|
Post by jdredd on Jun 9, 2009 13:15:08 GMT -5
Bruce, I can recall reading statements from people saying the same thing- that Israel chose a bad location to call home. I can also remember reading that had not the Jews been in the area for so long that efficient farming would never have progressed, education of the arab population would be about nonexistent and the locals would have continued their dismal existence as it was for thousands of years. Apparently Russian and various European Jews brought many changes to the region, too. I can't remember specifics. I think that, in spite of the fact that Israel represents the only democracy in the region and are our close ally, you may be right. They may be doomed to the trash heap of history. I sincerely hope not. They have a name for what the European Jews brought to those primitive Palestinians. It's called colonialism.
|
|
|
Post by EscapeHatch on Jun 9, 2009 14:37:12 GMT -5
Jdredd, do you think colonialism is accurate? Not sure. So many European jews migrated because of the depression and rather unfriendly atmosphere. It would certainly have been colonialism had there been a home country to whom they could share the largess of a colony. European history was full of it.
The people that migrated to what became Israel went there to flee oppression and to keep a promise that existed in jewish history: a return to Jerusalem.
Guess it points to the old adage: Be Careful What You Wish For
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Jun 9, 2009 14:48:59 GMT -5
Hatch: There are lots of different kinds of colonialism. There is the classic British colonialism, where you occupy a country. There is the improved American version, where you just economically dominate a third world country, usually with puppet governments. And there is cultural colonialism, such as Israel, where you establish a basically European nation in the heart of the Middle East, and move in large numbers of non-natives while expelling the indigenous population.
But I will agree with your last line!
|
|
|
Post by EscapeHatch on Jun 9, 2009 18:12:26 GMT -5
Jdredd, does the name Masada ring a bell? And what does the Temple Mount mean? Are you familiar with the importance of the Bar Kochba caves? Whose territory was it that the Romans occupied and, centuries later, was conquered by muslims? Why was a war called the Jewish-Roman War of c.e. 70? Colonialism, be it cultural or otherwise may be a misnomer in historical context. The language and writing system endured for ages before the fall of Israel, went dormant because of outside influences and re-emerged with the new state. Are you, by coincidence, somehow related to Goliath... and still pissed about something?
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Jun 9, 2009 18:22:50 GMT -5
Hey! That's it! Why don't we just reestablish the Roman Empire? That would solve everything!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Sept 24, 2011 0:14:10 GMT -5
www.nationalreview.com/articles/277932/can-israel-survive-victor-davis-hanson"But now a new array of factors — ever more Islamist enemies of Israel such as Turkey and Iran, ever more likelihood of frontline Arab Islamist governments, ever more fear of Islamic terrorism, ever more unabashed anti-Semitism, ever more petrodollars flowing into the Middle East, ever more prospects of nuclear Islamist states, and ever more indifference by Europe and the United States — has probably convinced Israel’s enemies that finally they can win what they could not in 1947, 1956, 1967, 1973, 1982, and 2006."
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Dec 1, 2011 22:51:20 GMT -5
www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/01/israeli-government-tells-israelis-not-to-marry-american-jews.html"Unfortunately for American Jews, and all those niggling parents, it turns out that Israel might not be on our team in this marriage game. A middling and now infamous Israeli government department has forged a peculiar U.S.-based advertising campaign. In a series of videos and billboards, it is discouraging Israeli expats from marrying American Jews and imploring them to move back to Israel." "Israel’s once booming technology industry seems to have splintered in the global economic crisis. But rather than antagonizing the minds it did not retain, maybe Israel’s government would do better to find out why Israelis are moving to America in the first place. It’s hard to find clear-cut numbers on how many Israeli expats live in the U.S., but the Jewish Channel reported about 2 million." "People who make it their business to say who is and who isn’t a Jew are as old as the religion itself. That paradigm is hardly a useful one. Nobody listens to people who only want to exclude. There are more of us here than in Israel. Questions of Jewishness may not permeate our everyday activities, but maybe that’s Israeliness and not Jewishness at all."
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Dec 1, 2011 22:59:33 GMT -5
Gosh, I just googled "Will Judaism survive Zionism?", and I'm apparently the only one who has asked that question. That's a first.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Dec 6, 2011 13:47:22 GMT -5
www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2011/12/2011126231822136.html"US President Barack Obama's administration has rejected Republican calls to fire the ambassador to Belgium after he suggested that Israeli actions against Palestinians, including settlement building and military strikes, were partly to blame for anti-Semitism in Europe. Ambassador Howard Gutman, who is Jewish and the son of a Holocaust survivor, said in a speech that a new type of anti-Semitism had emerged in Europe that was not "classic bigotry" but instead linked to "continuing tensions" between Israel and the Palestinian territories and other Arab neighbours. Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, frontrunners for the Republican presidential nomination, both called on Obama to dismiss Gutman and renewed charges that his administration was not supportive enough of Israel. But both the White House and State Department said on Monday that Gutman would remain."
