Is it wrong the hate Judaism?

Goduznt Xzst

Zamboni wrote: »

Sorry for getting worked up about people killing other people in the name of religion. Apparently thats ok.

People could kill people in the name of pizza. It still doesn't change the fact that the execrable act is the killing itself and not the pizza... which is delicious.

Zamboni

sink wrote: »

It's an immensely complex situation and for outsiders like us to be able to constructively comment it requires a deep understanding of the conflicts origins and history but most importantly the current situation with all the different factions within both the Palestinian and Israeli communities and their capabilities and motivations. I am certain I do not posses enough knowledge to be able to pass any meaningful judgement and I would say the same for almost all of us. Only those with sufficient knowledge of the factors at play can take any meaningful part in a debate, the rest of us are just doing guess work often grounded in emotion rather than fact.

One does not need a history degree to know that murder is wrong.

Dades

Zamboni wrote: »

Sorry for getting worked up about people killing other people in the name of religion. Apparently thats ok.

Congratulations on trying to boil all the responses you've received here down to a fatuous soundbyte.

CDfm

There is a difference between Zionism and Judeaism.

Zionism is all about the State of Israel and the Jewish homeland.

Like it or not Israel came from WW2 and the Holocaust- but there had been a history of anti-semitism in Europe and America.

So its wrong.

munchester29

Zamboni wrote: »

One does not need a history degree to know that murder is wrong.

Is it always?
What if one murder stops the death of hundreds or thousands?
What if one murder stops the death of just one member of your family?
What would you do, if you had the choice between killing 5 innocent bystanders, or have your wife or son killed if you don't?

Life is a bit more complex...

brianthebard

CDfm wrote: »

There is a difference between Zionism and Judeaism.

Zionism is all about the State of Israel and the Jewish homeland.

Like it or not Israel came from WW2 and the Holocaust- but there had been a history of anti-semitism in Europe and America.

So its wrong.

The state of Israel as a concept goes back further than WW2.

toiletduck

Don't hate, it's not worth it.

CDfm

brianthebard wrote: »

The state of Israel as a concept goes back further than WW2.

as a concept it goes back to Moses.

I am always amused that he managed to pick about the only area in the Middle East without oil.

Yet another excerpt from that slim volume - Peaceful Former -British Colonies.

sink

Zamboni wrote: »

One does not need a history degree to know that murder is wrong.

But who is more wrong the murder of the murder or the murderer of the murderer of the murderer? The point I'm trying to make is passing judgement on the Israelis by calling them all murderous scumbags saying nothing about the different factions and the history behind it is to simplify the situation to such a ridiculous degree that it looses all meaning. The situation is fubar and passing moral judgement from afar is as pointless as praying to god.

Craft25

Zamboni wrote: »

I will not disagree with that.
But show me a Jew that says the Israeli attacks in the Gaza are not justified and I will retract my statement.

actually there is a lobby group in washington in recent years of high powered jewish people.... they have been lobbying the opposite of the traditional "bomb em all to hell" lobby... that dialogue is better and israel is digging a whole it cant get out of by angering all it's neighbours...

I worked in Israel before and MANY MANY of them wish no harm on palestinians, but they can be easily swayed by a new mortar attack that lands nearby... they start to panic, thinking "OMG my children, when will this end", add that to the fact they are fenced in and alot of them never leave israel, only listen to israeli news etc... they start to change their mind and think "bomb em"

Isreal is not really a problem betwees palestinians and israeli's, it is a world problem (it is after all the fertile crescent and the birthplace of western civilisation jew,christian & arab) and will require a world solution along the lines of: 1) two separate states possibly with some form of international policing (before that the UN will need widespread reform)
2) Jerusalem will have to be a "world City" owned and shared by all


All of this requires a shift in the way we see "nations" and "states" which after all are a relatively recent phenomena..

the chances of any of us seeing this in our lifetime seem extremely slim, but i hold out hope... and if the world ever does get to that stage it will be wholly unrecogniseable from the world we know today

PS: the Crown Family of chicago are a high powered jewish family and were instrumental in getting Obama elected... lets hope they are from the more open minded jewish section and not the hotheads... i reckon the israeli's might be going all out attack now because they fear Obama might clamp down on them more than bush

Húrin

Zamboni wrote: »

Because it would be naive to suggest they are mutually exclusive.
Of course there are nice non-violent jews, but do you think they are the majority?

