down like a quiet rape victim

 

 

Unlike other western armies who invade foreign lands

and fight terrorists who doesn't constitute immediate threat

while causing large collateral damage.

 

The Israeli army only tackles ticking bombs

and has by far the least amount of collateral damage.

 

Had the arabs wanted peace they would have agreed to the too generous peace treaty offered to them

(to which I personally object) but instead they have chosen the way of terror. 

 

It is very convenient for anti zionist to ignore the defensive nature

of the anti terrorist campaigns.

 

coming from a Jewish background myself I saw first hand how cultural it is to always claim you are the victim while you are the perpetrator

my mother did exactly this in my family (she is Israeli) she constantly causes other people misery but claims she is the victim and justifies what she is doing by claiming victimhood

that's what the jews do in Israel, they are perpetrators  who play the victim card

 

 

So you basically project your anger on your mother to all of the Israeli people

and this is your way to illumination?

I dont think your argument is valid because when I give my child a property I ownI will provide some agreement to my child that shows directly me giving to him my propertie.This would be only the propetie I personnaly own, not the hole region surrounding my propertie.As far as I know only a small part of land was actualy privatly owned the rest of the land was taken by forceWith just a pretence of ownership.Isn't the nation of israel just another divide between human beeings like state, religion?

 

 

Now this is the level of argument I've expected when coming here.

I have several reason to think otherwise:

1. A valid way to  homestead a land is by defending.

2. The property of the hebrews contained not only their homes

but their fields and grazing grounds & defence lines 

which covered large areas, 

3. If you homestead  the perimeter of an area then you also obtain the interior.

 

The jewish nation is different than other nations

because it has a large amount of enemies.

During the age of enlightment in europe

jews though that at the modern world

but they were proven wrong in a series of events which culminated in the holocaust.

Zionism is in essence a post modern movement which rose

from the disillusionment of jews from the hope of achieving equality at their hosting nations.

[powder]

And there you have it.  See what I mean?

[PGP]

Wow you were fed anti zionist propoganda

with a large spoon :-)

 

I'll refute your claims

but observe that you raise petty objections 

because you can not argue with my general arguments.

 

 

 

 

It is very convenient for an anti-zionist to begin their narrative at recent times.

The land of Israel belongs to the Jews

like Japan belongs to the Japanese

and burma to the burmease.

 

Anyway, if you argue that ownership expires after a certain period

than the same hold for the arab claim to the land of Israel.

 

Furthermore, it is more than a bit cynical to base your argument on the small number of of jews living in Israel

prior to the age of SHIVAT TZIYON

as the reason for the small number is that they were killed, exiled, robbed & humiliated

by the conquerers including the arabs.

 

 

 

 

International law doesn't say that.

Again you have swallowed anti zionist propaganda without even checking your sources.

 

 

The wall was build to stop terror attacks against Israeli civilians.

The jewish settelements are also fenced from the same reason.

The blockade is meant to stop terror organisation smuggle weapons to Gaza.

They receive more supplies than they pay for.

 

 

Both the west bank & Gaza are integral part of the land of Israel

and jews have every right to build their home there

it also means that international law is morally invalid there.

I've never trusted the United Nations anyway.

 

The arabs in west bank and Gaza have access to water

in a quantity larger than they could have derived  from local sources.

 

 

 

Unlike other western armies who invade foreign lands

and fight terrorists who doesn't constitute immediate threat

while causing large collateral damage.

 

The Israeli army only tackles ticking bombs

and has by far the least amount of collateral damage.

 

Had the arabs wanted peace they would have agreed to the too generous peace treaty offered to them

(to which I personally object) but instead they have chosen the way of terror. 

 

It is very convenient for anti zionist to ignore the defensive nature

of the anti terrorist campaigns.

 

 

 

So you basically project your anger on your mother to all of the Israeli people

and this is your way to illumination?

 

 

Now this is the level of argument I've expected when coming here.

I have several reason to think otherwise:

1. A valid way to  homestead a land is by defending.

2. The property of the hebrews contained not only their homes

but their fields and grazing grounds & defence lines 

which covered large areas, 

3. If you homestead  the perimeter of an area then you also obtain the interior.

 

The jewish nation is different than other nations

because it has a large amount of enemies.

During the age of enlightment in europe

jews though that at the modern world

but they were proven wrong in a series of events which culminated in the holocaust.

Zionism is in essence a post modern movement which rose

from the disillusionment of jews from the hope of achieving equality at their hosting nations.

I have a personal question to ask here: When you are writing this stuff do you experience any physical pain?

Also, you talk about the collective jewish identity or some such. If a jew, whether religious, practicing or ethnically so does not adhere to the israel project but is also part of your defined jewish collective identity, does this not mean that the project is being carried out and in the name of someone who opposes said project? Is this not just another form of government? If it is not, does this mean that a jew who does not adhere to the israel project is not really a legitimate jew, as you have defined it?

