quote: I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race. Just fancy those parts that are at present inhabited by the most despicable specimens of human beings what an alteration there would be if they were brought under Anglo-Saxon influence, look again at the extra employment a new country added to our dominions gives. I contend that every acre added to our territory means in the future birth to some more of the English race who otherwise would not be brought into existence. Added to this the absorption of the greater portion of the world under our rule simply means the end of all war
Cecil Rhodes’ “Confession of Faith” of 1877
Replace Anglo-Saxon with "Israeli" and English with "Jewish" and you have a great summary of Lisa's link.
Imperialist have always justified their ambitions this way. Somehow it never works out to be quite as idealistic as they claim.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
How exactly would Israel "govern" the various autonomous regions? What would compel the residents to accept Israeli rule?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Who is talking about compelling anyone? This is simply a matter of making it clear that those are our lands. Far from demanding anything of anyone, I actually proposed paying the governments that are currently governing those areas.
It's our land whether they acknowledge it or not. And we're not about to launch a war to take it away from them. So we're willing to allow them to maintain autonomous rule.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So what exactly do you get out of the deal? Seems like a waste of money. You don't get anything other than maybe peace of mind out of the deal.
I liked much of what I read in the book you linked. I'd agree to the US and EU pressuring neighbor Arab states to sell land, to be annexed, to Israel. And I would agree with paying Palestinians to leave. So long as it is all voluntary, I have no objections, on the contrary, I'd agree to using US political muscle to compel Arab states to comply. Quite frankly I think the best way to do so would be to threaten the Middle East as a whole (with the exception of the more free, US allies, of course) with oil sanctions. Yeah that's right Middle East, we can do it to. Threaten not to buy from them, and get the EU to do it as well. China can't pick up the slack.
But much of the plan I think hinges on wishful thinking. What do you do with the Palestinians who don't want to leave? You can't make them, or you'd lose international support. I'm guessing that in order to pay for all this, the buying of land and paying off Palestinians, would be financed by loans from the EU and the US. The downside of that is that everything gets done on Western terms. The entire argument hinges on the West expending tons of money, and political will, and maybe lives, in the end, in the hopes that a viable and sustainable Israel is good for them, since the book openly admits that "fairness" isn't really a good argument in world politics these days.
Before any of it could be started, there'd need to be a plan for what would be done with the Palestinians who refuse to leave.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Israel has not successfully governed itself for any significant length of time, why on Earth would we put it in charge of a larger area? With God feeding them and leading them with a pillar of fire Isreal still rioted and fell into apostasy. At the height of the power and wisdom of Solomon Israel fell into idolatry. Last time they where in charge of a significant empire The King of Babylon (Iraq) was chosen by God to punish Israel, and the Jews were scattered.
In no place on Earth did Israel rule in the modern era. Bankers, underwriters, merchants and solid citizens no doubt. Powers behind government certainly, but the form of Democracy Israel is using is an invitation to riot.
Israel couldn't manage to order itself with Prophets, Judges, Kings, Priests or (not to mention missing the Messiah in a rather colossal blunder) Representatives, I do not think it is time to put them in charge of North Africa and Central Asia.
Posts: 475 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are SERIOUSLY suggesting that Israel shouldn't be allowed to govern more land because TWO THOUSAND YEARS ago, things didnt' go so well?
I can't even come up with an outlandish enough comparison to make, and I don't think I have to, you sound silly enough as it is.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: Nah. You wouldn't say that if you'd read it. You're just making wild and nutty assumptions.
I read a very large portion of it Lisa and I stand by my original statement. At the core or your proposal is a very racist assumption that Israeli's can rule the Arab world better than the Arab's have been able to. If that is not your contension, then please explain it to me.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: You are SERIOUSLY suggesting that Israel shouldn't be allowed to govern more land because TWO THOUSAND YEARS ago, things didnt' go so well?
A ten thousand year record of failed governance is not trivial, if you want to ignore past performance and experience when hiring do so but most people consider it relevant.
"What apart from the aquaduct, public safety, sanitation, roads, education... have the Romans ever given us?"
Posts: 475 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: You are SERIOUSLY suggesting that Israel shouldn't be allowed to govern more land because TWO THOUSAND YEARS ago, things didnt' go so well?
A ten thousand year record of failed governance is not trivial, if you want to ignore past performance and experience when hiring do so but most people consider it relevant.
"What apart from the aquaduct, public safety, sanitation, roads, education... have the Romans ever given us?"
