Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 59571	2005-07-06 07:42:00	I don't understand what's going on in Israel, can you explain to me?	Renmoo (66)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
369898	2005-07-09 06:51:00	Basicly the Israelis are swapping land for peace with the Palestinians who want a homeland which they have been fighting for with the Israelis. So, that means Israel is previously occupied by Palestinians, right? In another words, someone created Israel out of Palestinians land?	Renmoo (66)
369899	2005-07-09 07:12:00	hey techikid, the Israelis do not have a version of the Bible. The jewish equivalent of the bible is the Torah, which is the first five books of the Bible, the Old testament (or, the first five books of the Bible contain the Torah), and has nothing whatever to say about Allah and Mohammed since Islam was inspired a millenium later. The Christian Bible adds the new testament, which is flatly rejected by the Jews. It is accepted by Islam (Jesus was a prophet) but his divinity is not accepted. In Islam, both Jews and Christians are known as "peoples of the Book" and they are to be respected. Indeed, early Islamists offered to merge with Judaeism, but were rebuffed, just as Christianity was rebuffed. The Koran says somewhere that a man must first discuss his wife's errors, and only later can he apply "correction". The point of this was that it was an improvement on the treatment of women in the society of the time to talk first. The Bible also contains many directions (especially in the old testament) that sit uncomfortably with modern sensibilities. And what about the religion of Baal (as worshipped by the Carthaginians, for example) in which during times of social difficulty, human babies might be sacrificed in order to regain Baal's favour? :xmouth:	Nicky (112)
369900	2005-07-09 08:21:00	What it boils down to is that the Israelis want to give some of the land back to the Palestinians to stop the suicide bombings in Israel. Unfortunately, the Israeli settlers on this land want to stay there but part of the deal is that all the settlements (and settlers) go. Myself, I would give the settlers a dead line to get home. If they stayed, they would renounce there Israeli citizenship and become Palestinian Jews. They would then have to take there chances with there new countries leaders and Israel should not intervine in what follows. The Palestinians could make a lot of moral capital if they did nothing too drastic and swallowed them up into the new country without a drop of blood being spilled. Then again pigs might fly.	craigb (4884)
369901	2005-07-09 09:59:00	The point of this was that it was an improvement on the treatment of women in the society of the time to talk first. The Bible also contains many directions (especially in the old testament) that sit uncomfortably with modern sensibilities. And what about the religion of Baal (as worshipped by the Carthaginians, for example) in which during times of social difficulty, human babies might be sacrificed in order to regain Baal's favour? :xmouth: Nicky makes a fair point. There are instructions in the Bible which are equally abhorrent in a modern society. However these archaic rules are not imposed by law in any democracy I know of. By contrast, Islam has adherrents who favour literal interpretations of the Koran. So stoning wrongdoers and lopping off hands is acceptable to milion of people. Not all Moslems nescessarily follow the Korans teachings slaveishly, but a huge number do. Sufficent in fact that Koranic law is the law of such countries as Saudi Arabia and Iran. And it is harsh - just think of Afghanistan under the Taleban.	Winston001 (3612)
369902	2005-07-09 10:01:00	So, that means Israel is previously occupied by Palestinians, right? In another words, someone created Israel out of Palestinians land? Not exactly . Palestine has always had Jewish people living there . Alongside Arabs . From about 1890 onwards Jewish people from all over the world started moving to Palestine and buying land . Land which was desert and of no value to anyone . This was the beginning of Zionism which is a Jewish political movement and shouldn't be confused as meaning all Jews or all Israelis . In 1948 the United Nations created a new country, Israel . Many Jews were already there having fled the horror of Europe . They didn't get off ships, walk down the road, and turf local Palestinian Arabs off their land . Instead they went to kibbutz, or whereever they could, to land purchased over the past 60 years . A zone of land along the Mediterranean called the Gaza Strip, and another area on the West Bank of the Jordan River were set aside by the United Nations for the Palestinians . Then Egypt, Jordan, and Syria invaded Israel . And local Arabs supported them . Against all odds, the new Israelis won - and conquered more land when pushing the three armies back . And even more land in repelling subsequent sudden attacks . Indeed Israel held the entire Sinai Peninsla at one point . And they gave it back to Egypt to gain peace . Which in fact worked . It is a complex topic . At the heart of todays conflict is the teaching of hatred in Palestinian communities . You might recall these people rejoiced at the deaths of thousands of ordinary Americans on 9/11 . But thats another story .	Winston001 (3612)