[MMX2010]

Wow,...  Adam's responses here, and the fellow from the other thread who has been blocked, are the reason I suggested that FDR stay away from wading into this debate with facts and 'the truth' (the truth about video) and instead stick to philosophy. 

 

I feel the exact opposite of you. 

 

I didn't know how crazy the pro-Israel crowd was until Stef released his video and invited people to respond. 

[gausian]

1. A valid way to  homestead a land is by defending.2. The property of the hebrews contained not only their homesbut their fields and grazing grounds & defence lines which covered large areas, 3. If you homestead  the perimeter of an area then you also obtain the interior. The jewish nation is different than other nationsbecause it has a large amount of enemies.During the age of enlightment in europejews though that at the modern worldbut they were proven wrong in a series of events which culminated in the holocaust.Zionism is in essence a post modern movement which rosefrom the disillusionment of jews from the hope of achieving equality at their hosting nations.

Thank you for your answers.My intrest in this discussion is not facts and history lessons.You keep arguing by facts but i'm looking at the principles and this is where i'm confused.All your arguments are bases on non anarchist philosophy and principles,You use state, religion and nation points of vue, so my question is, do you understand and agreewith the anarchist philosophy? If so, none of your arguments are valid.

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

Thank you for your answers.

My intrest in this discussion is not facts and history lessons.

You keep arguing by facts but i'm looking at the principles and this is where i'm confused.

All your arguments are bases on non anarchist philosophy and principles,

You use state, religion and nation points of vue, so my question is, do you understand and agree

with the anarchist philosophy? If so, none of your arguments are valid.

 

I'm also interested chiefly in principles.

 

None of my arguments are based on religion.

I do claim that the alluvial title to the territory which comprised the state of Israel

is owned in communion by all the jews.

 

The jewish people had a long history before the age of kings.

In fact, SEFER SHOFTIM (book of judges) discusses.

 

During all this time there was national identity among the jews 

and they have perceived ERETZ YISRAEL as their home.

So a state is not a pre requisite to have a country and a nation.

 

My main points:

1. I have defined the owner (Definition1).

2. I have defined the property (Definition 2).

3. I have elaborated on the form of ownership (Definition 3).

4. I have specified a universal moral rule (Rule 1).

5. I have applied this rule to the owner and property defined above

which establishes my claim.

 

 

Definition 1:

A jewish person is a:

a. A founding father or mother.

b. any descendent of a jewish person by the female line.

 

Remark: The jewish people may change the rules of membership from time to time as it sees fit.

 

Definition 2: 

ERETZ YISRAEL is the land which came under a sovereign jewish law

at the time of the 1st or the 2nd temple.

 

Definition 3:

Ownership in communion is a form of ownership 

where all owners posses the property simultaneously

in an undivided manner and carries a right of survivorship.

 

 

Rule 1:

If a property was forcibly robbed 

and maybe even abandoned by the aggressor

or given to a third party

than it still belongs to its original owner.

[PGP]

I'm also interested chiefly in principles.

 

None of my arguments are based on religion.

I do claim that the alluvial title to the territory which comprised the state of Israel

is owned in communion by all the jews.

 

The jewish people had a long history before the age of kings.

In fact, SEFER SHOFTIM (book of judges) discusses.

 

During all this time there was national identity among the jews 

and they have perceived ERETZ YISRAEL as their home.

So a state is not a pre requisite to have a country and a nation.

 

My main points:

1. I have defined the owner (Definition1).

2. I have defined the property (Definition 2).

3. I have elaborated on the form of ownership (Definition 3).

4. I have specified a universal moral rule (Rule 1).

5. I have applied this rule to the owner and property defined above

which establishes my claim.

 

 

Definition 1:

A jewish person is a:

a. A founding father or mother.

b. any descendent of a jewish person by the female line.

 

Remark: The jewish people may change the rules of membership from time to time as it sees fit.

 

Definition 2: 

ERETZ YISRAEL is the land which came under a sovereign jewish law

at the time of the 1st or the 2nd temple.

 

Definition 3:

Ownership in communion is a form of ownership 

where all owners posses the property simultaneously

in an undivided manner and carries a right of survivorship.

 

 

Rule 1:

If a property was forcibly robbed 

and maybe even abandoned by the aggressor

or given to a third party

than it still belongs to its original owner.

Striking similarities to Communism. Collective, owned in communion, rules made up as they go along.

Another personal question: Have you benefited personally from this collective "right" that is based upon stone-age fairy-tales?

[gausian]

Hi Adam

 

You did not answer my question.

Do you understand and agree with the anarchist philosophy?

 

It looks to me that you are cherry picking parts of this philosophy

and using it to reinforce your belives.