I was going to give a nice long response, but I think you're doing a fine job of discrediting yourself without my help. Keep up the good work.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think there's a slight difference between an employee that has a bad performance history and a group of people making mistakes 5,000 years ago. But only a slight one.
On the other hand, the fact that we've been around for 10,000 years, which it seems you think we've been the same people for 10,000 years, should be a slight positive on our side.
Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ask yourself if the tables were turned, if some other country came to you (say US or England) and said, "God has given us a stewardship over the region. We will give you money and in exchange we will govern you country. You must admit, that your government hasn't been that stable and you have lots of violence, so its time you let us rule", would you even give it a second thought?
Seriously, if you were on the other side. If you were a citizen of Syria why would you even consider reliquishing your atonomy to Israel? I know that you believe God has given you a right to that land and that somehow makes a difference. But the point is that the average Syrian doesn't believe the validity of your claim to the land any more than you would believe that God gave the US or someother country stewardship over your land. And given that they do not accept the basic tenet of your claim to their land, why would you even imagine that they would peacefully accept such an offer.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the more likely scenario is them taking the money with one hand, and pushing Israel away with the other. Anyone want to take bets on how much of that governing money would be used to buy weapons and materiel for terrorists groups who'd use it on Israeli citizens?
That's if it's done with the status quo in place. Palestine has to be resolved before you can do something about claiming ownership over a decent sized chunk of Mesopotamia.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
crescentsss, not controversial at all. At least, not as far as you, me, and a whole lot of other people are concerned. Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
I as an observer of these events fulyl stand by my support for Israel and its right to exist, its right to defend itself and its right to do whatever is nessasary to protect its teeritorial integrety.
As such I do not feel that it is above and beyond the call of duty for Israel to do wat it thinks is right to protect the Jewish people and to maintain a Jewish homeland.
I will read this ebook very carefully and very attentitevly.
IP: Logged |
posted
"Lisa - how would you feel if the leaders of the enumerated countries came together and offered Israelis to leave their homes in exchange for money?
Why are you any different from them?"
I'm not Lisa, but considering the first question is an offer, I think Israelis would just simply say "no thanks". Nothing to get into a fight over, it was just an offer.
Posts: 2054 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: I as an observer of these events fulyl stand by my support for Israel and its right to exist, its right to defend itself and its right to do whatever is nessasary to protect its teeritorial integrety.
As such I do not feel that it is above and beyond the call of duty for Israel to do wat it thinks is right to protect the Jewish people and to maintain a Jewish homeland.
i agree with every single word - but maintaing a jewish homeland and taking over all of the middle east and north africa are not synonymous. at all. in any way.
thank you quidscribs, i had hoped as much Posts: 97 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It probably isn't a good idea to allude to a satire that centres around eating babies when suggesting a serious idea...
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Has there ever even been talk of Arab nations offering to buy the Jews out of Israel? I think the vast difference, is that, well from what I read in the ebook anyway, they'd be offering to buy unoccupied land from their neighbors, and offering Palestinians, of whom a large, large minority poll affirmatively for this on the subject a large buyout, and safety from the conflict.
If someone in Ohio offered be $250,000, a house, and a car to move there for a few years to work, I'd do it. I wouldn't like it, because I'd be away from my family, and my home, but the situation changes when that same person offers the same deal to everyone in my family, and everyone I know.
I think it's fair. People do it all the time in the business world, and it isn't offensive to offer to buy someone's house for a vastly overinflated price. What's offensive is anyone talking about forced marches, or wiping anyone off the face of the Earth. Offering to peacefully buy them out and live as a good neighbor to them is better than anything I've heard suggested by either side as far as fairness and compassion go.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by GaalDornick: "Lisa - how would you feel if the leaders of the enumerated countries came together and offered Israelis to leave their homes in exchange for money?
Why are you any different from them?"
I'm not Lisa, but considering the first question is an offer, I think Israelis would just simply say "no thanks". Nothing to get into a fight over, it was just an offer.
Yes, so why would anyone expect the Arabs to say, if given the same offer, "Sounds great, wire it over and we'll be gone on Tuesday"?
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by GaalDornick: "Lisa - how would you feel if the leaders of the enumerated countries came together and offered Israelis to leave their homes in exchange for money?
Why are you any different from them?"
I'm not Lisa, but considering the first question is an offer, I think Israelis would just simply say "no thanks". Nothing to get into a fight over, it was just an offer.
i believe there would be an international jewish outcry of anti semitism and anti zionism. of course it wouldnt cause war or anything... but there would be protests on the street and rallies and everything. and i would go to them of course. but such a thing would not be taken silently by us.
