Scores die in Israeli air strikes

[Amir]

Well, Israel is definately a racist country in some way. I mean, the national anthem alone says it all, one of its lines mentions 'a jewish heart'. Of course, you have to realise Israel has become a country in 1948, just three years after millions of jewish people were murdered just for being jewish, so the whole idea was to create a country of jewish people, for jewish people, where they will all feel safe.

60 years on, I believe that foundation is old and should be updated. However, for many in Israel, we are still a small country surrounded by enemies. Even though it's been 60 years, survival here is still our main target. As Netanyahu once said - a rare time I agree with him - If Israel's neighbours disarm, there will be no war. If Israel disarms, there will be no Israel.

It's a sad state of affairs, but it's based upon 60 years of fighting that never seems to end. It's survival instinct, based on a very real massacre of six million people. We'll never allow for it to happen again, no matter what. Sometimes it looks extreme, but protecting your life normally is.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

So had we had a thread about the Falklands war I'd r take it that you'd bring up the fact that England has a minor theocratic aspect???

This thread just flat out confuses me sometimes. I wouldn't have posted in a thread about the Falklands war as I know very little about it.

My post about Israel being a nation defined by race or religion, and that being a negative thing, was in response to the article by Ruud_boy_10 about the nature of the Israeli state.

 

[Fearless]

This thread just flat out confuses me sometimes. I wouldn't have posted in a thread about the Falklands war as I know very little about it.

My post about Israel being a nation defined by race or religion, and that being a negative thing, was in response to the article by Ruud_boy_10 about the nature of the Israeli state.

You should go to Israel.

Never will you see such exotic mixture of creeds, races and religions inter mingle. Th UK is far more segragated in many ways.

And you can shag on the beach.

 

[Amir]

I dont think there is any doubt about who killed the young boy on that day.

Im afraid not everyone in Israel agrees with you.
http://comment.independent.co.uk/com...cle1197235.ece

Regarding the boy, there have been some investigation - in France, I believe - which came up with different results. We'll never truly know, but like I said before - when guns fire, innocent get hurt.

As for the professor, people have different ideas, that's fine. There have been demonstrations in Israel involving jewish people against the operation in Gaza. It's a minority, but it exists.

As someone who has been around for 'just' 29 years, I can say with all my heart that Israel does not strike for fun. Yes, our responses sometimes look severe, maybe even cruel, but they are always responses. Gaza would not have been harmed had they not fired missiles; We would have done nothing in Lebanon had Hizbullah not fired missiles at our cities and kidnapped soldiers from our own territory. But once these things happen, all bets are off.

 

[Sultan]

Amir has been an absolute gem in this thread. I wish he posted more on the Israeli/Palestinian issue.

 

[Amir]

Amir has been an absolute gem in this thread. I wish he posted more on the Israeli/Palestinian issue.

Dear oh dear, that's the last thing I want. Let me discuss United all day and forget about the rotten situation here.

 

[Nucks]

The Athenian city state preceded Philip of Macedon and his megalomaniac offspring by a century or two.

Depends where you identify the basis of western values and culture as representing 'our' civilisation.

Yes but it was Alexander who exported those values to the rest of the world.

He was the turning point, up until that point Asia and Asian cultures dominated. Alexander demarcates the exact point in history in which the scales tipped.

 

[Nucks]

Dear oh dear, that's the last thing I want. Let me discuss United all day and forget about the rotten situation here.

I'm curious about the integration of Arabs into Israel. How common is it? How are they treated?

My understanding is that while it may not be the most common thing, and other than travel restrictions into specific "hotspots" Arabs who choose to live in Israel and integrate enjoy the same civil liberties that the Jews in Israel do.

 

[Ruud_boy_10]

Regarding the boy, there have been some investigation - in France, I believe - which came up with different results. We'll never truly know, but like I said before - when guns fire, innocent get hurt.

As for the professor, people have different ideas, that's fine. There have been demonstrations in Israel involving jewish people against the operation in Gaza. It's a minority, but it exists.

As someone who has been around for 'just' 29 years, I can say with all my heart that Israel does not strike for fun. Yes, our responses sometimes look severe, maybe even cruel, but they are always responses. Gaza would not have been harmed had they not fired missiles; We would have done nothing in Lebanon had Hizbullah not fired missiles at our cities and kidnapped soldiers from our own territory. But once these things happen, all bets are off.

You make it sound as if Israel is innocent in all of this which is very naïve. There are many extremist and hardliners in Israel who if they were given a platform on the world stage would utterly disgust the international community and make Ahmadinejad look like a saint. I guess in the end it’s a matter of perception and interpretation but I wish you would be a bit more objective. So here is a little perspective:

1. Hamas is the DEMOCRATICALLY elected representatives of the Palestinian people. If you don’t recognise Hamas, then you don’t believe in democracy.