Well, 75% of Jews consistently vote for Democrats in US Presidental elections. I know that's a very vague indicator, but if they were really hawking for Palestinian blood then they would be voting the fanatically pro-Israeli Republican party.

Zamboni wrote: »

Atheism is a light at the end of this stage of the human infancy tunnel if you ask me.

I can't believe anyone is still saying this. The main defining characteristic of atheistic regimes in the 20th century was their violence - on a scale of previously unimagined, unprecedented horror.

metrovelvet

Instead of offerring more hate, why don't you offer a solution?

My suggestion would be a 48 hour ceasefire during which time Isreal invites the world to mediate and does not retaliate at all even in the case of receiving violence from the otherside. Once the two days are up and nothing has moved, then retaliate.

philologos

brianthebard wrote: »

The state of Israel as a concept goes back further than WW2.

Indeed, didn't Herzl's Judenstaat put it forward as an idea in the 1860's?

UU

Well I can see where your confusion may occur and indeed I'm fully against Israel as a state and refuse to support the actions of the Zionist movement. Zionist is the key word in that sentence. You must distinguish between Judaism and Zionism. Judaism refers to the ancient Abrahamic religion whereas Zionist is moreso a more recent view found within Judaism which support the return of the "Holy Land" to the Jews who had occupied it 2000 years ago when many emigrated and the Arabs (former day Palestinians) took control. Therefore, Israel is a state founded on the view of Zionism not Judaism although it is contained within Judaism. Although it is clear that most Jews are Zionists, not all are. And most Israelis are Zionists but not all are. Not all Israelis are Jews either but most are. Sure even a percentage of Palestinians are Christian.

I am against Zionism but not Judaism (although I don't support Judaism either but I don't support any religious system). I think it is totally ridiculous for Zionists to claim the land belongs to them because their ancestors lived there 2000 years ago. I don't fully support everything the Palestinians do but in fairness I can understand why they do what they do. Just look at the situation. How many Israelis compared to Palestinians died in the recent violence? Only a handful of Israelis but around 400 Palestinian civilians have perished so far and many more injured. It's just sickening because the Palestinians are totally screwed over and seen as terrorists and Islamic fundamentalists. Some are, not all. Most who died were innocent civilians. But what Israel is doing is state terrorism. It is the Israelis who have the power, money and arms. From looking at the photos linked in the first post, you'll see the Israelis have nice clothes, bomb shelters, are rich. It isn't that people in the Holy Land are Jewish or Muslim I'm against violence and it is that they're people, human beings and their religion isn't a factor for me opposing what is wrong.

I could keep going on and on but I won't. What I will say is the situation is got to do with religion but not all is. A lot is also politics, land and apartheid. If you really feel strong about the whole issue, may I suggest joining the Irish Palestinian Solidarity Campaign who are peaceful activists who support the Palestinians. link. They're doing a protest on Saturday at Central Bank in Dublin at 1pm. I might go, not sure though.

dlofnep

Your issue is with Zionism, not the faith of Judaism.

philologos

I think, it's too easy to just blindly side with the Palestinians too though. I know because I used to be very pro-Palestinian. However, it's clear that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and so on do have a role in this conflict, and are responsible. If you look to the history of Israel too, it is clear that the Palestinians have a great weight of responsibility to be taken also.

I honestly hope that Hamas will do either one of two things:
1) Disband their militant operations and join the discussion table,
2) Just give up and join Fatah, and join the discussion table.

