Is the world better off with the nation of Israel?

[evillawyer]

They won the fight so annexation is long overdue. And since when do you have a problem with annexation?

So might is right?

 

[hog88]

So what one state solution are you proposing?

Palestinians either agree to become law abiding Israeli citizens or get out.

 

[Mick]

Nobody in their right mind wants a two state solution.

What's the solution for people in their right mind?

 

[evillawyer]

Palestinians either agree to become law abiding Israeli citizens or get out.

Hahaha. You think that option is being offered by Netanyahu? Nope, it'll be annexation and expulsion. They can't risk Israel becoming a non-jewish majority state. That's the whole purpose of israel--to be a Jewish Homeland.

 

[evillawyer]

Hahaha. You think that option is being offered by Netanyahu? Nope, it'll be annexation and expulsion. They can't risk Israel becoming a non-jewish majority state. That's the whole purpose of israel--to be a Jewish Homeland.

At least Crimeans wanted to be Russian and identified more with Russia than Ukraine.

 

[T-TownVol]

Hahaha. You think that option is being offered by Netanyahu? Nope, it'll be annexation and expulsion. They can't risk Israel becoming a non-jewish majority state. That's the whole purpose of israel--to be a Jewish Homeland.

Well DUH!!

 

[evillawyer]

Well DUH!!

And so where post WWII has the US been totally cool with one country annexing land and expelling the population that lives there in favor of its own people.

 

[LouderVol]

So might is right?

At some point it is.

Otherwise we have no rules.

Not saying in this case it is.

 

[evillawyer]

At some point it is.

Otherwise we have no rules.

Not saying in this case it is.

Not following you. Flesh it out

 

[LouderVol]

Not following you. Flesh it out

Laws are backed up with force.
Borders are protected with force.

It's entirely natural and how literally everything else in this universe works. At some bucking that fact causes issues and tensions.

In this case it's how arabs came into the area. They weren't the original settlers. Not by a long shot. Neither were the Jews, but one has established themselves. The other hasn't.

 

[T-TownVol]

And so where post WWII has the US been totally cool with one country annexing land and expelling the population that lives there in favor of its own people.

Seriously?

 

[evillawyer]

Seriously?

Enlighten me

 

[T-TownVol]

Enlighten me

Hopeless endeavour

 

[evillawyer]

Laws are backed up with force.
Borders are protected with force.

It's entirely natural and how literally everything else in this universe works. At some bucking that fact causes issues and tensions.

In this case it's how arabs came into the area. They weren't the original settlers. Not by a long shot. Neither were the Jews, but one has established themselves. The other hasn't.

Seems like Arab population was pretty well established.

Demographic history of Palestine (region) - Wikipedia

Your argument for why might is right seems to bottom out on nothing more than the assertion that might is right (one has "established themselves. The other hasnt").

 

[LouderVol]

Seems like Arab population was pretty well established.

Demographic history of Palestine (region) - Wikipedia

Your argument for why might is right seems to bottom out on nothing more than the assertion that might is right (one has "established themselves. The other hasnt").

And what argument would you make?

Your link shows that the jews predated the arabs at one point. What caused that? This is just the latest turn in a long dance. And you are complaining because you dont like the current results.

 

[evillawyer]

Hopeless endeavour

Still waiting. Seems simple. Just want to know where US was ok with another country annexing land that was not theirs and expelling the population that lived there so they could be replaced with the annexing country's own citizens.

 

[evillawyer]

And what argument would you make?

Your link shows that the jews predated the arabs at one point. What caused that? This is just the latest turn in a long dance. And you are complaining because you dont like the current results.

So you subscribe to the might is right theory? Namely, whatever a country does is proper as long as it can get away with it.

 

[T-TownVol]

Still waiting. Seems simple. Just want to know where US was ok with another country annexing land that was not theirs and expelling the population that lived there so they could be replaced with the annexing country's own citizens.

When the land was originally theirs and taken from them illegally, we assist.
Don't come with "it was not theirs" or "it was the right thing to take the land".
Israel has land promised them by our creator and it should never be taken y anyone.

 

[LouderVol]

So you subscribe to the might is right theory? Namely, whatever a country does is proper as long as it can get away with it.

Lol. Two completely separate arguments.

I support one defending themselves even as the aggressor as situation requires. I think Israel is in a unique situation to fall under that. Meaning some things are justified but others arent.

Punching a threat might be ok where torture isnt.

A government doing bad things is not an argument against anything but bad things.

 

[T-TownVol]

And what argument would you make?

Your link shows that the jews predated the arabs at one point. What caused that? This is just the latest turn in a long dance. And you are complaining because you dont like the current results.

Ding....Ding....Ding......

 

[evillawyer]

When the land was originally theirs and taken from them illegally, we assist.
Don't come with "it was not theirs" or "it was the right thing to take the land".
Israel has land promised them by our creator and it should never be taken y anyone.

Oh ffs, if you're going to pull the "God promised them that land" argument, I don't think we can debate. That's not a "public reason" that can be offered and accepted by any neutral observer.

Public reason - Wikipedia

And regardless, that doesn't answer my question as to when the US has been cool with action like what Netanyahu is proposing.

 

[evillawyer]

Lol. Two completely separate arguments.

I support one defending themselves even as the aggressor as situation requires. I think Israel is in a unique situation to fall under that. Meaning some things are justified but others arent.

Punching a threat might be ok where torture isnt.

A government doing bad things is not an argument against anything but bad things.

Israel has defended itself. That's true. But why does that entitle them to the aggressor's land? Would it also entitle them to land in Syria, Jordan and Egypt if they decided to claim it since they were all aggressors to Israel?

 

[hog88]

Israel has defended itself. That's true. But why does that entitle them to the aggressor's land? Would it also entitle them to land in Syria, Jordan and Egypt if they decided to claim it since they were all aggressors to Israel?

if you start a war and lose there is a price to pay.

 

[evillawyer]

if you start a war and lose there is a price to pay.

Ok. So can the victor rape their women? Take their gold? Destroy their landmarks? Why stop at just seizing their land? What's the moral principle that justifies seizing the land but not raping the women and enslaving the population?

In everyday life, if you punch me first, and I counterpunch and win, do I get your car?

 

[Pacer92]

They won the fight so annexation is long overdue. And since when do you have a problem with annexation?

It doesn’t belong to Israel! What do you not understand about that?