Posts: 97 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by GaalDornick: "Lisa - how would you feel if the leaders of the enumerated countries came together and offered Israelis to leave their homes in exchange for money?
Why are you any different from them?"
I'm not Lisa, but considering the first question is an offer, I think Israelis would just simply say "no thanks". Nothing to get into a fight over, it was just an offer.
Yes, so why would anyone expect the Arabs to say, if given the same offer, "Sounds great, wire it over and we'll be gone on Tuesday"?
I imagine you'd feel different if you were a Palestinian living in a refugee camp. Something like 40% of Palestinians said that if they were offered a house, and $200K to move to another Arab country, they'd take it. I'd think Jordan would be happy to receive a population of wealthy brother and sisters who just want a job, have a large amount of cash on hand, and whose houses will be built most likely with Western money. That's totally different than a couple million refugees. Though I think they'd have to deal with the million refugees currently already in Jordan. Somehow I bet they'd get left in the dust, unless Jordan demands they be given the same choice in order for the deal to work.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:You are SERIOUSLY suggesting that Israel shouldn't be allowed to govern more land because TWO THOUSAND YEARS ago, things didnt' go so well?
Why not? StarLisa's contention that the land belongs to her people is based on history at least that old.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
Money buys them an education, it allows them to start a business, or ensure that the place they move to has a job, or at the very least, might let them learn a trade, or start a farm.
But really, isn't ANYTHING better than the current situation for many of them? Many of them already don't have jobs. They don't have money. Many don't have homes, or access to safety, security, and healthcare. Living in camps, or with the constant shadow of a closed border and no work is preferable to a huge nest egg and a house in a safe land?
And saying they've never had an education is ignorant. Many of them have. They have skills, what do you think they do now for a living? They have universities, they learn trades, they farm, they work for a living. There's no reason they can't do it somewhere else IF THEY CHOOSE TO.
lem -
I never said I bought her argument either. I don't. Anyone who has seen even a paragraph of the usual exchanges between Lisa and I on this topic should know that we usually diverge rather violently on anything revolving around this topic. I don't think Mesopotamia is theirs, or that chunk of it that she defines or whatever. If they want to think it is, and they want to try and aquire it, good luck, but it isn't going to change a single thing.
Still, how would you like to be judged on something your very, very, VERY distant ancestors did? The furtherest back that I know my ancestry goes, on my mother's side, is to Gaul. That side of my family has been in France, or what is now France, near Avignon, for almost two thousand years, and I wouldn't take kindly to anyone judging me, or denying me anything based on the actions of two millenia old celtic warriors.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
And saying they've never had an education is ignorant. Many of them have. They have skills, what do you think they do now for a living? They have universities, they learn trades, they farm, they work for a living. There's no reason they can't do it somewhere else IF THEY CHOOSE TO.
What they do now is work on the construction site i passed every day on my way to school, for example. some of them farm, of course, but many of them don't have a living.
Posts: 97 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: You mean that dead fictional character JC? Oh, please.
That is the one. In the tradition of the Fictional Moses and Aaron the Fictional Exodus to the probably true genocide of the real original inhabitant of the holy land.
The one who taught the Hebrew God the meaning of humanity by letting him take on human form. The one who had the authority to change the message.
The one who's followers restored Israel to Jewish authority and to whom any plan for expansion that Israel has will come for approval or denial.
Posts: 475 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
And saying they've never had an education is ignorant. Many of them have. They have skills, what do you think they do now for a living? They have universities, they learn trades, they farm, they work for a living. There's no reason they can't do it somewhere else IF THEY CHOOSE TO.
What they do now is work on the construction site i passed every day on my way to school, for example. some of them farm, of course, but many of them don't have a living.
Alright then, let's take that as our premise: Palestinians are as a whole uneducated and don't earn a living.
You're saying that given that situation, that offering them a new life, with financial and physical security for the next five or six years at least, to give them a chance at a fresh start, is somehow insulting?
If Jordan asked all of them to come live in Jordan, with a yearly salary of $20K to do absolutely nothing, with a free house and a chance to get an education and learn, and get a good life, would you consider that insulting, or the act of a compassionate neighbor?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Could Israel affor to buy them out? Wikipedia's low end estimate is 2,490,000 people. At 200000 per person it would cost nearly 500 billion. Even if it was per household instead, that would still be a considerable sum.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well my name is not General, but I cannot think what I said that was as offensive as what I quoted, nor is anything I said untrue, or other then doctrine in my faith.
