Posted on 06/25/2002 1:20:13 PM PDT by Johnny Shear
This is an honest question, no offense towards anyone is intended...
I won't try to claim I'm any kind of scholar on the subject of Isreal Settlements but I have done a bit of research on the subject. Yet, one question still remains...
I can't justify the Isreal Settlements in The West Bank and Gaza...In my own mind, anyway...
As far as I can tell, Isreal officially justifies these settlements based on the fact that they lay claim to Gaza and the West Bank due to defeating Arab aggressors in the 1967 war. And, Isreal is still technically at war with some Arab states so they can continue occupying these areas...
What I don't understand is how they justify the settlements. Occupation is one thing (Based on protecting themselves against an aggressor) but settlements are something completely different (In my opinion, anyway).
If anyone can educate me, I know Freepers can. And as a bonus, if anyone can supply information or sources on how the Palestinians "See Things", that would be great. (In the spirit of "Two sides to every story").
"Making nice" occured because Israel didn't want the Siani Peninsula and had only captured it to drive out Egyptian troops, Egypt wanted it back, and the two agreed it would revert to Egypt ONLY upon agreement that NO troops would ever be stationed there. Put another way: when attacked by Egypt, Israel basically beat the crap out of the attacker, and said "keep your distance or we'll do it again".
Now THAT finially begins to answer my original question. Can what you have said be verified?
If you do a google search for the phrase "Jewish Land Fund" (I think that's it) you should find something. Also, look for references to "the blue boxes." (The boxes would be at people's businesses and you could donate to the Jewish land fund or Jewish land foundation, something like that.) Some of it predates 1948 but I think they continued buying after that time.
Please cite me the passage that makes government subsidy of an artist who displays a crucifix in a jar of urine unconstitutional. Hint: You can't. (In other words, it's a government of enumerated powers only, Mr. Chief Justice.)
You want the foreign policy of an empire, not a republic. Of course, with the dollar falling and $6.1T in debt (not counting what's owed SS and all the IOU's Paul O'Neill's depositing in the FERPF), I don't know where you're going to get the money. Guess you'll just print it.
You also have to remember that the war in which they gained territory was against an Arab attempt at total annihilation of Israel, combined with the fact that the holocaust was still fresh in everyone's minds. Alot of the Jews that had moved to Israel after WWII were European holocaust survivors. Probably no one had the nerve to go to Israel and say, "Okay, you oppressors, give the land back to those poor people who just tried to annihilate you".
Nope, it was actually invented in 1964 when the West Bank and Gaza were occupied by Jordan and Egypt.
I think Israel lost land overall in the 1948 war. Is that what you're referring to? I'm not an expert on the pre and post 1948 war borders. They may have captured a few areas that weren't part of the UN mandate, but they must have been so small as to be meaningless and in any event since they lost some other land, nobody could make an issue of it anyway.Israel lost no land that was part of the 1947 mandate, and gained quite a bit that wasn't.
-Eric
Long live Israel, from the oldest Jewish community right down to the newest settlement founded yesterday.
Never any Pallie state west of Jordan R., and that has always been my position.
Peter affirmed that God made no distinction between Jews and Gentiles with reference to the matter of salvation. In other words, both Jews and Gentiles were to be redeemed in precisely the same fashion.
Christ once pronounced a curse upon a barren fig tree near Jerusalem. The tree served as a suitable illustration of fruitless national Israel. Jesus declared: Let there be no fruit from thee henceforth for ever(Mt. 21:19). Where is the hope in that? Later, on that same Tuesday, just prior to Friday’s crucifixion, the Lord announced to the Jews: "The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof (21:43). In other words, barren national Israel would be replaced by fruitful spiritual Israel, the church (1 Pet. 2:9; Gal. 6:16).
God’s initial selection of the Hebrew people, and the acquisition of the land of Canaan, was preparatory to the coming Christ. Jehovah employed the Jewish nation as a medium for the introduction of Christ into the world. Now that the Messianic mission has been accomplished, the role of "national Israel" no longer exists (Gal. 3:24-25). That "middle wall of partition," designed to isolate Israel from the nations, has been broken down (Eph. 2:14). It was abrogated at the cross (Col. 2:14). From the divine viewpoint, old physical Israel has passed away. It has been superseded by a new Israel. A SPIRITUAL Isreal.
