Thread: Should Israel exist

It doesn't say anything anti-semitic at all in the title or in the overall content of this thread. It is a debate on the existence of the of Israel which is a valid topic. Obviously, you don't see this topic as valid so would you care to post why? Perhaps, it will be a nice read

Originally posted by SeptCore
I can't believe this topic wasn't locked yet..... somebody posted a topic saying he's a racist and got almost imediatly locked.... being a nazi and being anti-jews is just as bad...

That is the problem with the mania toward shutting down Free Speech in the name of a extremely sensitive and positively protective AntiSemitism. If Hitler had had the same Free Pass in regards to Teutonic Supremacy as the Jews now have for Zionism, that is Jewish Racial Supremacy, he would have conquerred the World and we would now all be thanking him for the privelege.

So thankyou, Ms Weinberg, for your opinion.

Originally posted by Leo Volont


So thankyou, Ms Weinberg, for your opinion.

Way to sound smart. Oh wait...nevermind.. what I meant was like an ass.

Originally posted by bochen4



mongreloctopus,

You actions are not delightful in the eyes of God.

There is a forum for naughty christ loving boys like you >: (

Anyhow, on the topic of jews: I find it ironic that often we are all bitching about anti-racism, but alot of the people we racist, black people and middle-easter people, are anti-semetic.

At least middle eastern people are.

The only solution is killing Eighter all the white people, or the black people, or the jews. Oh, or we should try to get middle eastern countries to be more racist.

This topic could work out fabulous in conjunction to the Forum Topic, (What is the dumbest thing you have ever said)
Many of you can simply copy & paste.

personally I think the creation of the jewish state after the war was a decison that was always gonna have heavy repercussion it was typical of the kinds of decisons made by the winners of wars.

There is a creoocuring problem that arises when governements (particularly those propped up by military force) rule over geographical areas on behalf of certail racial social or national gropus to the detriment of the minority sometimes these governements rule to the detrimment of the majoirty

are people ever goona learn to respect their fellow man even those that with different colour skin religion language culture etc

not very soon i think seeing all the comments about nuking people written in this thread

and a bit of empathy for those who are economicaly and political oppressed might not go amis sure i would defend my self if physically attacked i might even join the resistance if i felt my country was illegally occupied that why its better if goverments don't put its people in those extreme situations

Originally posted by Neruo
Perhaps. But they totally fucked it up. So I voted no.

something like this for me.

but I also think that if both israel and palestinians had better governments with less economic interests on oil most problems would simply disappear.

and no, i don't think bombing anyone can help. you can't fix things by breaking them worse.

Well, I voted "yes", but more because they WILL exist, whether or not they should. I guess that goes a bit against the poll's question, but whatever.

Israel shouldn't have been created in the first place, because it isn't right to force people out because it was yours hundreds of years ago.
Now that Israel does exist, it should continue to exist for the same reason: It isn't right to force people out because the land was yours a few generations ago.

So, should Israel have ever existed? No.
Should it continue to exist? Yes/No. No, I don't think it should. But it will.
No matter what force is enacted on the Israelis, they won't surrender their land. EVER. They'd fight to the death first. They have in the past. Further, they're one of the most powerful military forces in the world, despite their small size. Israeli tanks are better than US tanks. We gave them some Abrams, and they modified them. Then they made the Merkavas, which are on par or better than most any other tank out there. Their tank crews are arguably superior. Their ground forces are extremely well-trained. Better by far than any other Middle Eastern nation. And they're a nuclear power (Thanks, no doubt, to additional and unfortunate meddling by the US). Combined, they're quite immune to all but the most dedicated of attackers.

Originally posted by Dangeruss


I think you hit the nail on the head right there. Of course they deserve a nation of their own. Yet, you can't justify taking away someone else's land simply because someone else wants it and they've got the big guns behind them.

Then we should also give back the Americas the The Natives that were here before our Euro-ancestors.

Have you packed your bags today?

Originally posted by The original question
do you think israel should exist?

No.

Israel shuld never have existed in the first place, it should not continue to exist, and it is better for the world if Israel did not exist.

Totally APART from whether Israel should ever have existed in the first place, and APART from whether they should continue to exist... peace negotiations and truces only go so far. There will never be peace in the middle east as long as Israel continues to exist. IF you want stability and peace in the middle east, Israel has to go.

It would be better if it it can be dismantled quietly and peaceably, with its citizens not suffering. But, if Israel has to be wiped of the face of the earth, so be it. The long-term strife and suffering resulting frok Israel's continued existance may very well outweigh that which would be caused by wiping israel out in one fell swoop.

I'm not an anti-semitist, if that's what you are thinking. I just take a very hard-line approach to Israel. If you want peace, Israel has gotta go.