Either way I don't really care. I don't think that violence is in any way justified on the Israeli side either, but I will say this, I do sympathise with those in Southern Israel also who have been evacuated from their homes, even if that is the lesser of the two situations between Southern Israel, and on the Gaza Strip. Both situations are unacceptable. It is unacceptable that rockets should be raining down around the place where you live, and it's also unacceptable when a sophisticated military and advanced airforce attempt to raise your city to the ground as a result of the actions of a minority.

I can understand why people are frustrated, but I also think that people need to read up on the history so that they may make a fair and balanced judgement of the situation. As for the take I would take on a possible solution to the Israel - Palestine conflict. It's entirely clear that the two-state solution option failed miserably in 1948, if you look up, you will find out what happened. In a nutshell, Israel was founded, the Palestinians rioted, and the Arabs caused a war, and Israel booted out 700,000 Palestinians from the land in the aftermath. And then of course we have the 6 Day War, Yom Kippur War, Operation Peace for Galilee (1982), and more modern operations such as Operation Cast Lead which is happening right now, or Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. However, I think a shared Israeli state between the Palestinians and the Israelis is the best way forward. The One State solution has hope in an age when the Two State solution has clearly failed time and time again. Like if Israel are bombing Gaza right now, what would stop them if Palestine was an independent state and some group fired a rocket across?

Important question to ask, if you disagree with the IDF actions, can you see at least that there may be a responsibility on the Palestinian side or a Casus Belli in current conflicts. You can disagree with something strongly and yet see the flaws in the opposing side, or better still see if there is any reasoning behind what they have done. I think the IDF attacks are abhorrent, don't get me wrong, but at the same time, I think we have to criticise Hamas, and to fairly assess the conflict taking into account Israel's entire history from the Zionist Congress before Israel emerged in the 1860's right up to the current day.

I agree with Israel's existence, and the right for the Jewish people to live in the Holy Land, if that makes me Zionist I don't know, but I also support equal opportunities for Palestinians and any other minority such as the Druze and the Christians.

UU - the 400 figure apparently includes combattants such as Hamas militants who have been killed also.

Running Bing

dlofnep wrote: »

Your issue is with Zionism, not the faith of Judaism.

Quite right.


I have absolutely no problem with Jewish people but I find Zionism abhorrent to be perfectly truthful. The history of the situation still astonishes me and I feel it is one of the great injustices of the 20th century.

You do have to be careful though because if you launch into an attack on Zionism it can be construed as anti-semitic which is not the case at all.

The current government of Israel quite frankly disgusts me. There is another side to all this, it should not be forgotten that Palestinian terrorists are also killing innocent people. The difference is these people are recognised as terrorists whose actions are to be condemned while the Israeli government seems to enjoy Carte Blanche in committing whatever atrocities they like and not only are they not condemned but world leaders, such as the President elect of the United States, actually sympathise with and defend their actions. This is what I find most disheartening.

UU

Yeah I agree with Jakkass' comment. I mean although I would be more supportive of the Palestinian side in all of this that doesn't mean I support everything the Hamas do. Islamic terrorism does occur and it should be also condemned as it is a threat to human life. Violence really doesn't help at all. I think peaceful discussions are vital. But apartheid occurs and that is what really sickens me. Like the way all the Palestinians are shoved into such small areas. I'm not anti-Semitic. In fact I have friends who are Jewish. I think that the Israeli state should have never been founded but it would be impossible to reverse that now. Every time, violence erupts there, it is the Palestinians who suffer the most because they are so poor and weak. As I said before, I'm against violence in general and thus the way both sides suffer.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Just so all the underdog lovers know, Hosni Mubarek(Egymtian Pres) and Mahmoud Abbas are blaming Hamas.

It's difficult to have overall sympathy for a nation that elects hamas. Sure I think Israel have done some things wrong, such harrassing humanitarian aid suppliers.

