h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<...if someone thought acceptable political resistance was to blow up buses...>

Who said anything about political resistance? The Palestinians are involved in a military campaign to expel the invaders of their lands.



When you're fighting the best high-tech weaponry America can supply with almost nothing beyond hand-guns and rocks, you do what you must. And while Palestinians go thirsty, water extracted from their lands irrigates Israeli lawns and fills their swimming pools.



And if the UN gave California to a community who needed a home, things would be different?



Except to cut off the 2 billion dollars a year? C'mon!

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

A few comments, footnotes, ramblings, rants, etc.:

>>If history teaches us anything, it's that yesterday's victim is tommorow's perpetrator. (Posting 3)

If you think about it, the US (of which I am a not-yet-voting citizen) has been funding victims and turning them into perpetrators. Think about the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan... the Iran-Contra scandal... money for Israel. And now the Northern Alliance, to kick out the Taliban... have we learned anything? (No, no we haven't.) The US was a victim of sorts at one point, at least they tell us that, but now we seem to be at fault for most troubles in the world. It's part of human nature to hate each other, kill each other, and generally be dumb, but that can all be overcome, at least on an individual basis. If only the people who officially directed the hating and killing realized this.

>>The Israelis continually whine about terrorism, but they continue their armed occupation of Palestinian lands. When the Palestinians (temporarily) cease their efforts to rid themselves of the invaders, the Israelis breathe sighs of relief, but do they withdraw from Palestine or stop killing Palestinians in return? No. (Posting 4)

To me, it looks essentially like a war of pride between two countries: neither is willing to back down for fear of being seen as weak or defeated. My opinion is that Israel should be the one to withdraw first, because it has the greater military power, but it really is a headlock and something that may need arbitration from a neutral power of some sort. Given the US' rather one-sided stance, it shouldn't be us. (Forgive my 'us', but it's still there because I can't think of anything more accurate but concise.)

>> The Palestinians are trying to defeat a military invasion of their lands using little more than hand-held weapons (mostly thrown rocks!!!) against an invader with tanks, missiles and jet aircraft. If they are brave enough to make suicide attacks against the invaders, who can honestly say they're wrong? (Posting 4)

This draws attention to the point that courage is not necessarily a virtue in all cases. It takes considerable courage to blow yourself up, but it can't be said that it's good. Courage isn't much without judgement. I can certainly understand the motivations behind the bombings, but I don't agree with them... or any of this, for that matter.

>> Nobody sane would deny Jews the right to live in Palestine, but what gives them the right to rule it? (Posting 6)

Can anyone really rule a land that is sacred to three religious groups? Greed seems to have overruled a respect for historically holy lands. (Actually, I'm spewing rhetoric here, trying to convey some sort of understanding. I don't identify with an organized religion and I don't have strong personal feelings about 'who gets the land' one way or another. Sharing would be, in my eyes, optimal, but I doubt it. It'd take a long, long time to get that.)

>> Why should *any* religious group be given land because of their beliefs? Christians and Moslems hold parts of Palestine sacred; should they be given rights to go and live there? (Posting 7)

Exactly!

>> Regarding a Jewish homeland: I always thought that the really orthodox Jews believed that they weren't supposed to go to the Promised Land until the Messiah arrived. Am I wrong on this?

>> I think, if we (the world comunity represented by the United Nations) gave back the country the Jews that they lived in 2000 years before, we should give back America to the (Native Americans) ... Australia to the Aboriganies and parts of England to the French (Posting 13)

Indeed. As of now, the Native Americans are 'compensated' with the right to live on government-designated reservations and encourage people to gamble themselves to death. If only greed weren't so... greedy... hah, that'll happen.

>> We can no more return lands to people which was 'stolen' from them in antiquity than we can 'give' them land now to call home. There are simply too many people already living in places that others want to, or claim a historical right to, who will be displaced. (Posting 18)

This is the premise behind affirmative action, as well as reparation for the Japanese-Americans stuffed into internment camps by the government during WWII. (I actually saw someone defend this decision during a high-school level Lincoln-Douglas style debate, on the merits of national security versus individual freedoms. I nearly exploded, but I was just observing so I couldn't.) I find the idea of somebody's great-great-great grandchildren repaying somebody else's great-great-great grandchildren for their ancestors' trespasses against the other people's ancestors to be mostly infeasible and also besides the point. Apologies would be nice. But I'm not one to talk.

