Should the Palestinians have an independent state?

[professor]

Wow Dystopia, that was a mouthful from Pat.
Only a true Utopian with his blindfold tightly fitted could dismiss what he said.

[Brakeman]

Some atheists you guys are...
Israel is a founded theocracy, it hides it's religious control but nothing can be done that crosses the religious Zionistic theme. Fuck them. Treat all people equally, compensate those that were displaced and give the property back to the original owners. Give everyone a vote and the majority arabs will get rid of all remnants of the the stupid zionistic state.

How another people choose to live is not my business, as an American.

As for giving the property back to the original owners, I'm not sure how that will work, given that the vast majority are deceased. Do you mean give it to their heirs?

And are you willing to do that for every instance of expropriation we see in the world around us?

Israel would not exist without American weapon's funding.

Anyway, when we recently found additional Nazi plundered art from 1943, did we give it back to the jewish families it was stolen from? (yes)

Property should be treated as it would in almost any court in the land. If the living heirs have a better claim than the possessors then it should be equitably redistributed. The native Indians of Manhattan held claim to a Manhattan of marsh and swamp, they cannot claim the Manhattan of today. Similarly, where the Jews have improved the land they have rights to the improvements, and a settlement would be reached in a fair court of law. It's simpler than you think.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Property should be treated as it would in almost any court in the land. If the living heirs have a better claim than the possessors then it should be equitably redistributed. The native Indians of Manhattan held claim to a Manhattan of marsh and swamp, they cannot claim the Manhattan of today. Similarly, where the Jews have improved the land they have rights to the improvements, and a settlement would be reached in a fair court of law. It's simpler than you think.

I think it's more complex than you think, because what appears to be fair when read on the paper of a decision handed down in court is often rejected on the basis of emotional attachments, and I think this instance is almost certainly one of those cases. Remember, the goal is not only just treatment, but lasting peace.

Putting together the just settlement may indeed be as easy as you portray, but translating it into the real world and seeing it peacefully implemented is another story entirely.

[vorlon13]

Insisting Israel value Palestinian lives more than the Palestinians do isn't going to lead anywhere productive.

[Anomalocaris]

Insisting Israel value Palestinian lives more than the Palestinians do isn't going to lead anywhere productive.

Palestinians in 1993 had other things to lose by fighting the Israelis. Since that time Israel had moronically deprived them of all of it. The only Israel thing still has the power to offer Palestinian in return for anything, besides a genuine state, is the prospect that in Israel Palestinian lives are worth more than if there were no Israel. If Israel does not value Palestinian lives more than Palestinians, and does of allow a Palestinian state, then Palestinians lose nothing by giving up their lives to kill Israelis.

A small state with limited resource can never win by making it clear its enemies lose nothing by trying their hardest to kill it. So Israel will fight until it inevitably it will lose to superior aggregate Arab resources.

[Mudhammam]

Palestinians should be a state but they should first locate some actual leaders who can deliver sustained peace and order.

Israel should not consider itself a Jewish state, as it only continues to feed tribal tensions, and it should end the apartheid immediately.

[Anomalocaris]

Palestinians should be a state but they should first locate some actual leaders who can deliver sustained peace and order.

Israel should not consider itself a Jewish state, as it only continues to feed tribal tensions, and it should end the apartheid immediately.

Palastinians had leaders, but Isreal managed to promote fractionalism and discredit any leading personality within palastinians as a way of making palastinian state nonviable.

Isreal can't exist without being a Jewish state, which is why it should never have been allowed to be brought into existence after WWII at all.

The west cavalierly assumed it could always call the shots in the middle-east and stuff its own conveniences and fetishes down arab throats. It didn't count on the fact that calendar read 1948, not 1878. If the west had successfully inserted an Jewish state into Ottoman Turkish territory in 1878, before any significant glimmer of Arab nationalism and anti-colonialism had menifested themselves, arabs could well have come to accept a Jewish state in its midst.

But the west ham handedly inserted a Jewish state into arab lands at the height of Arab nationalism, when western colonialism itself was in its dying days, so there was no real prospect serious prospect Isreal would be accepted. Without being accepted, Isreal will likely eventually be overthrown. While it was understandable for Jews to jump at the chance, it was in the long term probably a stupid thing for Jews to do to take the offer of the Jewish state amidst rising arab nationalism.