2. Israel broke the ceasefire many times and that is why Hamas continue to fire the rockets. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians

3. Israel continues to impose draconian sanctions on the Palestinians people as punishment for voting in Hamas, leaving many without running water or electricity. Nothing goes in or out of Gaza or the West Bank without Israeli approval.

The point I’m trying to make is that neither side is without blame and the sooner that the Israeli’s accept that they are NOT the people of god and that they are not whiter than white then maybe a lasting peace could be reached. I, unlike many people on this forum, believe peace in the Middle East is a realist goal.

 

[AlwaysRedwood]

Well, Israel is definately a racist country in some way. I mean, the national anthem alone says it all, one of its lines mentions 'a jewish heart'. Of course, you have to realise Israel has become a country in 1948, just three years after millions of jewish people were murdered just for being jewish, so the whole idea was to create a country of jewish people, for jewish people, where they will all feel safe.

60 years on, I believe that foundation is old and should be updated. However, for many in Israel, we are still a small country surrounded by enemies. Even though it's been 60 years, survival here is still our main target. As Netanyahu once said - a rare time I agree with him - If Israel's neighbours disarm, there will be no war. If Israel disarms, there will be no Israel.

It's a sad state of affairs, but it's based upon 60 years of fighting that never seems to end. It's survival instinct, based on a very real massacre of six million people. We'll never allow for it to happen again, no matter what. Sometimes it looks extreme, but protecting your life normally is.

At some point, Israel will be wiped off the map if the current situation continues. Seems inevitable and quite obvious.

Good luck with everything, but from here it looks like only one way out, unless there are massive changes.

 

[holyland red]

I'm curious about the integration of Arabs into Israel. How common is it? How are they treated?

My understanding is that while it may not be the most common thing, and other than travel restrictions into specific "hotspots" Arabs who choose to live in Israel and integrate enjoy the same civil liberties that the Jews in Israel do.

I posted this a while ago, and I think it kinds of answers your question. While Arabs do face more difficulties than Jews in Israel, the complications of the ME political climate make some of them a necessity. Things could be better for Israeli Arabs but they certainly share some (imo, the majority)of the blame. Still:

More equality than in Europe
By Amnon Rubinstein

The gap between the rich and relatively advanced State of Israel and the lagging Arab world has much increased (the Arab states are at the bottom of the United Nations' Human Development Index, behind South American, Caribbean, and Southeast Asian countries) and is liable to be another obstacle in the future of relationships between Jews and Arabs in the Middle East. In Israel itself, however, despite the events of the last two years, equality between Jews and Muslims has grown in many aspects. Data from the health authorities, at least, attest to a better situation than in Western countries.

The data from the health authorities are most important because they measure not only the welfare of society but also its relations to the minorities living within it and because the right to health, which is one of the human rights, is actually the right to life and is of utmost importance. The UN, therefore, also views the data on infant mortality - perhaps the most important indicator for measuring public health - as the most important component of the Human Development Index. Infant mortality indexes are also considered the most reliable and can be compared internationally.

In Israel, there are gaps between the infant mortality rates among Jews and among Muslim Arabs. In 2001, the infant mortality rate among Arabs was 7.6 per thousand live births (Muslim Arabs, 8.2; Christian Arabs 2.6; Druze, 4.7), while among Jews it was 4.1. This is a substantial gap, which the Health Ministry explains is caused mainly by marriages between close relatives. It is worth noting, however, that the gaps in this area are shrinking at a truly impressive rate. During the years 1955-59, the infant mortality rate among Muslims was 60.6 per thousand - while among Jews it was 38.8 per thousand (take note, you who miss "the good old Israel"). The relationship between the two sets of figures may not have changed much, but the massive drop in infant mortality in the Muslim sector also brought this sector closer to Western rates.

An even more important fact is that the infant mortality gaps in Israel are lower than between Muslim minorities living in some Western countries and those of the local population. Researchers from the International Organization for Migration, based in Geneva, published data on these rates for the first time in 2000. In France, for example, the rate of stillbirths per thousand live births was 8 among the French and 13 among Arabs from North Africa. The mortality rates for babies up to one week old were 6 and 15 respectively. This means that the fetal and early infancy deaths among Arabs are more than twice that among the French majority.

In rich and developed France, the infant mortality rates among Arabs (most of whom speak the language of the country, and some of whom are already second, third and fourth generation natives of France) are not only much higher than in Israel - the gap between the minority and the majority there is considerably larger than in "racist Israel." These numbers speak for Israel more than dozens of anti-Semitic articles and anti-Israel resolutions.