That should be all for now, I think-
Eva

"<...if someone thought acceptable political resistance was to blow up buses...>

Who said anything about political resistance? The Palestinians are involved in a military campaign to expel the invaders of their lands."

A military campaign that involves strapping bombs to yourself, and hurling yourself into a civilian area with the aim of killing civilians? Sounds more like terrorism to me. And try and think of a better answer than "Ooh, but the Israeli's do that too!"

"

When you're fighting the best high-tech weaponry America can supply with almost nothing beyond hand-guns and rocks, you do what you must. And while Palestinians go thirsty, water extracted from their lands irrigates Israeli lawns and fills their swimming pools. "

Does America supply Israel with arms? I assumed Israel largely constructed it's own arms. The Merkava tanks are certainly not American. Are Palestinians actually going thirsty, or are you beating a propaganda drum?

"

And if the UN gave California to a community who needed a home, things would be different?"

Probably yes. I know this is hard for some people to stomach.

"

Except to cut off the 2 billion dollars a year? C'mon! "

The US does not want to fall-out with Israel. Cutting off the aid to Israel would infuriate the US government and make them fall-out with the only friendly nation in the Middle East. The American's don't want that and the Israeli's know this perfectly well. The line about the US approving everything Israel does is garbage that says more about the people who perpetuate it and their simple anti-American viewpoint (the flipside of the same coin as people such as Rush Limbaugh who also see the world in morally simplistic terms) than anything else.

Sorry, I'm in a bad mood (of my own making). I apologise if I come out a bit blunt and moody.

"Mr. Moustache"




()

Oh, such a complex issue!
In an ideal world (& probably the end solution of this conflict), both the Jewish people & the Palestinians would be able to have a Land they can call home.
However, as I understand it from what some have posted thus far (if I´ve got this wrong, then please feel free to scold me!!), some of you may be inclined to think that maybe the creation of Israel was unfortunate(possibly from the Palestinian point of view?). This may be construed as negative. Nowadays, Israel is a thriving democratic & civil society with freedom to vote as well as (& most significantly for this discussion) multi-racial. Arab citizens of Israel proper have a right to take part in elections. This was of course aided by the West (I may point out here that prior to 1948, Britain who had a mandate over Palestine usually favoured Arab opinion to serve their own oil interests & thus limiting the number of Jewish immigrants into the country fleeing Nazi Germany). Perhaps when Palestinians & their Arab allies see the success made of the Israeli land since 1948, it arouses feelings of envy springing from resentment. Why won´t Palestinans integrate into Israel & share sovereignty of the Land? Perhaps they prefer their own sovereign state? Is the Arabic mindset too separatist or racialist? (Genuine questions, not rhetorical). While nobody should deny the Palestinians their rights, I´d estimate that there are worse regimes in the world (Zimbabwe, China occupying Tibet, Iraq, Iran, Russia in Chechnya...). Afterall, Israel doesn´t have a secret police or persecute its own citizens. Israeli aggression may be a tad extreme at times, but it could be construed as merely a defensive deployment. Afterall, given the geopolitics of the region, it kindda looks like a country under seige. They no longer wage war against neighbouring Arab states; plus, Israel did not respond when Iraq decided to bomb their cities during the Gulf War (albeit under American pressure).
I´m reminded of that phrase:
"If you want peace, prepare for war."



[Apologies if I come across too pro-Israel here, but I´ve tried not to ignore or forget about the plight of the Palestinians either. Please feel free to counterbalance my witterings!]
Part of the reason why Ariel Sharon was elected was arguably due to the exasperation with the failure to achieve a breakthrough via dialogue.

As I understand it, the Bible suggests that the return of the Jews to
their homeland was prophesied.

And furthermore, those nations that 'meddle' in the situation are
warned that they are playing with fire...

Lo, I am about to make Jerusalem a cup of reeling to all the peoples
round about...on that day I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all
the peoples; all who lift it shall grievously hurt themselves. And all the nations of the earth will come together against it.
Zechariah 12:2-3

I'm not writing these things to be provocative - merely 'quoting'.
Let's see how it pans out... Hold on, things might get a whole lot worse!

Questions:
Can we believe biblical prophecy ?
Can we fight against it?
What happens if we try ?

you can if you want to
you can fight against anything
if we knew that then we would be fortune tellers

Personaly the answers come down to what you belive in...and that's a very tricky thing

()

Why set any store by biblical prophesy? What we need is a little less reference to the bible, the torah, or any other religious tomes you might want to bring into it, and a lot more secular rationalisation.