If an organisation that was elected in Northern Ireland sent a constant barrage of rockets into Dundalk do you think you'd think twice about bombing Northern Ireland?

pH wrote:

But the IRA did similar things, and the couple of times that the British army reacted in an overt military manner (Bloody Sunday) are still remembered with horror. At no stage were attack helicopters sent in, or cities bombed by jet fighters, or maybe you're saying that the correct British response to the attempted mortar attack on Downing Street in 1991 would have been the destruction of the Irish army and the shelling of Dublin?

This is plain silly.

Bloody sunday was a massacre of unarmed protesters. Israel are attacking Hamas who do their best to surround themselves in human shields. Aside from South Armagh and perhaps the Free Derry eras, the IRA never controlled any regions of the north so you can't compare it. Though helicopters were regularly sent into South Armagh

The IRA who launched that one-off attack on downing street were not in control of Dublin. Hamas are in control of Gaza and they're the ones sending rockets into Israel

I think the whole thing is more an ethnic issue. Allowing people with just one Jewish grandparent citizenship in Israel is essentially creating a European state in the middle east. Ethnicity played a part in Northern Ireland but comapared to the contrast of Arabs & Euro-Jews, Ulster Scots & native Irish are effectively the same thing.

I disagree with how Israel was formed but it's been around for 60 years so its time the Arabs made the best of the situation.

robindch

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Just so all the underdog lovers know, Hosni Mubarek(Egymtian Pres) and Mahmoud Abbas are blaming Hamas.

Hamas is unpopular with the regional islamic governments, which is why condemnation has been muted. It's similar to the reaction to the 2006 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, when the Israelis tried to do away with Hezbollah to the silent cheers of many regional political types who were (and are) worried that islamic militants pose a threat to them too.

.

brianthebard

Jakkass wrote: »

I think, it's too easy to just blindly side with the Palestinians too though. I know because I used to be very pro-Palestinian. However, it's clear that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and so on do have a role in this conflict, and are responsible. If you look to the history of Israel too, it is clear that the Palestinians have a great weight of responsibility to be taken also.

Yes Hamas are involved in a war with Israel, but its hard to believe Israel is a legitimate state unless you take a fundamentalist reading of the Bible and/or Torah. Do you? I don't, and I expect most on this forum don't.

philologos

How is Israel as a state illegitimate though? I mean as a concept I really don't see much wrong with an Israeli state. It's the abuses of the IDF, amongst other things that I am not happy with. Why can't the Jewish people have the right to live in their ancestral homeland? I do support Palestinian rights to live in this area also.

As for a literal reading of the Torah, as in do I believe that God had given the promised land to the Jewish people. Well in Judaism, Christianity and Islam this is narrated in their holy books. However I find this isn't really the point of this argument is it? Sure even from a secular point of view I think that Israel has the right to exist.

The same logic to say that Israel shouldn't exist "because the Palestinians were there first" is wholly ludicrous. It's really a fallacy. For example by this logic surely we should accept that the Greek Orthodox were there before the Arabs invaded during the reign of Caliph Umar in the 7th century. Should we return the land to the Greek Orthodox.

We could go even earlier, and suggest that the Jews had owned the land, before the Romans had expelled them from Israel in 120AD. One could also reason that since the Romans had expelled the Jews from the land that the land should have been restored to them. However, the Jews didn't have the advantage of international law in their favour at that time.

It's not as clear cut or as simple as using that argument. Hence why I support an Israeli state with mutual rights for Palestinian and Israeli populations.

I don't understand why we cannot aim for an Al Andalus type climate. What was so different about Moorish Spain than Israel that Jews, Christians and Muslims could live together in relative peace there.

Bubs101

Zamboni wrote: »

Lol

Drunk posting. Ya gotta love it

Sorry for getting worked up about people killing other people in the name of religion. Apparently thats ok.

Crusades and many other conflicts in history say sup, anyway, like it's been pointed out it's political not religious.