In general the gaps in infant mortality rates between majorities and minorities - even when there is no national conflict between them - are higher even in the richest of countries. In Switzerland, the infant mortality rates per thousand for Swiss and Turks are 8.2 and 12.3, respectively. In Britain, 7.8 and 5.6 (English and Pakistanis). The situation is worst in the United States, where the rate for whites is 8.5 and for blacks, an astounding 21.3.

Against this background, it seems Israel's accomplishments are great, considering this is a country less wealthy than those mentioned above and one under conditions of severe national conflict between the majority and the minority. We must not suffice with this achievement. On the contrary, it proves that even under such conditions, Israel can reach full equality in every aspect of life between members of the Jewish majority and the national Arab minority.

 

[holyland red]

Well, Israel is definately a racist country in some way. I mean, the national anthem alone says it all, one of its lines mentions 'a jewish heart'. Of course, you have to realise Israel has become a country in 1948, just three years after millions of jewish people were murdered just for being jewish, so the whole idea was to create a country of jewish people, for jewish people, where they will all feel safe.

60 years on, I believe that foundation is old and should be updated. However, for many in Israel, we are still a small country surrounded by enemies. Even though it's been 60 years, survival here is still our main target. As Netanyahu once said - a rare time I agree with him - If Israel's neighbours disarm, there will be no war. If Israel disarms, there will be no Israel.

It's a sad state of affairs, but it's based upon 60 years of fighting that never seems to end. It's survival instinct, based on a very real massacre of six million people. We'll never allow for it to happen again, no matter what. Sometimes it looks extreme, but protecting your life normally is.

Good attempt at trying to be as objective as one can, but you took it a bit too far right there. Is Briatian racist for having the St. George cross on their national falg? How about Scandinavian countries? The state of Israel has difficulties in defining the national identity, but that alone does not make it racist.
As you say, after centuries of being singled out as a people/race it's a bit rich arguing that the Jews should simply integrate with surrounding cultures and disappear as a separate independent nation. In a way it's similar for the persecution of Jews for their money-grabbing genetic traits which was followed by killing them for being communists.

 

[holyland red]

At some point, Israel will be wiped off the map if the current situation continues. Seems inevitable and quite obvious.

Good luck with everything, but from here it looks like only one way out, unless there are massive changes.

More than just Israel will be wiped off the map if the current situation continues.

 

[holyland red]

There is definitely something immoral and unjust about defining a nation based on race or religion. And that is largely what Israel is.

There is something immoral in forcing utopian ideals regardless of cultural differences, history and human nature.

The recent conflict in the Balkans suggests shades of grey between your ideal world and nationalism.

 

[Fitzjames]

More than just Israel will be wiped off the map if the current situation continues.

Probably true. But no need for the rest of us to worry.

 

[holyland red]

Probably true. But no need for the rest of us to worry.

You don't have to worry at all as long as the potato crops are fine

 

[Mozza]

I posted this a while ago, and I think it kinds of answers your question. While Arabs do face more difficulties than Jews in Israel, the complications of the ME political climate make some of them a necessity. Things could be better for Israeli Arabs but they certainly share some (imo, the majority)of the blame. Still:

More equality than in Europe
By Amnon Rubinstein

The gap between the rich and relatively advanced State of Israel and the lagging Arab world has much increased (the Arab states are at the bottom of the United Nations' Human Development Index, behind South American, Caribbean, and Southeast Asian countries) and is liable to be another obstacle in the future of relationships between Jews and Arabs in the Middle East. In Israel itself, however, despite the events of the last two years, equality between Jews and Muslims has grown in many aspects. Data from the health authorities, at least, attest to a better situation than in Western countries.

The data from the health authorities are most important because they measure not only the welfare of society but also its relations to the minorities living within it and because the right to health, which is one of the human rights, is actually the right to life and is of utmost importance. The UN, therefore, also views the data on infant mortality - perhaps the most important indicator for measuring public health - as the most important component of the Human Development Index. Infant mortality indexes are also considered the most reliable and can be compared internationally.

In Israel, there are gaps between the infant mortality rates among Jews and among Muslim Arabs. In 2001, the infant mortality rate among Arabs was 7.6 per thousand live births (Muslim Arabs, 8.2; Christian Arabs 2.6; Druze, 4.7), while among Jews it was 4.1. This is a substantial gap, which the Health Ministry explains is caused mainly by marriages between close relatives. It is worth noting, however, that the gaps in this area are shrinking at a truly impressive rate. During the years 1955-59, the infant mortality rate among Muslims was 60.6 per thousand - while among Jews it was 38.8 per thousand (take note, you who miss "the good old Israel"). The relationship between the two sets of figures may not have changed much, but the massive drop in infant mortality in the Muslim sector also brought this sector closer to Western rates.