You maybe not religiuos but you sure know how to use biblical

terminilogy to make your case.

[J-William]

If you refer to jews, the people who introduced morality to the world, as brutal 

than I don't wish to engage in a discussion with you.

Failure to identify historical brutality that is clearly documented in the bible is why you can't see brutality in the present.

 

In other words, god commanded jews to murder babies in the past. You call this introducing morality. now a jewish state is commanding people to murder babies, and it is no wonder that you are not bothered by that.

You maybe not religious but you sure know how to use biblicalterminology to make your case.

I've heard of these jewish fundamentalists, but I think they are a rare beast outside of Israel...

 

and non-religious jewish fundamentalists.... well that's a thing to behold.

 

Here's an interesting article about a Jewish guy who was really too dedicated to the cause http://www.commondreams.org/hambaconeggs

These guys come out of the woodwork to defend Israel, and that may explain why they don't quite understand why a jewish state has very little to do with anarcho-capitalism.

 

[jpahmad]

what is the "pro-Israel" position?

 

what is the "anit-Israel" position?

 

I'm a little confused here

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

what is the "pro-Israel" position?

 

what is the "anit-Israel" position?

 

I'm a little confused here

 

There are several aspects to this conflict

 

Civilian Casualty Ratio

We Israelis claim that

we have the most moral army in the world.

As an evidence you may want to consult wikipedia entry on Civilian Casulty Ratio (CCR):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio#Israeli.E2.80.93Palestinian_conflict

 

Our cynical enemies are aware of our humane nature

and using their own population as 'human shields' 

is part of their tactic.

 

Sources:

http://nypost.com/2014/08/05/hamas-manual-details-civilian-death-plan-israel/

 

Note that it emphasises the humanitarian achievement of the Israeli army

as it is much harder to maintain low CCR

when the enemy is aware of your humanitarian policies

and makes cynical use of its own population.

 

 

Despite of the above (why let facts spoil a chance to bash Israel?) 

almost every outlandish accusation was made against Israel

it always turns out to be false

but it is a large effort & time consuming task to disprove.

http://archive.adl.org/main_anti_semitism_international/blood_libel_algeria.html#.U_zKeFZbtFw

 

The palestinians also have an organized disinformation arm

sometimes called Palywood  

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLg7ARmfofNHgljlBppzHt28v17O8Du8iA

 

 

Peace efforts

I personally object to any compromise over the land of Israel

exactly as  you would probably object to a compromise on your home with an intruder.

 

But the Israeli government likes to emphasise its peace efforts

and the reluctance of the Palestinians to make peace.

(yet another reason why not to have a government).

 

Sources: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit#Accusations_of_Palestinian_responsibility

 

 

Land claims

As I discussed above, the Israeli position is that ERETZ YISRAEL (land of Israel)

belongs to the people of Israel

in exactly the same way as tibet belongs to the tibetians

and japan to the japanease.

 

From my point of view, it has nothing to do with religion

although some religious jews & christians also see a religious justification to this.

 

Sources:

http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=495

[jpahmad]

 

 

Land claims

As I discussed above, the Israeli position is that ERETZ YISRAEL (land of Israel)

belongs to the people of Israel

in exactly the same way as tibet belongs to the tibetians

and japan to the japanease.

 

 

So...the Israeli position is that the land belongs to Israel.  Does this mean that the Palestinian people should either get out or become Israeli's?

 

Please don't give me a long-winded answer.  Just tell what you would do if you were in charge.

[PGP]

"To search for a common gene to define a people or nation, as the Germans once did to argue for their ethnic blood ties, is dangerous. It is an irony of history that whereas in the past those who defined the Jews as a race were vilified as antisemitic, now assertions to the contrary are taken as antisemitic"

 

Reference:“Some people, historians and even scientists, turn a blind eye to the truth. Once to say Jews were a race was anti-Semitic, now to say they're not a race is anti-Semitic. It's crazy how history plays with us.“ Shlomo Sand cited Danielle Venton, 'Highlight: Out of Khazaria—Evidence for “Jewish Genome” Lacking,' in Genome Biology and Evolution, Vol.5, Issue 1, 2013 pp.75-6.

Found at:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Invention_of_the_Jewish_People

[Adam_Min_Hayeshuv]

So...the Israeli position is that the land belongs to Israel.  Does this mean that the Palestinian people should either get out or become Israeli's?

 

Please don't give me a long-winded answer.  Just tell what you would do if you were in charge.

I believe that most palestinians (in contrast to their leaders) want peace & freedom 

and therefore they can stay.

 

 

 

It may be interesting to note that

most Israeli citizens of arab nationality object to land exchange initiatives

(chiefly advanced by an Israeli politician named Liberman)

under which they remain on their land

but the land becomes part of the Palestinian Authority.