Anyway, to condemn one side and not the other is stupid. Hamas ended the ceasefire and refused to go back to talks. They knew what was going to happen. Israel was not going to change it's tactics. Everytime Hamas launch a rocket or use a suicide bomber they know the response will be heavy handed and will harm their people far more than their attack on the Israeli's and they keep doing it. The Israeli's are clearly to heavy handed on the other hand. Both sides are at fault and just because America supports Israel doesn't mean the Arabs are right, no matter how cool it is

brianthebard

Jakkass wrote: »

How is Israel as a state illegitimate though? I mean as a concept I really don't see much wrong with an Israeli state. It's the abuses of the IDF, amongst other things that I am not happy with. Why can't the Jewish people have the right to live in their ancestral homeland? I do support Palestinian rights to live in this area also.

Its illegitimate because it was created against the wishes of the majority of the population of the region at the time of its creation. Its illegitimate because it was created through colonisation. What is happening in Israel is really not that different to how the native American people had their lands taken from them. Why should we assume that people have a right to create nations out of thin air?

Also clearly the people of Moorish Spain didn't live in harmony if the Spanish and Portuguese saw fit to force the Moors out of the peninsula and then expel the Jewish population. Very flawed example.

dlofnep

Jakkass wrote: »

How is Israel as a state illegitimate though? I mean as a concept I really don't see much wrong with an Israeli state. It's the abuses of the IDF, amongst other things that I am not happy with. Why can't the Jewish people have the right to live in their ancestral homeland? I do support Palestinian rights to live in this area also.

Look at your wording.

Israeli ancestral homeland... But ah sure, the pallies can stay there too!

Ancestral my arse, the Palestinians were there in majority numbers prior to the Jewish migration. If the Jewish people were ever there, it was 1000's of years ago and their claim was well and truly gone.

Could you imagine if what they did happened in any Western country? Think about it.

PDN

brianthebard wrote: »

Its illegitimate because it was created against the wishes of the majority of the population of the region at the time of its creation. Its illegitimate because it was created through colonisation. What is happening in Israel is really not that different to how the native American people had their lands taken from them. Why should we assume that people have a right to create nations out of thin air?

So is the USA an illegitimate State? What about Australia? New Zealand?

philologos

brianthebard wrote: »

Its illegitimate because it was created against the wishes of the majority of the population of the region at the time of its creation. Its illegitimate because it was created through colonisation. What is happening in Israel is really not that different to how the native American people had their lands taken from them. Why should we assume that people have a right to create nations out of thin air?

Also clearly the people of Moorish Spain didn't live in harmony if the Spanish and Portuguese saw fit to force the Moors out of the peninsula and then expel the Jewish population. Very flawed example.

How is Moorish Spain a poor example when Christian, Muslim and Jewish thinkers could come together in peace? People such as Avicenna, and Moses Maimonides, could work together with entire peace, even discussing the ideas of the other. I don't think it is a poor example, as these three peoples had lived in tolerance for hundreds of years. Of course there was political factors behind it, such as the Europeans feeling threatened by the Arab presence in Europe. This region also existed like this in some form from the 8th century right up to the 15th century. That's significantly longer than most countries have existed.

As for Israel being illegitimate due to colonisation. I don't think this is a fair example. If Israel was indeed the land of the ancestors, and if it was perceived to be some form of safe haven for the Jewish people, I think they have the right to live there, and should. Unless you are suggesting that the 5 million Jews in Israel relocate? As for being against the will of the majority that were in the region of the time, that's why the two state was offered instead of a single Israeli state which proponents such as the Stern Gang or the Lehi had sought through violence against British troops. However, the Palestinians rioted, and the Arabs tried to capture Israel. Alas, that failed. We should be seeking to work with what we have instead of trying to reverse Israel back out of existence. However, I celebrate Israel's existence so I'm not one of those who is seeking for Israel's end. I don't however, encourage violent acts against the Palestinians or vice versa. For me Israel had every right to come to existence.