369903	2005-07-09 13:57:00	Then Egypt, Jordan, and Syria invaded Israel . And local Arabs supported them . Against all odds, the new Israelis won - and conquered more land when pushing the three armies back . And even more land in repelling subsequent sudden attacks . The odds changed somewhet in the '70s conflict . The Israelis where basically running out of ammo so Uncle Sam sold/gave Israel the needed ammo and firepower to save the day . This period was during the cold war . Had the Arabs won, the Soviet Union (who where backing the arabs) would have had a foot-hold in the mid-east and the worlds oils supplies .	craigb (4884)
369904	2005-07-10 22:16:00	............... Then again pigs might fly.Politicians frequently travel between airports.	personthingy (1670)
369905	2005-07-11 00:06:00	By contrast, Islam has adherents who favour literal interpretations of the Koran. So stoning wrongdoers and lopping off hands is acceptable to millions of people. Not all Moslems nescessarily follow the Korans teachings slaveishly, but a huge number do. Sufficent in fact that Koranic law is the law of such countries as Saudi Arabia and Iran. And it is harsh - just think of Afghanistan under the Taleban. It is only for a few centuries that we of the European tradition have extricated religion from overt political power. Until then, there were any number of atrocities, such as the Inquisition, the witch hunts, slaughter of the Hugenots, Albigensians and assorted Catholic/Protestant warfare. So we should not affect superiority when gazing at Islam, which for most of the time that European cities were cesspits was far more ciivilised and indeed, more powerful than the squabbling states of Christendom. We now regard punsihment by mutilation as harsh, but had used it up to about 1900. Some of us still approve of judicial murder to punish non-judicial murder, and declare themselves the more moral for it. We too have fanatics who favour literal interpretations of the bible, but they do not hold political power so long as our civil leadership remembers its principles. Regarding the Taliban in Afghanistan, realise that society in Afghanistan is harsh. More tolerant/flexible/modern leadership had failed and in the subsequent disorder, only the firm-minded rose above the turmoil. Remember what triggered the creation of the Taliban: a local warlord took a fancy to a young boy, kidnapped him and buggered away for days before abandoning him. The local community leader, a mullah by the name of Omar, was incensed, and using his students as the nucleus, found others who were prepared to restore order. Thus arose the Taliban ("Students" in Persian) whose eventual victory was gained not through calm discussions of sweet reason, but by absolutely resolute determination. Thus, when the Taliban decreed that opium growing was to stop, 1) no-one doubted that they meant it, and 2) no-one grew opium poppies. (I also know that there was a large stockpile of unsold opium, enough for a few years of sales) On the crushing of the Taliban, among other things, opium production has resumed, local warlords are again in power, and boys are again walking carefully. Oh, and women continue to wear the veil/burka, as outside Kabul they have done for centuries. As for Israel/Palestine, those who have been reasonable have lost.	Nicky (112)
369906	2005-07-11 02:18:00	All fair comment Nicky. We seem to have strayed a little from James question but it is relevant. It is true that our liberal Western views are very recent. And there are those among us who favour capital punishment and Old Testament style justice. But not many, otherwise we'd revert to such laws. The difference between nominal Christian democracies and Islamic states is that the democracies have a clear separation of Church and State. Even in Italy. Thus religious beliefs and laws are not imposed by secular government. By contrast, Islamic states have no such separation. The religion is the law, and the law upholds the religion. This is fine for adherrents but not so great for apostates. Tolerance for others doesn't seem to be in evidence. Of course not all Islamic countries become Islamic states. Witness Turkey, Iraq, and Indonesia. The Taleban could have been a great force for good. They did achieve unity in a country torn by strife. But their determination led them down an extreme path and the price paid by the people doesn't seem worth it. Afghanistan hasn't known peace in the conventional sense since about the 15th century and I don't believe the Americans or the Taleban could really achieve it anyway.	Winston001 (3612)
1 2 3