There is not a solitary New Testament passage which speaks of the restoration of national Israel and the re-institution of Judaistic ritualism, etc. The Old Testament prophecies which predict the literal return of the Hebrews to Palestine were fulfilled in the Jews’ release from political captivity (Jer. 29:10; Ezra 1:1). Other predictions, which speak of a “restoration” of Israel, refer to a spiritual restoration [to God, not Palestine – Isa. 49:5]through Jehovah’s servant, Christ.
In his letter to the Romans, Paul contends that “a hardening in part hath befallen Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in . . .” (11:25). First, the “hardening” was the Jewish disbelief in Christ. Second, the “in part” suggests that this lack of faith was characteristic of only a portion of the nation; there was a remnant that did believe (9:27; 11:5,14). Third, the verb “hath befallen” is a perfect tense form, stressing the abiding nature of that hardness – until the fulness of the Gentiles comes in. Fourth, “fullness of the Gentiles” simply denotes the accomplishment of Jehovah’s purpose among the Gentiles (or the “nations”). In other words, Israel’s hardness will remain until the end of the present dispensation. This partial hardening will continue throughout the time of the Gentiles, i.e., until Christ’s return. Since the hardening of Israel was not total, but only “in part,” there was/is still hope that many Jews may be saved. But how will the Jews be saved? They will be saved by their acceptance of the gospel (10:12-16), and their surrender to the Deliverer from Zion (11:26). This provides the correct meaning of “so all Israel shall be saved.” The word “so” is an adverb of manner, meaning, “in this way.” Hence, it is “in this way” (the way of obeying Christ) that all Israel (who are saved) shall be saved. This passage does not affirm a nation-wide conversion of the people of Israel.
Lastly, go up to any Jew in Israel and ask them if Jesus is the Son of God. More than likely they will claim "He was a good teacher" or "He was a good man". But, Good Teachers and Good Men dont go around claiming to be God when they are not. Jesus has stated that on the Day of Judgement that He will reject those that disowned Him.
I DO put Jews and Christians on an equality, and I furthermore feel that it is unfortunate and outside the will of God that they ever became separated.
If that's your position, then fine. But know this, you are obviously biased on the situation and therefore, your opinion is worthless to most open-minded people. Just as worthless as any Palestinian.
For a self-described "libertarian conservative" you do an astonishing job of parroting the same old, same old Arab nazi lies smearing the Jews of Yesha.So saying anything bad about people who every nation on Earth agrees don't belong where they are, no matter what they do, qualifies as "Arab nazi lies". I swear, some menbers of the Israeli lobby could teach lessons in PC in Berkeley. The hilarious part is they not only counter the stated policies of our own nation, they go well beyond those of Israel.
The fact is the more zealous of the settlers have done things that, had they been done by Arabs, the Eretz Israel crowd would be using as examples of why all Arabs are evil. Research the behavior of the Hebron settlers, or the Kiryat Arba folks who tried to build the shrine to Baruch Goldstein. They like to talk about "nazis" too, but they are talking about the IDF.
-Eric
With regard to the "good teacher" comment, you're preaching to the choir. I've made that argument (nod to C.S. Lewis) to Jewish friends of mine on many occasions.
But what we know is that God used the Jews to bring the Messiah to all peoples, tribes and nations. I think He has plans for them even now.
"Every nation on Earth"? Well, there's Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, etc...France probably qualifies. Is that who you want to line up with?
As for the alleged Dr. Goldstein "wannabees" please provide evidence that Israeli school children are being taught that he is a hero whose deeds should be emulated, like the Palestinian child here who is learning how good it is to soak your hands in Jewish blood.
Well thats all fine and good if you're talking about political philosophy, but by using the term "Christian" you employ a rather spiritual undertone to your statement. On equality? To what? Whom? Christians have as much common ground with athiests as they do unsaved Jews who reject Jesus as their Savior. Thats not to say theyre as evil as Jews..just unsaved. I support Israel for Constitutional reasons. They are pro 2nd amendment. They are democratic. They are a "live and let live" religious people (unlike MUSLIMS).
Your understanding of the Constitution is rather limited. Indeed, the Federal govt is one of "enumerated powers" but the spending power is the most broad. The "Spending Clause" of the Constitution allows Congress to spend for the "general welfare" of our nation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.