An even more important fact is that the infant mortality gaps in Israel are lower than between Muslim minorities living in some Western countries and those of the local population. Researchers from the International Organization for Migration, based in Geneva, published data on these rates for the first time in 2000. In France, for example, the rate of stillbirths per thousand live births was 8 among the French and 13 among Arabs from North Africa. The mortality rates for babies up to one week old were 6 and 15 respectively. This means that the fetal and early infancy deaths among Arabs are more than twice that among the French majority.

In rich and developed France, the infant mortality rates among Arabs (most of whom speak the language of the country, and some of whom are already second, third and fourth generation natives of France) are not only much higher than in Israel - the gap between the minority and the majority there is considerably larger than in "racist Israel." These numbers speak for Israel more than dozens of anti-Semitic articles and anti-Israel resolutions.

In general the gaps in infant mortality rates between majorities and minorities - even when there is no national conflict between them - are higher even in the richest of countries. In Switzerland, the infant mortality rates per thousand for Swiss and Turks are 8.2 and 12.3, respectively. In Britain, 7.8 and 5.6 (English and Pakistanis). The situation is worst in the United States, where the rate for whites is 8.5 and for blacks, an astounding 21.3.

Against this background, it seems Israel's accomplishments are great, considering this is a country less wealthy than those mentioned above and one under conditions of severe national conflict between the majority and the minority. We must not suffice with this achievement. On the contrary, it proves that even under such conditions, Israel can reach full equality in every aspect of life between members of the Jewish majority and the national Arab minority.

I've dismantled that article previous because it does not comapre the same thing, doesn't matter to you ofcourse

 

[vijay]

Well, Israel is definately a racist country in some way. I mean, the national anthem alone says it all, one of its lines mentions 'a jewish heart'. Of course, you have to realise Israel has become a country in 1948, just three years after millions of jewish people were murdered just for being jewish, so the whole idea was to create a country of jewish people, for jewish people, where they will all feel safe.

60 years on, I believe that foundation is old and should be updated. However, for many in Israel, we are still a small country surrounded by enemies. Even though it's been 60 years, survival here is still our main target. As Netanyahu once said - a rare time I agree with him - If Israel's neighbours disarm, there will be no war. If Israel disarms, there will be no Israel.

It's a sad state of affairs, but it's based upon 60 years of fighting that never seems to end. It's survival instinct, based on a very real massacre of six million people. We'll never allow for it to happen again, no matter what. Sometimes it looks extreme, but protecting your life normally is.

Even before 60 years the foundation laid was Neanderthal, taken a leaf from Hitlers theories of compassion, a revamp is required rather than a updation yet your folk wont show too much interest, as the damage done on either sides is beyond repair.

At some point, Israel will be wiped off the map if the current situation continues. Seems inevitable and quite obvious.

Good luck with everything, but from here it looks like only one way out, unless there are massive changes.

Israel would continue to exist as long as jews can pull the strings in the American government, Jewish votes, their influence in their external affairs ministry or for the fear of being labeled anti semitic, the recent stance of Americans against Jihadis whomsoever gets elected would continue to give moral and diplomatic support to Israel.

Israel is the common axis for Arab countries or Islam as a whole unite together, once Israel caeses to exist, its only a matter of time they don their cannibal hats back and cancel out each other.

 

[holyland red]

I've dismantled that article previous because it does not comapre the same thing, doesn't matter to you ofcourse

Of course you have, only that I thought it would benefit some posters if they could form an opinion for themselves based on the presented data.

 

[topper]

I'm afraid you'll have to get used to it.

great post - as usual

 

[Amir]

You make it sound as if Israel is innocent in all of this which is very naïve. There are many extremist and hardliners in Israel who if they were given a platform on the world stage would utterly disgust the international community and make Ahmadinejad look like a saint. I guess in the end it’s a matter of perception and interpretation but I wish you would be a bit more objective. So here is a little perspective:

1. Hamas is the DEMOCRATICALLY elected representatives of the Palestinian people. If you don’t recognise Hamas, then you don’t believe in democracy.

2. Israel broke the ceasefire many times and that is why Hamas continue to fire the rockets. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians

3. Israel continues to impose draconian sanctions on the Palestinians people as punishment for voting in Hamas, leaving many without running water or electricity. Nothing goes in or out of Gaza or the West Bank without Israeli approval.

The point I’m trying to make is that neither side is without blame and the sooner that the Israeli’s accept that they are NOT the people of god and that they are not whiter than white then maybe a lasting peace could be reached. I, unlike many people on this forum, believe peace in the Middle East is a realist goal.