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Dec 19, 2011 3:16:20 GMT -5
Well, I did find this when I used Yahoo search for "will judaism survive zionism": www.mosheamon.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=94&Itemid=27"An article by Peter Beinart, published in the New York Review of Books[1] , has raised not only waves but a mighty storm among the North American Jewish community. Referring to a 2003 poll ordered by Jewish philanthropists in order to find out why Jewish college students were not more vigorously rebutting campus criticism of Israel, he alludes to the finding that “particularly in the younger generations, fewer and fewer American Jewish liberals are Zionists while fewer and fewer American Jewish Zionists are liberals.”
|
|
|
Post by Tired in CV on Dec 19, 2011 4:41:56 GMT -5
Well, I did find this when I used Yahoo search for "will judaism survive zionism": www.mosheamon.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=94&Itemid=27"An article by Peter Beinart, published in the New York Review of Books[1] , has raised not only waves but a mighty storm among the North American Jewish community. Referring to a 2003 poll ordered by Jewish philanthropists in order to find out why Jewish college students were not more vigorously rebutting campus criticism of Israel, he alludes to the finding that “particularly in the younger generations, fewer and fewer American Jewish liberals are Zionists while fewer and fewer American Jewish Zionists are liberals.” Perhaps this might give some insight into that thought as well: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Mar 16, 2012 14:25:29 GMT -5
www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2012/03/israel-and-iran'This dispute over what America's Jews could have done to save other Jews—Bibi's father, Professor Benzion Netanyahu, was one of its protagonists during the war years—left a profound mark on the Revisionist movement, which later morphed into Israel's Likud Party, led first by Menachem Begin and now by Mr Netanyahu. It was not only Roosevelt who failed the Jews, the Israeli prime minister was, in effect, saying in his speech. It was the American Jewish leadership of that time. Then, as now, the counter-argument was that to shout and pressure too forcefully would be to court the accusation that the Jews were pushing Roosevelt to conduct a "Jewish war". It would provoke domestic American anti-Semitism. Mr Netanyahu's position now, like that of his political (and biological) forbears, is that mortal danger trumps domestic political dangers. To him, the present fear is not only or mainly that Iran would nuke Tel Aviv but that its vaunted ability to do so would lead to a brain- and talent-drain from the Jewish state, undermining its viability in the long term. Hence a key line in his speech: "As prime minister of Israel, I will never let my people live in the shadow (italics added) of annihilation."
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Apr 22, 2012 12:02:27 GMT -5
www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/04/201242172625739133.html"It is, however, what I believe. There is nothing wrong about a Jewish city, just as there is nothing wrong (and plenty right) about a Jewish country (which the 20th century taught us is essential to Jewish life). But that equation does not apply beyond the 1967 borders. The settlements and outposts in the West Bank - "legal" and "illegal" - are essential only to prevent Palestinians from having their own state and to make their lives as difficult as possible. The hundreds of checkpoints that divide one Arab town from another and not from Israel proper exist primarily to punish Palestinians. That is the prime purpose of the settlement enterprise. As for Jerusalem, which is now divided by walls of hate, it will only become one city when it is shared with the Palestinians."
|
|
|
Post by SAMCRO IRISH on May 1, 2012 10:30:26 GMT -5
Wow , I thought liberals didn't believe in the term illegal or the idea of borders . Just not here in America eh?
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Dec 3, 2012 21:50:14 GMT -5
www.nationalreview.com/articles/334112/itimesi-and-israel-conrad-black"Rupert Murdoch and I have had our differences over many years, and especially during my recent legal travails, but I must join with him entirely in his recent tweeted complaint that most American media outlets that are controlled by Jews seem to be reflexively, or at least habitually, anti-Israel. For mentioning this notorious fact, Murdoch was lambasted by the usual suspects, led by the New York Times, upon whose franchise as the premier quality newspaper of the world’s greatest market Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal is steadily encroaching. My sometime colleagues at the Daily Beast, whose grievances against Murdoch are profound and not unreasonable, even suggested that there was room here for a regulatory intervention. I understand the temptation to attack Murdoch, but this was seriously uncalled for. And yet, Murdoch actually apologized for his tweet. He did use some indelicate language, but to illustrate his pro-Israeli views." "But Rupert Murdoch is correct that American media outlets led by Jews are almost always minded to appeasement, and he was right to ask why. The answer necessarily mires discussion in consideration of whether the Jews are considered both a faith and a people, and what the relationship is between Israel and the diaspora Jews. As a non-Jew who has not particularly focused on these issues, I have no standing to take them very far, but there has long been a tendency among some Jewish American media leaders to downplay their own Jewishness, as if being a Jew connoted no racial aspect, any more than being a Presbyterian does, and to urge upon Israel an endless turning of the other cheek." The "Israel can do no wrong" crowd perpetually wants to bring the Jewish-owned press (and voters) in line by blurring the line between Judaism and Zionism. Be careful what you wish for.
|
|