[CristW]

The Palestinians already have a state, the same people have the country of Jordan.
But then, the Islamist war makers would have to fold up their tent and go home.
So the charade continues.
The Muslims do not want a state beside the Jewish one.
They were given Gaza and destroyed anything productive there, and use it to build bombs and launch missiles.
How many times do they need to tell you, they want one INSTEAD of the Jewish one.
Hell will freeze over first.

Why do you always fall for the trap? Your Christian Millennialistic non-sense is showing.

Of course, both sides have problems in which I have mentioned previously ( That is evidence that any 'religion' is not the solution, in the long run, for the human race ). The whole point of having a new reconstruction of the state of Israel is to promote a 'civil society' something which the GOP has missed in their calculations. The GOP of the U.S. are hypocrites. The recent episode concerning Netanyahu has exposed this hypocrisy and political opportunistic overtures.

There are no evidence, in the federalist papers and anti-federalist papers, of any attachment to religious 'destiny' rather these mentioned documents stuck to the idea of civil society (& experiment). Plus, there were no explicit reference of being loyal to Israel (or the Jewish people) within those mentioned documents. I would go as far to say that the American founding fathers had established thoughts, through words and deeds, that America replaced Israel (Replacement Theology).

Nevertheless, the rights of any people to defend themselves should not be negated. The state of Israel and its Jewish people have all the rights to defend themselves. However, they should adopt some kind of reasonable political strategy to reduce and diminish the other 'hostile' political entities in the region. Hence, the amazement I have seeing no one from either the GOP or the democratic camp in exporting the idea of a 'civil societal order' within the Israeli state. The very state we support with BILLIONS of dollars!

As for telling whole populations to move to Jordan is non-sense. What happens when this action creates the impetus for Pan-Jewish design in the region? For example; to tell Lebanese, Syrians, and Iraqis to leave their lands because Israel wants to create some Pan-Jewish land. Therefore, the previous notion is ridiculous !!! Just like the mentioned people, the Palestinians have much of a claim to the very soil Jewish people are claiming over. The history is filled with Jewish and non-Jewish people sharing the same soil and claims going back and forth. Actually, these changes were done under BARBARIC claims (through violence) rather than the MODERN methods of International Law and justice. International Law (& Justice) is something solidified after the event of WWII.

SO, we want to reverse these historical development to the laws of BARBARIC actions??? You know today nuclear weapons exist and it's not like the world of WWI and WWII.

Knowing that the state of Israel was formed through bloodshed (wordings from anti-Zionist Jews), the state of Israel could still recover from such events by simply making Palestinians Israeli citizens but then create a type of system which would still preserve the existence of the Jewish people. The previous action would diminish the strategy of the Iranian state and other Islamic groups within the region who could later recruit the Palestinian society to fight for them. Hence, ending in nuclear warfare exchange.

But wait, that's exactly what your Christian preachers and millennialists like yourself would want...a nuclear holocaust of humanity so it could fulfill your Biblical claims. I bet you that Jesus will NOT return. And I also foresee that when Jesus will not return some people in your camp will reinterpret it and say Jesus will return with other conditions.

[abaris]

The GOP of the U.S. are hypocrites. The recent episode concerning Netanyahu has exposed this hypocrisy and political opportunistic overtures.

Not to forget, there are massive financial interests involved. Many of these politicians lubing up for the Netanyahu asscrawling are in the pocket of defense contractors. A perpetual state of war is in their best interest. As long as weapons are needed, the donations keep flowing. Also there may be well paid jobs on the horizon, once the political career is over.

[CristW]

And now for this video. Pat Condell obviously misses out in even mentioning the attempt to establish a 'civil society' within Israel. Has the Israeli government respected the rights of Arab Christians? To blindly support Israel is just as worse as supporting Hamas. Not every Muslim wants to eradicate the Jewish population but all would want to get rid of the Israeli state because of how it treats non-Jews within and outside of Israel though its military arsenal. Pat Condell has presented a logical fallacy of slippery slope argument. It is the worst kind of generalization because it is like saying all Muslims (or even Arab Christians) want the Jewish people eliminated. If this was the case then many Jewish communities living in the Middle East would have been wiped out in the past while under Islamic authorities of various kinds.

In the long run, the previous episodes of religious antagonism and strife proves that 'religion' is the expression of young human adolescence.