Mate, I know all about the extremists and hardliners. A few of them are even members of our parlament. However, they will NEVER come into true power (a few seats out of 120 is very little power). They will always be a minority, and so will their voters. I'm sure you'll disagree and say one never knows what might happen, but seriously, it won't, it can't in our democratic system.

As for the rest:

1) Since Hamas has been considered by Israel (and other countries) a TERRORIST GROUP for years and has (and still does) refuses to accept Israel's existance, did you honestly expect us to recognize them once they became democratically elected? When Arafat made strides we've talked to him, eventually accepted him as the palestenian leader even though he was once considered by Israel a terrorist. But Hamas has done nothing of the sort.

2) That discussion was done a few pages ago. You've got the link from November, someone else brought a link from June, four days after the ceasefire started, that describes how missiles from Gaza landed in Israel.

3) You are absolutely right. That is what we do. And as long as missiles are still fired at us, we will continue doing so. What else do you expect us to? We've already seen in the past that Hamas does not hesitate to use whatever we do allow to go through for itself, rather than the people he is responsible for. And yet, we have given them electricity from our own power plants even after the missiles started. I'd love to know what country would do that. A kamikaze one. maybe.

I, too, believe peace is a realistic target. I also know we are not holier than the pope (well, the rabbi. Ah, who cares. I'm not into religion). However, peace has been the number one target for each of our govenments for the past 17 years or so. We've made peace with Jordan, we've made strides with the palestenians, only for things to blow up in our faces.

When we retreated from lands around Gaza in 2006, already at a time when missiles were fired at us, our message was clear: You've been given something without any conditions, but one - if you use that to simply fire at us from closer range, we WILL retaliate and have EVERY justification. It was a chance for Hamas to build bridges with Israel, show good intentions just like we did, and, well, what have they done? Started firing at us from closer range. And still we have been quiet for over two years, while you know perfectly well ANY other country would have reacted like we are now.

So, while we're not perfect and in many aspects I'm a very harsh critic of my country, I can't accept it, not this time. That is not something we've wanted. We've delayed it for as long as possible, but maybe things have to get a lot worse before they get a lot better.

 

[kuanteen]

Yes but it was Alexander who exported those values to the rest of the world.

He was the turning point, up until that point Asia and Asian cultures dominated. Alexander demarcates the exact point in history in which the scales tipped.

You mean in the Middle East circa 200 BC?

In Asia, Asian cultures still dominate today...Its a funny thing trying to discuss the meaning of dominance and culture as they're very shifty things. For instance, how Western is Christianity? Why are some English users not very English? Is democracy today really the Athenian sort?

 

[Amir]

I'm curious about the integration of Arabs into Israel. How common is it? How are they treated?

My understanding is that while it may not be the most common thing, and other than travel restrictions into specific "hotspots" Arabs who choose to live in Israel and integrate enjoy the same civil liberties that the Jews in Israel do.

Basically, they've got the same liberties I've got, and they don't serve in the army. A work with a young arab woman who is no different from anyone else in Tel Aviv, but clearly under the surface it's never that simple.

A basic fact I mentioned previously - our national anthem has a line about 'the soul of a jew', for instance. When our national football team plays - and over the years it always had players of arab origins, one of them even scored against United while playing for Wimbledon - there will always be those who criticise them for not singing the anthem, even though you wonder how anyone can expect them to sing of a jewish soul!

But, when things like the latest Gaza attacks occur, a lot of the so called arab-integrated citizens do tend to show support for the palestenians. There have been demonstrations by arab citizens, there's been strong criticism from arab parlament members of our attacks - both from arab parties and parties such as Labour which also has arab members - while you didn't really hear any of them while Sderot has been attacked for years.

It's not one sided, though. Not every jewish person accepts the co existance within our country. You'd always find those who say arabs should not be in the parlament, and those who consider them terror from within waiting to happen. The fact parlament member Azmy Bshara escaped Israel when he was suspected of passing information to Hizbullah during the second Lebanon war, and will clearly never return, certainly didn't help.

So I'd say it's a pretty peaceful co existance, but things always tend to bubble under the surface.

 

[Amir]

At some point, Israel will be wiped off the map if the current situation continues. Seems inevitable and quite obvious.

Good luck with everything, but from here it looks like only one way out, unless there are massive changes.

I'd say country wiping is quite difficult these days, especially when you have a pal like Uncle Sam. Still, Israel remains committed to peace and will always strive to achieve that. We simply don't believe we have someone to make peace with at the present time. Hopefully that will change.

If anyone offers me british citizenship I'll be on the next plane, though.

