I am so sick of the bullshit. Why did the Arab hijackers attack us on 9/11? Because of US bases in Saudi Arabia, primarily. How did George Bush respond to 9/11? He closed our bases on the Peninsula and moved all US troops away from Mecca and Medina. Is that not the same as surrendering to terrorist demands? The same logic is at work in the PR blitz to maintain American support for Israel. I would agree that Israel has a right to exist, because the UN has mandated that it should. However, by that argument Palestinians have the same right. Let me acknowledge in advance this article is unfair and biased against Israel. As the title announces I think Jewish people are great, especially Sacha Baron Cohen. Old Orthodox Jews protesting the state of Israel, young Jewish girls who went to BU, I honestly love you guys. But the occupation and slow-genocide of the Palestinians must stop. Over half of the children in the West Bank say they want to be martyrs when they grow up. This is the system America has created for the next generation to inherit, and it's simply not sustainable. This article is not about murder, terrorism, or whether using the word 'genocide' is appropriate here. I'm just trying to be logical.
I want to be clear about one thing. This is not a religious issue and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying, perhaps even to themselves. Yes, the bible tells us that God gave the land of Canaan to the Jews. Even if you accept that as truth, it still doesn't provide justification for continued occupation of Palestine. First, because God exiled the Jews after the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem, telling them to live among the other nations as an example of the holy path. Second, God did not create the modern state of Israel. Britain and America refounded the Jewish state, using the UN to set up boundaries, legitimize and recognize the new country. If the UN created Israel, it should have the same power to create a Palestinian state, no matter what the Knesset says. Unless you think Israel is immune from both logic and international laws, in which case there's no point in trying to convince you. Third, Jews and Arabs (as a group) are BOTH descended from Abraham, the man to whom God promised the land of milk and honey. So I'm sorry, but if you read the bible God was promising land to all his descendants, not just the Jews. Once you accept that the Torah does not specifically give Israel to the Jews alone, it becomes impossible to use religious arguments to justify a continued occupation.
Water is the primary reason Israel must continue to occupy Palestine. Most of the water Israel drinks or uses for farming comes from traditionally Arab territories. These include the Golan Heights, Gaza Strip, and the West Bank. In 1978, for instance, Israel invaded Southern Lebanon. The unprovoked attack was code named "Operation Litani" by the Israeli military. The name is pertinent because the invasion proceeded as far as the Litani River, then stopped and set up defensive fortifications. The entire reason for the 1978 war was to gain control of the Litani, which Israel still holds and is currently sucking dry. So let's be clear here. The Palestinian occupation is not about land, religion, politics, or society. It is not about the clash of civilizations. Without access to the wells and rivers in traditionally Arab lands, Israel would cease to exist. Where war and terrorism have failed, a drought would succeed in a week.
Israel set up their country in a tricky way. Every Jew in the world is technically a citizen, even if they've never been to Israel. This sounds nice, as it provides a moral justification for the continued existence of Israel. As a Jewish state, any invasions or occupations serve to protect the Jewish people. In practice, however, Zionism is a set of secular, nationalist beliefs. The reason I like Orthodox Jews so much is that they draw a distinction between Zionism and the Hebrew faith. Israel's citizenship policy only serves to disenfranchise the millions of Arabs living within the country. Another example is the wall. By deviating from the UN-mandated Green Line Border, Israel illegally added several hundred square kilometers to their country at the expense of Palestine. Like most debates in America, the Israel question is addressed in a totally illogical manner. There is no Palestinian state, the Zionists claim, and there never was. While this is not true (The Palestinians have two or three claims to the land, dating back to the Phoenician PLST or PRST), the simple fact that the UN created Israel and has called for a two-state solution renders this statement meaningless. Either way, I'm not one to be criticizing Israel's oppressive and dictatorial policies: I live in a police state myself, you know.


Salon.com
Comments
I personally love the Jews and the state of Israel, and applaud them for their refusual to bend over and take it from the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular.
If the Palestinian people continue to attack Israel, then they need to expect retaliation.
I think it's unfair and untruthful to charactarize Israel's struggle for survival as a genocide against the Palestinians as well.
On a positive note, even though I disagree with you, I applaud the writing and presentation of your post.
But I think the fundamental difference in our viewpoints is clearly illustrated by your response.
You are opposed to violence in any form. While pacifiicm is the height of human dignity, it is in direct and stark contrast with the neccisity to survive in the face of thugs.
Leaving the U.S. and it's foreign policy out of this for a moment, let's just take a look at Israel and Palestine.
If Israel were to stop responding to the attacks altogehter and simply say "Please stop, we want to peacefully co-exist" I'm willing to bet (good money) on the Palestinians pushing the attack rather than using that as an opportunity to forge lasting peace.
The Palestinians want the Jews gone. Period. They're run by a group of bullies and thugs that are in league with the thugs in Iran.
Bullies always take advantage of the small and weak. The only thing keeping them at bay is the fact that they get their noses bloodied on a regular basis by the Israeli forces.
Violence, in this case, can only be met with violence until either one or the other is eradicated or beaten into complete submission.
That is why all of the 'peace missions' into the region have traditionally failed.
I do appreciate your level and courteous response, however, and agree to disagree on this issue with you, as it is quite unreasonable to assume that a pacifict and a cynic would ever come to terms over something this controversial. :)
"So, we are now going to have a total solution to the Palestinian question. The program is clear. It reads: total separation, total segregation! What does this mean? It does not only mean the total exclusion of the Arabs from the Israeli economic system... It means much more! No Israeli can be expected to live under the same roof as a Palestinian. The Arabs must be chased out of our houses and our residential districts and made to live in rows or blocks of houses where they can keep to themselves and come into contact with Israelis as little as possible. They must be clearly identified."
Whoops. That was a Hitler quote with the words "German" changed to Jew and "Jew" changed to Arab and Palestinian. Weird how that works out.
The parallels in other areas of the world are significant, yes, even those you make to Nazi Germany.
The end result is the same, however. I beleive that violence will be the medium by which that result will be achieved...and the proportions to which it escalates will be determined by the determination of those involved.
Thanks again for the dialogue.
In the end, the only solution to the problem is the problem itself. You can't, and I mean really can not...stop..the cycle of violence until one side is beaten into total submission.
It's always been that way, and I really don't see it changing. It's human nature. (Save for those few pacificts who ususally get churned into ash by the savages)
I wasn't offended by the Nazi-thing, btw, it's a common thing to do and I've grown rather numb to it as of late. Hell I've even done it myself when describing the Tea Party, the Liberal PC police and that evil bastard Bill O'Reily.
I'm not into being diplomatic with rats who write this crap. No one wants or needs your love.