Israel SHOULD exist!!! I think the problem isn't Israel. I think it is the Islamic countries around it. If you look at Israel, and compare it to the Islamic countries it wins on all counts. Take civil rights. Israel is a democratic state, and while the non-Jews aren't totally equal, they still have opportunities. I have been there many times as I am Israeli born, and can attest to the fact. This isn't true about any of the surrounding Arab countries, and I'd love to see an openly-jewish person try to survive in Iran or some other extremist country. The reason people don't like Israel in my opinion is the ultra-orthodox settlers in the west bank and gaza who ARE stealing land from Palestinians, and the fact that the Palestinians make themselves all miserable and in bad condition, when the only reason they don't get more land and peace from Israel is that their leaders do nothing to stop, and even encourage terrorist attacks on innocent Israeli citizens. I do not hate muslems or islam, but I do hate the fundamentalist values that inspire terrorism and make them feel like they have the right to kill in the name of Allah. Those people are the real criminals, not Israel. People just hate jews and always have for some reason I will never understand. The idea that Israelis are doing something wrong by simply existing is fucking bullshit, and while I can't way I hate all that believe in this, as too many people believe this, it pisses me off.

Originally posted by PenguinLord13
People just hate jews and always have for some reason I will never understand. The idea that Israelis are doing something wrong by simply existing is fucking bullshit, and while I can't way I hate all that believe in this, as too many people believe this, it pisses me off.

Don't pull the race card. It doesn't do your argument ANY good.

And in any case, even discussions fo right and wrong aside, there remains the mater of practicality:

The middle east will NEVER be free from war, conflict, civil and political strife, as long as Israel exists. Regardless of whether or not it SHOULD exist, as long as it does, things are not going to change.

Originally posted by The Blue Meanie

Don't pull the race card. *It doesn't do your argument ANY good.

It may not, but not trying to sound miserable, as I believe what counts is the now, not the past, if you look back into the Jewish history, discrediting bible accounts and using real historically proven events you see a lot of inhumane acts of torture and death against the jewish people, most lately the holocaust. This being discounted, I still don't think that Israel is the one without right to exist when to my knowledge the only times it has taken actions of war against other countries is in responsee to assaults against them either in the form of an organized assault or terrorism against innocent citizens. Isn't there something wrong with saying a country shouldn't exist when the people commiting most (not all, Israel is anything but perfect, but most) of the crimes are the surrounding nations.

We're not saying who's committing the crimes--we're saying that Israel's existence STARTED those crimes. The Jewish people DID need a homeland, but it was wrong to steal land in the Middle East and give it to them. The land was still stolen, even if it had once upon a time been controlled by the Jews.

Originally posted by PenguinLord13
It may not, but not trying to sound miserable, as I believe what counts is the now, not the past, *if you look back into the Jewish history, discrediting bible accounts and using real historically proven events you see a lot of inhumane acts of torture and death against the jewish people, most lately the holocaust.

The holocaust had NOTHING to do with Israel. Israel did not EXIST at the time of the holocaust. The holocaust, while horrific, has NOTHING to do with the present debate.

"Jews" is NOT the same as "Israel".

And, for what it's worth, if you look back in the bible, you'll ALSO see accounts and justifications for acts of violaence and savagery BY the jewish people.

Originally posted by PenguinLord13
This being discounted, I still don't think that Israel is the one without right to exist when to my knowledge the only times it has taken actions of war against other countries is in responsee to assaults against them either in the form of an organized assault or terrorism against innocent citizens. Isn't there something wrong with saying a country shouldn't exist when the people commiting most (not all, Israel is anything but perfect, but most) of the crimes are the surrounding nations.

Bullshit.

Israel is, most definitely, the target of terrorist attacks. The terorists most definitely come from surrounding countries. It is NOT at ALL certain how much backing, if any, those terrorists have from the governments of their own countries. I, for one, believe they have little to no backing. For a START: what backing do suicide bombers NEED? They go in, blow themselves up. It's not a high-resource operation. At the very MOST, police and border guards from those nations turn a blind eye. At the MOST.

To blame those countries for the acts of a select bunch of religious nutters is totally wrong. It would be as stupid as blaming "Iraq" for the actions of a dozen or so zealot nutter terrorists with no connection whatsover to the iraqi government, or backing from them. Oh wait! THATS ALREADY BEEN DONE!!!

Israel, on the other hand? Any country which bulldozes innocent, legitimate citizens off their land, and destroys their houses and homes, in order to make way for its own settlers, is TOTALLY FUCKING WRONG. Same goes with any country whose army willfully murders those innocent palestinian citizens. Defenceless, by the way.




You want to bring up the holocaust, hitler, the nazis? Fine. Two can play at that game.

You condemn the nazis, and hitler, and RIGHTFULLY SO, for their actions against the jewish people.

Well, guess what?