 

[Amir]

Good attempt at trying to be as objective as one can, but you took it a bit too far right there. Is Briatian racist for having the St. George cross on their national falg? How about Scandinavian countries? The state of Israel has difficulties in defining the national identity, but that alone does not make it racist.
As you say, after centuries of being singled out as a people/race it's a bit rich arguing that the Jews should simply integrate with surrounding cultures and disappear as a separate independent nation.

Perhaps the example I've chosen was not the best, but I do believe Israel is a pretty close minded country when it comes to foreigners. Too close minded for my liking, but yeah - looking at the history of the jewish people, you can definately understand it.

 

[Red-Wedge]

There is definitely something immoral and unjust about defining a nation based on race or religion. And that is largely what Israel is.

That’s technically true.
So if it makes things easier we can define Israel as “an irrational, immoral, unjust yet DUE compensation to having been attacked and denied rights for about 20 centuries on race and religion grounds”.

I mean, if they can’t be what they are where they are, why not give them a place where no-one will annoy them?
There wouldn’t even be the need for an Israel in the first place hadn’t the Jews been the target of almost everyone on the planet for 2,000 years.

 

[AlwaysRedwood]

Israel would continue to exist as long as jews can pull the strings in the American government, Jewish votes, their influence in their external affairs ministry or for the fear of being labeled anti semitic, the recent stance of Americans against Jihadis whomsoever gets elected would continue to give moral and diplomatic support to Israel.

No it won't. It will eventually be wiped off the map by a nuke. Someone will carry smuggle one in and set it off. You can't be surrounded by enemies with today's weapons and not have it all end in an ugly, ugly fashion.

A US city will be nuked within 20 years as well.

It's inevitable.

 

[AlwaysRedwood]

Still, Israel remains committed to peace and will always strive to achieve that.

Thanks for the laugh. Israel is as bloodthirsty as it's enemies. You eventually become what you hate and Israel seems to be there.

 

[Amir]

Thanks for the laugh. Israel is as bloodthirsty as it's enemies. You eventually become what you hate and Israel seems to be there.

No we're not, no we won't. Mind you, when I look at how we look like through what you see on worldwide TV, Newspapers and websites, I can't blame you for taking that view. But what you see is NOT what you get.

 

[Mozza]

Of course you have, only that I thought it would benefit some posters if they could form an opinion for themselves based on the presented data.

The presented data is not of the same statistic, the article however compares them as is they are the same, it is poorly disguised propaganda

 

[Nucks]

You mean in the Middle East circa 200 BC?

In Asia, Asian cultures still dominate today...Its a funny thing trying to discuss the meaning of dominance and culture as they're very shifty things. For instance, how Western is Christianity? Why are some English users not very English? Is democracy today really the Athenian sort?

I would suggest that more than the democracy that emerged in Athens it is the way people think in terms of philosophy, morality etc that defined "western civilization". Western Civilization is an extremely simplistic, awkward and often incorrect way to describe it but when you say western civilization most people immediately understand what you are referring to ;p

Consider that Europe is little more than a peninsula on the Asian continent I would argue that Asian culture dominated the old world until Alexander. Sure in the far east Asian culture continued to dominate but that had as much to do with geography (Himalayas) as with the self inflicted isolationism that the Chinese imposed on themselves.

 

[Nucks]

No it won't. It will eventually be wiped off the map by a nuke. Someone will carry smuggle one in and set it off. You can't be surrounded by enemies with today's weapons and not have it all end in an ugly, ugly fashion.

A US city will be nuked within 20 years as well.

It's inevitable.

I don't think anyone is going to nuke Israel, the idea of nuking the holy land would seem to be pretty unthinkable, even to the most hardline radicalized Muslims.

Israels military readiness and willingness means that even if a Pan-Arab league invaded, Israel would probably walk all over them. I'm hard pressed to think of a more capable military force on the planet per capita. The way to defeat Israel is through unconventional asymmetrical warfare and even then defeat is highly unlikely. Certainly Egypt, Syria, Jordan and the rest would get bombed to the stone age in about 2 weeks if they attempted a conventional war.

 

[holyland red]

Perhaps the example I've chosen was not the best, but I do believe Israel is a pretty close minded country when it comes to foreigners. Too close minded for my liking, but yeah - looking at the history of the jewish people, you can definately understand it.

