Does Israel have a right to exist?

[Bosco 1]

[gwenneh 7]

There is a school of thought that land belongs to the people who live on it, not the people who won it by battle. If everyone agreed that winning land in battle made it yours and you were free to do with it as you wished, there would be no conflict, no war.

If we follow that logic, then, couldn't Britain come back and claim the US colonies as theirs? After all, they stole it from the rightful inhabitants first...

one could also argue that america does not have the right to exist, since it was taken from the indians....

Precisely.

[almaty 19]

I vote yes. What do you think? For the purposes of this, disregard the current conflict in the region. Simply state whether or not you believe the nation as we know it today, has a right to exist.

i vote yes..of course..

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

There is a school of thought that land belongs to the people who live on it, not the people who won it by battle. If everyone agreed that winning land in battle made it yours and you were free to do with it as you wished, there would be no conflict, no war.

If we follow that logic, then, couldn't Britain come back and claim the US colonies as theirs? After all, they stole it from the rightful inhabitants first...

one could also argue that america does not have the right to exist, since it was taken from the indians....

Depends on which side of the argument you're on. If you believe winning land in battle makes it yours, America has a right to exist. If you do not, America does not.

[keltic 1]

If it was their land to deed as they wished...hm. Interesting.

There is a school of thought that land belongs to the people who live on it, not the people who won it by battle. If everyone agreed that winning land in battle made it yours and you were free to do with it as you wished, there would be no conflict, no war.

um... what does that say to the 12 million illegal immigrants here?

[Ban Hammer 13,671]

If it was their land to deed as they wished...hm. Interesting.

There is a school of thought that land belongs to the people who live on it, not the people who won it by battle. If everyone agreed that winning land in battle made it yours and you were free to do with it as you wished, there would be no conflict, no war.

um... what does that say to the 12 million illegal immigrants here?

hehehehe...i was waiting for someone to mention that, as i threw out the bait for it.

[gwenneh 7]

Depends on which side of the argument you're on. If you believe winning land in battle makes it yours, America has a right to exist. If you do not, America does not.

Further, if you believe that land is won in battle, then you believe Israel has a right to exist, as it was won in battle and the victors deeded it as they wished. So by believing in America's right to be a nation you also believe in Israel's?

[Fischkoepfin 1]

I voted yes because there's nothing we can do to change history. I believe Israel should exist in a different form (I prefer a secular one-state solution in which Arabs, Jews, and Christians have the same rights, etc.), but given the lack of restraint on both sides that is not going to happen any time soon. It might be a good idea if the Western nations stopped supporting Israel and the Arab League stopped taking the side of Palestinians because part of the problem is that the international community makes things much worse.

As to the historical situation, blame Zionism if you wish. As nationalisms rose in the 19th century and gave birth to previously non-existent identities (think Germany, Hungary, Mexico, and so on), some people of Jewish descent decided they had the same aspirations and started a movement to reclaim the ancient homeland. Of course, Jews had always lived in the area, but now people actually migrated to "Israel." The idea of a Jewish state was already discussed after WWI when the allies considered giving the territory to Zionist. Interestingly, until the crucial point in 1948 when Israel was founded, Jews and Arabs were living peacefully side by side.

[mercuryroad 0]

Ari,

My answer to the question is that it doesn't matter because Israel does exist.

People can say what if all day and it doesn't do anything. What we have to deal with is what is and what can be done to make things better.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Depends on which side of the argument you're on. If you believe winning land in battle makes it yours, America has a right to exist. If you do not, America does not.

Further, if you believe that land is won in battle, then you believe Israel has a right to exist, as it was won in battle and the victors deeded it as they wished. So by believing in America's right to be a nation you also believe in Israel's?

Pretty much.

[peejay 327]

There is a school of thought that land belongs to the people who live on it, not the people who won it by battle. If everyone agreed that winning land in battle made it yours and you were free to do with it as you wished, there would be no conflict, no war.