With respect to their treatment of palestinians, Israel has BECOME what nazi germany was.

Israel is big trouble makers in the area. They are far worse than any of the other countries around it. They have way more human rights violations than any of the other countries. Which is a big reason why Israel has so many UN sanctions against them condemning their actions.

By the way, we are all mad at Iran for trying to get nuclear weapons and israel never even signed the nonproliferation treaty. There was like 150 countries who signed it, including nearly all the Islamic countries. Every modern country in the world pretty much signed it except for israel, india and pakistan.

Ok, you win. Thinking logically and practically if you want an easier route to peace in the area, then Israel shouldn't exist, as considering all the surrounding countries hate Israel's guts, peace is nearly impossible. The problem is there are six million people in there, and if you get rid of Israel as a country, and just leave them to rot, every single jew remaining WILL be killed. This isn't a piece of land the size of massachusetts, these are real, living people, most of which are no better or worse than anyone else. I understand that many people disagree with my views, and I respect that. I am not going to argue about this anymore because I know that I am arguing with perfectly normal, nice people, and I am not going to start making enemies because I disagree with someone's views, even on something so important to me, just like I am not going to make enemies with republicans because I'm democrat. It's a waste of time.

Well thats the problem. Even if their all evil you cant just tell them all to move away and go some where else. So everyone in that area will just keep on fighting them untill one day israel is defeated and launches nuclear weapons in a revenege move and the entire continent turns into a smoking crator.

You're right: Six million people shouldn't be forced out of their homes. But that's exactly what happened when Israel was put into existence: They forced out all the middle easterners to make room for the new Israelis.

Originally posted by PenguinLord13+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PenguinLord13)</div>

I understand that many people disagree with my views, and I respect that. I am not going to argue about this anymore because I know *that I am arguing with perfectly normal, nice people, and I am not going to start making enemies because I disagree with someone's views, even on something so important to me, just like I am not going to make enemies with republicans because I'm democrat. It's a waste of time.[/b]

Because you're arguing with normal, nice people, is a good reason to KEEP arguing. I, for one, aren't going to get angry at somebody for their views, or hold it against them. I'm angry at the ideas, not the person who holds them.

<!--QuoteBegin-PenguinLord13
Ok, you win. Thinking logically and practically if you want an easier route to peace in the area, then Israel shouldn't exist, as considering all the surrounding countries hate Israel's guts, peace is nearly impossible. The problem is there are six million people in there, and if you get rid of Israel as a country, and just leave them to rot, every single jew remaining WILL be killed. This isn't a piece of land the size of massachusetts, these are real, living people, most of which are no better or worse than anyone else.

Yeah. Amen. I totally agree with this. IF you decide that Israel has got to go, you've still got the problem of how to do it. If you wanted to take the same approach that Israel took to Palestinians, we could always just bulldoze all the Israelis of their land, knocking down there homes and killing the ones who resist.

But that would be totally inhumane. So, what then is the solution, IF you decide that Israel has gotta go? I'm not sure, to be totally honest. Erasing a country from the map isn't an easy task. Especially when you try to do it without causing the people any harm or suffering.

I say yes, Israel should exist. At the time, the Jewish needed a home. However I do not agree that Israel should have been built off of someone elses land. But it wasnt Israel who stoled the land was it???

I dont think it will do any good if Israel just suddenly stopped existing. But I also think, it wont do any good so long as America stays involved in the middle east...

No. I say pull out of the middle east and let nature take its course.

I arbitrarily said no, although I honestly have 0 idea about anything going on in that crazy hotbed - I don't know the details of how it was formed, how it really operates, who they hate, who hates them, etc etc etc. I hear the name all the time on the news which technically should educate me as to what's going on, but no, it does quite the opposite. Whenever I hear the name being spoken, there are usually a few other country names tossed in with it along with the words "suicide," "bomber," "explosion," "casualties," and "terror." I've just tuned it out because everything is this zero-sum attritional temper tantrum game where everybody in that region just jumps back and forth blowing people up and forming coalitions and being overthrown and blowing more people up and making vague threats all the time.

So I say no primarily because I despise nationalism and the easiest way to decrease nationalism is to dissolve nations. It doesn't matter if you're fighting for a religion, a ruler, a piece of land, or (in this case) a country - over and over again, you're just being manipulated by an idea, being controlled to do inhuman things in the name of an intangible abstraction. Nations only create divisions, and divisions only create conflict, and conflict only creates suffering (well, conflict does a lot of other things too, but that foremost among them).

Sorry, for once I just couldn't stomache reading 5 massive pages of heated debate, so I'm just dumping this here. Apologies if it's already been articulated by someone else.

Originally posted by Dangeruss
No. I say pull out of the middle east and let nature take its course.

Wow. Okay, Russ, I completely agree.