Maybe I can offer some help with portraying Israel as racist. For example, funding graduate students on a racial basis:

Research discipline(s): biotechnology, Life Sciences, agriculture, aquaculture, biotechnology, environmental sciences, medical sciences
Type of Funding: Fellowships
For Other Types of Funding: click here

Description:
The purpose of this program is to support the academic career chances of Druze, Arab, and Circassian doctoral students at Israeli universities in the fields of:
Nanotechnology, physics, photonics
Space research
Advanced materials, chemistry, energy
Biotechnology, bio-medicine, bio-medical engineering
Agriculture, environment, water
Information and teleprocessing, applied mathematics
Applied social sciences and science policy


Eligibility: PhD students
Total Amount: NIS 30,000
Submission Deadline: 27/11/08

Additional Information:
DEADLINE HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO: 27/11/2008 BY 12:00 NOON.
The scholarship amount available to doctoral students is 30,000 NIS

 

[holyland red]

What many are failing to see is that despite what seems as just another round of violence in the region, there are some substantial geo-political developments in the region that make it very different to what we've seen in conflicts prior to 2006.

The threat of Iran and it's terrorist branches of Hizballah and (more recently) Hammas led major Arab countries to the realization that Israel is in fact not their major enemy. As in the 2006 war, we don't witness now the instinctive Israel-bashing we've gotten used to from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and even the PA. Obviously these regimes can't openly justify Israel's actions because their people are so well-indocrinated in hating Israel, but there is a realization in the Arab world that extremism (mostly of their own making) is coming to bite them in the arse.

 

[Devil_forever]

I found an interesting article here:

Johann Hari: The true story behind this war is not the one Israel is telling
The world isn't just watching the Israeli government commit a crime in Gaza; we are watching it self-harm. This morning, and tomorrow morning, and every morning until this punishment beating ends, the young people of the Gaza Strip are going to be more filled with hate, and more determined to fight back, with stones or suicide vests or rockets. Israeli leaders have convinced themselves that the harder you beat the Palestinians, the softer they will become. But when this is over, the rage against Israelis will have hardened, and the same old compromises will still be waiting by the roadside of history, untended and unmade.

To understand how frightening it is to be a Gazan this morning, you need to have stood in that small slab of concrete by the Mediterranean and smelled the claustrophobia. The Gaza Strip is smaller than the Isle of Wight but it is crammed with 1.5 million people who can never leave. They live out their lives on top of each other, jobless and hungry, in vast, sagging tower blocks. From the top floor, you can often see the borders of their world: the Mediterranean, and Israeli barbed wire. When bombs begin to fall – as they are doing now with more deadly force than at any time since 1967 – there is nowhere to hide.

There will now be a war over the story of this war. The Israeli government says, "We withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and in return we got Hamas and Qassam rockets being rained on our cities. Sixteen civilians have been murdered. How many more are we supposed to sacrifice?" It is a plausible narrative, and there are shards of truth in it, but it is also filled with holes. If we want to understand the reality and really stop the rockets, we need to rewind a few years and view the run-up to this war dispassionately.

The Israeli government did indeed withdraw from the Gaza Strip in 2005 – in order to be able to intensify control of the West Bank. Ariel Sharon's senior adviser, Dov Weisglass, was unequivocal about this, explaining: "The disengagement [from Gaza] is actually formaldehyde. It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so that there will not be a political process with the Palestinians... this whole package that is called the Palestinian state has been removed from our agenda indefinitely."

Ordinary Palestinians were horrified by this, and by the fetid corruption of their own Fatah leaders, so they voted for Hamas. It certainly wouldn't have been my choice – an Islamist party is antithetical to all my convictions - but we have to be honest. It was a free and democratic election, and it was not a rejection of a two-state solution. The most detailed polling of Palestinians, by the University of Maryland, found that 72 per cent want a two-state solution on the 1967 borders, while fewer than 20 per cent want to reclaim the whole of historic Palestine. So, partly in response to this pressure, Hamas offered Israel a long, long ceasefire and a de facto acceptance of two states, if only Israel would return to its legal borders.

Rather than seize this opportunity and test Hamas's sincerity, the Israeli government reacted by punishing the entire civilian population. It announced that it was blockading the Gaza Strip in order to "pressure" its people to reverse the democratic process. The Israelis surrounded the Strip and refused to let anyone or anything out. They let in a small trickle of food, fuel and medicine – but not enough for survival. Weisglass quipped that the Gazans were being "put on a diet". According to Oxfam, only 137 trucks of food were allowed into Gaza last month to feed 1.5 million people. The United Nations says poverty has reached an "unprecedented level." When I was last in besieged Gaza, I saw hospitals turning away the sick because their machinery and medicine was running out. I met hungry children stumbling around the streets, scavenging for food.

It was in this context – under a collective punishment designed to topple a democracy – that some forces within Gaza did something immoral: they fired Qassam rockets indiscriminately at Israeli cities. These rockets have killed 16 Israeli citizens. This is abhorrent: targeting civilians is always murder. But it is hypocritical for the Israeli government to claim now to speak out for the safety of civilians when it has been terrorising civilians as a matter of state policy.