It's very easy for you or I to take this for granted when we never had to deal with being vilified across Europe. Infact if you read Der Judenstaat by Herzl, just in the opening section, you will see that this is the primary reason he gives. Basically his argument is, since you hate us the Jews so much, why don't you let us found a State in our homeland Israel.

I can sympathise with the idea of an Israeli state, as long as the Palestinians are respected and honoured. Israel is currently failing in this duty. However, I would argue that Israel didn't create a nation out of thin air, but rather it was restoring a nation that their ancestors had lived in before, just as much as the Irish people restored the Irish nation from the British. Although comparing this with that example mightn't be too kosher, but it's a fair one.

dlofnep, I do see that as a fair one, if the Jewish people had been expelled from lands they had previously ruled by the Romans. This is the cause of their plight in Europe and surely this is fair to an extent, as long as the Palestinians are respected. Again which Israel is failing to do.

As for a claim ending due to 1000's of years, couldn't it be argued that the national claim to Palestine resulting from the colonization of Arabs in the 7th century could be seen as null and void due to basically 1400 years having passed? I guess a criticism only works when it suits your position.

brianthebard

PDN wrote: »

So is the USA an illegitimate State? What about Australia? New Zealand?

They are all colonies.

PDN

brianthebard wrote: »

They are all colonies.

They were, but that wasn't my question.

Are they illegitimate States?

brianthebard

Jakkass wrote: »

How is Moorish Spain a poor example when Christian, Muslim and Jewish thinkers could come together in peace? People such as Avicenna, and Moses Maimonides, could work together with entire peace, even discussing the ideas of the other. I don't think it is a poor example, as these three peoples had lived in tolerance for hundreds of years. Of course there was political factors behind it, such as the Europeans feeling threatened by the Arab presence in Europe. This region also existed like this in some form from the 8th century right up to the 15th century. That's significantly longer than most countries have existed.

Two people were able to chat, therefore it was a success? Poor example.

As for Israel being illegitimate due to colonisation. I don't think this is a fair example. If Israel was indeed the land of the ancestors, and if it was perceived to be some form of safe haven for the Jewish people, I think they have the right to live there, and should. Unless you are suggesting that the 5 million Jews in Israel relocate? As for being against the will of the majority that were in the region of the time, that's why the two state was offered instead of a single Israeli state which proponents such as the Stern Gang or the Lehi had sought through violence against British troops. However, the Palestinians rioted, and the Arabs tried to capture Israel. Alas, that failed. We should be seeking to work with what we have instead of trying to reverse Israel back out of existence. However, I celebrate Israel's existence so I'm not one of those who is seeking for Israel's end. I don't however, encourage violent acts against the Palestinians or vice versa. For me Israel had every right to come to existence.

It's very easy for you or I to take this for granted when we never had to deal with being vilified across Europe. Infact if you read Der Judenstaat by Herzl, just in the opening section, you will see that this is the primary reason he gives. Basically his argument is, since you hate us the Jews so much, why don't you let us found a State in our homeland Israel.

I can sympathise with the idea of an Israeli state, as long as the Palestinians are respected and honoured. Israel is currently failing in this duty. However, I would argue that Israel didn't create a nation out of thin air, but rather it was restoring a nation that their ancestors had lived in before, just as much as the Irish people restored the Irish nation from the British. Although comparing this with that example mightn't be too kosher, but it's a fair one.

dflopnep, I do see that as a fair one, if the Jewish people had been expelled from lands they had previously ruled by the Romans. This is the cause of their plight in Europe and surely this is fair to an extent, as long as the Palestinians are respected. Again which Israel is failing to do.

As for a claim ending due to 1000's of years, couldn't it be argued that the national claim to Palestine resulting from the colonization of Arabs in the 7th century could be seen as null and void due to basically 1400 years having passed? I guess a criticism only works when it suits your position.

All of this hinges upon a fundamentalist reading of the bible/torah. If that's your thing go for it, but don't expect me to have any regard for your view. I don't believe in the divine right of one community to take the property of another.