Posts: 475 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, they couldn't. It probably wouldn't come to that though, there's no way EVERYONE would agree to it.
It would have to come in the form of extremely large amounts of aid from the EU and the USA most likely.
Hell, if we're willing to spend a half trillion to kill people in Iraq, why not spend a half trillion to help secure peace for Palestinians and Israel? If the cost was shared with the EU, I'd be all for it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by General Sax: The one who taught the Hebrew God the meaning of humanity by letting him take on human form. The one who had the authority to change the message.
God created humanity. He has no need to "learn the meaning of humanity".
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Joshua aka JC was indee a real person who lived 2000 years ago BUT he is not the messiah, he is simply a charismatic leader who dupped some weak willed Jews into believing a lie.
Moses, Abraham, the Exudus are all real people /andor events that there is historical proof of theyre existence.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Alright then, let's take that as our premise: Palestinians are as a whole uneducated and don't earn a living.
You're saying that given that situation, that offering them a new life, with financial and physical security for the next five or six years at least, to give them a chance at a fresh start, is somehow insulting?
If Jordan asked all of them to come live in Jordan, with a yearly salary of $20K to do absolutely nothing, with a free house and a chance to get an education and learn, and get a good life, would you consider that insulting, or the act of a compassionate neighbor? [/QB]
A) How about we pay all the inner-city poor to go live on farms in Kansas? Yes, it is insulting.
B) You honestly think Jordan would welcome an influx of millions of Palestinians into its midst? If they don't have money, they're a burden to the economy. If they do have money, they're taking all the good jobs away from Jordanian citizens. Don't forget that they speak different dialects of Arabic. And there are many Shiite Palestenians, would not be very welcome in Jordan.
I just think you're oversimplifying this. Complications arise whether you expect them to or not.
Posts: 97 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
God may be infinite, but so is the edge of a snowflake, God learned alot when he became man...
Bob, please...
As for buying off the Palestinians, lets do it. Rich Palestinians with checks burning holes in their pockets are sure to be welcome where the poor ones that Islam is required to take care of have not.
As for giving Israel local authority in the Middle East, I stand by what I said, there is no indication that Israel is well managed, given the volume of aid they receive any country of similar size could prosper and many have done more with less. There is a lot to indicate that bad government is a Jewish Tradition regardless of the system they operate under. The Knesset sure looks like a circus to the rest of us, like putting the Marx Brothers in charge...
Also given the Demographics of the region even the Knesset will have an Arab majority by the end of the century. (assuming mandatory sterilization is not imposed on Arab citizens in Israel) so all we would be doing is giving the Arabs money and the Middle East in the long run.
Posts: 475 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Alright then, let's take that as our premise: Palestinians are as a whole uneducated and don't earn a living.
You're saying that given that situation, that offering them a new life, with financial and physical security for the next five or six years at least, to give them a chance at a fresh start, is somehow insulting?
If Jordan asked all of them to come live in Jordan, with a yearly salary of $20K to do absolutely nothing, with a free house and a chance to get an education and learn, and get a good life, would you consider that insulting, or the act of a compassionate neighbor?
A) How about we pay all the inner-city poor to go live on farms in Kansas? Yes, it is insulting.
B) You honestly think Jordan would welcome an influx of millions of Palestinians into its midst? If they don't have money, they're a burden to the economy. If they do have money, they're taking all the good jobs away from Jordanian citizens. Don't forget that they speak different dialects of Arabic. And there are many Shiite Palestenians, would not be very welcome in Jordan.
I just think you're oversimplifying this. Complications arise whether you expect them to or not. [/QB]
We'll have to agree to disagree on whether or not it is insulting.
As for Jordan, I never said they would all go to Jorda, and I never even said they'd all go. There's 21 Arab nations according to the ebook referenced above, I see no reason why they'd all go to one.
It's an option. It's voluntary. It's benevolent.
If that insults you, I'm sorry, but I can live with that if it means peace in one more area of the world. And if I lived in inner city Detroit, and someone offered me 200 grand and a house to move to rural Michigan, because the French wanted Detroit back, I would kick and punch my way to the front of that line, and I bet half of inner city, destitute, poor, violent, Detroit would too. And they wouldn't be insulted, not all of them. The ones that would take it would say "Thank you."
Hell, I live in the nice little burbs outside of Detroit, and I'd take that deal.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