The American and European governments are responding with a lop-sidedness that ignores these realities. They say that Israel cannot be expected to negotiate while under rocket fire, but they demand that the Palestinians do so under siege in Gaza and violent military occupation in the West Bank.

Before it falls down the memory hole, we should remember that last week, Hamas offered a ceasefire in return for basic and achievable compromises. Don't take my word for it. According to the Israeli press, Yuval Diskin, the current head of the Israeli security service Shin Bet, "told the Israeli cabinet [on 23 December] that Hamas is interested in continuing the truce, but wants to improve its terms." Diskin explained that Hamas was requesting two things: an end to the blockade, and an Israeli ceasefire on the West Bank. The cabinet – high with election fever and eager to appear tough – rejected these terms.

The core of the situation has been starkly laid out by Ephraim Halevy, the former head of Mossad. He says that while Hamas militants – like much of the Israeli right-wing – dream of driving their opponents away, "they have recognised this ideological goal is not attainable and will not be in the foreseeable future." Instead, "they are ready and willing to see the establishment of a Palestinian state in the temporary borders of 1967." They are aware that this means they "will have to adopt a path that could lead them far from their original goals" – and towards a long-term peace based on compromise.

The rejectionists on both sides – from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran to Bibi Netanyahu of Israel – would then be marginalised. It is the only path that could yet end in peace but it is the Israeli government that refuses to choose it. Halevy explains: "Israel, for reasons of its own, did not want to turn the ceasefire into the start of a diplomatic process with Hamas."

Why would Israel act this way? The Israeli government wants peace, but only one imposed on its own terms, based on the acceptance of defeat by the Palestinians. It means the Israelis can keep the slabs of the West Bank on "their" side of the wall. It means they keep the largest settlements and control the water supply. And it means a divided Palestine, with responsibility for Gaza hived off to Egypt, and the broken-up West Bank standing alone. Negotiations threaten this vision: they would require Israel to give up more than it wants to. But an imposed peace will be no peace at all: it will not stop the rockets or the rage. For real safety, Israel will have to talk to the people it is blockading and bombing today, and compromise with them.

The sound of Gaza burning should be drowned out by the words of the Israeli writer Larry Derfner. He says: "Israel's war with Gaza has to be the most one-sided on earth... If the point is to end it, or at least begin to end it, the ball is not in Hamas's court – it is in ours."

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-the-true-story-behind-this-war-is-not-the-one-israel-is-telling-1214981.html

What Israel is doing is not self defence (400 killed in return for 4?) and the pictures I've seen has only increased my rage at the US' reluctantcy to condemned isreal. Israel has just created itself a new set of enemies and the children that have seen their parents and family be blown to pieces will strap a bomb to their chest and do the same to Israelis (terrorism? would you blame them for retaliating?)

A question to those who feel that Israel is valid in its actions, would be saying the same thing is the situation was reversed and you saw Jewish fathers carrying their dead children in their arms?.......thought not.

 

[Amir]

A question to those who feel that Israel is valid in its actions, would be saying the same thing is the situation was reversed and you saw Jewish fathers carrying their dead children in their arms?.......thought not.

As has been repeated time and time again, probably every single one of us here would have reacted different had he been involved. Either as the Palestenian in Gaza, or the Israeli in Sderot. Fortunately for most people here, they are not a direct part of it and are being fed by whatever news channels choose to broadcast or different articles, like the one you've provided - which is clearly not entirely false, yet not entirely true either, and certainly comes with it's own agenda - and others who will say just the opposite.

 

[holyland red]

A question to those who feel that Israel is valid in its actions, would be saying the same thing is the situation was reversed and you saw Jewish fathers carrying their dead children in their arms?.......thought not.

I don't think that posting horrible pictures of the innocent victims of the conflict make your argument stronger. We lost three civilians yesterday, and thankfully we don't use photos of their dead bodies to back our case. Quite sad, if not really surprising, that The Independent adopts the Al Jazeera standards.

 

[utdalltheway]

origin.

understood fearless but still not much of an influence. I'd hope Obama's view and actions on the ME will be fair and balanced. one can hope, right?

 

[Kaos]

I don't think that posting horrible pictures of the innocent victims of the conflict make your argument stronger. We lost three civilians yesterday, and thankfully we don't use photos of their dead bodies to back our case. Quite sad, if not really surprising, that The Independent adopts the Al Jazeera standards.

I've been watching the English version of that and it by far gives the most accurate and honest interpretation of events IMO. They tend to reveal information none of the western media would dare do so.

 

[Kaos]

understood fearless but still not much of an influence. I'd hope Obama's view and actions on the ME will be fair and balanced. one can hope, right?

Anything more balanced that Bush would be a step up - this arsehole was essentially an Israeli agent.