Let’s just say for the SAKE of argument you are correct.
Does that then imply a 2000+ year claim based on the bible ,negates the 1000+ years of continuous use & occupation of lands by Palestinians/Arabs.
Indeed most Palestinian know (intimately) the villages and or valleys from where their family’s originated,unlike the Jewish settlers(European) the majority having no family or historical ties to the lands they now claim.
Surely the people living on the land for the past 1000+ years have the stronger “claim”,indeed for all intensive purposes the land belongs to them period !
Surely you are not arguing that European Jews(who lived else where and have/had been for centuries) now have a right to Palestinian lands,again based solely on some highly contentious/pseudo 2000+ year claim.(this is not to deny that some Jews did not live on these lands, nor Christians for that matter)
The world just does not work that way Nasty,in fact if we were to try,we would all be immigrants from else where. With few peoples if any being able to prove continuous ownership,of a particular chunk of land,going back to the dawn of time.
P.S I am done.

It’s not pretty flag waving or national anthems played while brave young men and women march off to defend the homeland, or even the distant sound of artillery going off with a cloud of smoke rising on the horizon – it’s the blood and guts of women and children splattered into gutters and all over walls.

You mean it’s not healthy for children and other living things? Well, I’ll be!

Patronize much?

The Jewish claim on the land pre-dates Islam.

You are taking things personally ?,”its not about me having to dream on”.The demographic situation is as I described.
Israeli actions and policy’s are taking the viability,of a separate Palestinian state out of the equation.But that said if Israel were to(by some miracle)reverses her self and pull back to the 67 border & leave E.Jerusalem,well than a two state solution might well be the outcome.
Again I don’t have to “dream on” ?

Nasty said…”Israel may not be a “secular state” by western standards, but the minority citizens of Israel have full rights of citizenship. which is more than can be said of their Arab neighbours treatment of their non-muslim citizens.”…

This is not true,there are different rule/laws for Arab Israelis(1.4 million)….For example an Israeli Jew can marry another Jew any where on the plant and bring his/her spouse back to Israel.An Israeli Arab/Palestinian can not even marry another Palestinian in the W.Bank or Gaza with the intention of living in Israel.
A Jew from any where on the planet has a right,by virtue of the fact that he or she is Jewish,to settle and live in Israel.
Arab refugees(1,000,000+ who can prove their tie to land inside Israel have no right of return.
The aim is obvious,that being to ensure Israel remains a Jewish state.A true secular democracy would never consider passing such laws based on religion and ethnicity.

http://www.arabhra.org/HRA/Pages/Index.aspx?Language=2

And again on my point…”that there was a pre-existing indigenous population”,Possession is 9 tenths of the law.
The Palestinian/Arab claim to the land goes back centuries.This is not a theory or speculation,they have lived and thrived for centuries,again on the lands now being claimed by Israeli Jews(i.e the majority being European immigrants).
But I suppose if we go back far enough in time we are all “immigrants”.

Originally Posted By Raphael Alexander But Israel is doing essentially what needs to be done

No Raphael, Israel, and Hamas, are doing what needs to be done to prolong this conflict.

Raphael Alexander: Clearly these people cannot be depended upon for autonomous rule and peaceful coexistence.

Given that they have not been given the opportunity that’s a fairly broad statement to make don’t you think?

Originally Posted By Peter don’t think we are yapping, but I’m more than a little puzzled as to where Stageleft, Dr. Dawg and the other best progressive sites think they are taking us with this gruesome, in-your-face litany of human tragedy.

Because this is what war is Peter. It’s not pretty flag waving or national anthems played while brave young men and women march off to defend the homeland, or even the distant sound of artillery going off with a cloud of smoke rising on the horizon – it’s the blood and guts of women and children splattered into gutters and all over walls.

Originally Posted By dirk O yeah the founding of Israel on lands that had a pre-existing indigenous population.O yeah AFTER Jewish terrorist bombed and terrorized Palestinians

Bringing up that sort of thing up can get ya labeled an anti-Semite dirk… polite company neither talks about things like that, or subsequent celebrations of those events.

I’d go further but this has just about wrapped up my entire energy use quota for the day – I’ll be back when this heinous head cold leaves me.

Does anyone know?

Since I don’t like to assume I’ll hazard a guess you’re referring to the Saudis or something like that in the last sentence.

Yes. Thank you for the reminder of the perils of wide-sweeping statements.

And re-reading my comment to dirk “Don’t lecture me on history.”, I apoplogize. That sounds snippy. I only meant to never doubt my madd hizitory skillz.

And the “One Nation Solution” is an interesting idea, but not practicable.

“dispassionate” = able to set aside one’s emotional response in order to consider the implications of weakening principles of international law (some could stand to be weakened, but not the principles governing the misuse of protected places/persons).

“knowledgeable” = understanding what is militarily possible. Not every weapon team and military leader can be assassinated via Predator drone or SAS team insertion.

Israel’s war is probably legal, but in my view assuredly unjust. I doubt it can pass at least two tests: that it was likely to succeed, and that the beneficial outcomes would outweigh the costs.

I suppose Israel loses more people in a week to traffic accidents than it does to Palestinian military action in a year – possibly in several years. The complications are that:
1) “Those people” did it; it was not merely bad judgement/fortune.
2) The knowledge of rocket and other terror attacks is a source of stress entirely unlike the occasional fleeting thought that one might die in a car.

One could argue that Israel could stand to tolerate the fruits of Palestinian anger and endure the results, particularly since the security “wall” has reduced suicide bombings. As a legal question, though, Israel does not have to.

The solution lies in “Responsibility to Protect”, and therefore in paternalism. Israelis bid war to form a state and subsequently to defend it, and succeeded; it is accomplished and therefore difficult to undo. Palestinians bid war to regain a state or form an alternate one, and have failed, and persist in the failure. Given the likelihood of angry Palestinians to reinitiate conflict, a solution which requires Israel to accept Palestinian resettlement or similar concessions is impractical. Israel has done about as much as it can, which is to control its borders. As part of that, Israel also needs to cease its embargo, which is possible only if a third party will step in to forcibly disarm, monitor, and govern Palestinians for the next few decades.

It is also necessary to control Iranian proxy adventurism among the Palestinians and Lebanese. I’m not sure how the political will to do so can be mustered by the nations with the power to do so. Note that I’m not calling for war on Iran; I’m confident other ways can be found but also accept those ways might call for a paternalistic presence in Lebanon.

Originally Posted By nastyboy but the minority citizens of Israel have full rights of citizenship. which is more than can be said of their Arab neighbours treatment of their non-muslim citizens.

Since I don’t like to assume I’ll hazard a guess you’re referring to the Saudis or something like that in the last sentence.

If you literally meant Israel’s neighbours then I’m not quite sure what you mean. Do you mean the nearly 40% of Lebanon’s population which is Christian does not have full citizenship rights?