If we follow that logic, then, couldn't Britain come back and claim the US colonies as theirs? After all, they stole it from the rightful inhabitants first...

one could also argue that america does not have the right to exist, since it was taken from the indians....

Depends on which side of the argument you're on. If you believe winning land in battle makes it yours, America has a right to exist. If you do not, America does not.

Let's not forget that this would apply to the Spanish conquest of Mexico and the South American countries as well. The inhabitants with Spanish / European blood should move back to Spain and give the land back to the indigenous peoples.

Just thought I would throw that old cliche in that gets brought up repeatedly by America bashers when they use it to bash the USA.

[j&js 0]

Personally, I feel like the British specifically and the western world in general has a lot to answer for in regards to the messed up state of a lot of regions (Israel, Africa, etc etc) in the world today. Their earlier imperialism destroyed traditional cultures around the world and both tied different ethnic groups together and tore apart other ones. Then after WWI and even more so after having not helped stop the Holocaust, they felt guilty and they, or in some cases the UN, decided they had to stop the imperialism and just gave the land to those they felt most sorry to, which of course just made a bad situation worse in a lot of areas.

Besides that, the reason the Jews were 'given' Israel was that both the Europeans and the Americans at the time wanted nothing to do with them but also didn't want their poor state of affairs on their conscious.

AND another point to add on this whole situation, Israel was attacked by several Arab states almost immediately upon being created and Israel won the wars despite being such a new nation. People say they have taken land that wasn't theirs, but they won wars and then claimed land. Is that not how civilizations form and grow? Is that any different then how America was formed? Not really except that it happened way later in history. You look at Europe and its borders, how did they get there? Wars were fought and territory traded hands.

Just wanted to add that I mean no disrespect to anyone with different opinions or from any ethnic or religious group. I don't know how things could have been done differently to avoid problems. Various groups have claims to the same lands in several different parts of the world, and generally, I find that listening to each group, they all make sense and have valid points, who is to say which side is more right? so then what do you do? Whoever gets to the land and wins battles will get to claim it, and then there will be fights over it and debates, but the fighting will continue as long as each side feels they are entitled and that compromise is impossible.

[Fischkoepfin 1]

There is a school of thought that land belongs to the people who live on it, not the people who won it by battle. If everyone agreed that winning land in battle made it yours and you were free to do with it as you wished, there would be no conflict, no war.

If we follow that logic, then, couldn't Britain come back and claim the US colonies as theirs? After all, they stole it from the rightful inhabitants first...

one could also argue that america does not have the right to exist, since it was taken from the indians....

Depends on which side of the argument you're on. If you believe winning land in battle makes it yours, America has a right to exist. If you do not, America does not.

Let's not forget that this would apply to the Spanish conquest of Mexico and the South American countries as well. The inhabitants with Spanish / European blood should move back to Spain and give the land back to the indigenous peoples.

Just thought I would throw that old cliche in that gets brought up repeatedly by America bashers when they use it to bash the USA.

You're somewhat right, but overlook a crucial point. While the European colonizers in the US did everything to prevent mixed-raced children and aimed at maintaining not only their racial but also their ethnic purity, the Spanish colonizers were much more likely to racial miscegenation. Consequently, most South American are mulitracial descent of European colonizers, African slaves, and native Indian inhabitants. As such, they have married into the family and have thus a right to the land (or at least more so than US-inhabitants of European descent).

edit: deleted double post. sometimes my internet is just too slow...

Edited July 14, 2006 by Fischkoepfin

[Veiled Princess 1]

one could also argue that america does not have the right to exist, since it was taken from the indians....

It makes it pretty clear why America doesn't see Israel as being in the wrong here

Edited July 14, 2006 by veiledprincesslayla

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So, shouldn't people really be mad at the British??? j/k

Yes - we enjoyed the benefits of imperialism for a good 300 years. Yet what was good for the British wasn't necessarily good for the territories we occupied.

Same thing with the French - who's own experiment with empire has left much of Africa, a never ending quagmire of civil war and genocide.

Perhaps thats why europeans are so critical of the US. We recognise much of the same arrogance.