As a guy from israel i'm willing to try and answer all your questions regarding Israel and it's actions. I think that Israel is greatly misunderstood, and i'll try to answer all your questions.
please ask only fair questions.
cahenn
At 4/15/05 03:34 PM, Cahenn wrote: As a guy from israel i'm willing to try and answer all your questions regarding Israel and it's actions. I think that Israel is greatly misunderstood, and i'll try to answer all your questions.
please ask only fair questions.
cahenn
1) Israel has been charged with genocide of Palestineans in more than one occassion. 1948 and some other date I believe. Are you guys guilty?
2) When Israel was first created, were there already a lot of people inhabiting the land? Did you just kick them out?
Thanks.
At 4/15/05 03:34 PM, Cahenn wrote: please ask only fair questions.
How many Jews does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
Why do I always hear about Rabbi's walking into bars with Priests?
Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?
Are you worried about that suspicous car parked next to your residence?
Have you been to the Saturday only Porkatoriam?
Do you think that a relatively peaceful compromise over the settlements that are in dispute can ever be reached, or will both sides continue their perpetual and useless hatred towards each other, only leading to more violence?
At 4/15/05 03:49 PM, BrickMurus wrote: ...
Not funny. Banned.
At 4/15/05 03:39 PM, Rooster349 wrote:
1) Israel has been charged with genocide of Palestineans in more than one occassion. 1948 and some other date I believe. Are you guys guilty?
well, although I tend to deny this, i won't yes, Palastinians were massacared (as a response for israelis being massacared)... but it was over 50 years ago and not by the israeli goverment but by fanatics whom were outlawed and disarmed by the goverment before the war of 48. at 48 we needed any fighting force we could get (1% of the entire population died in that war). so I don't think israel should be charged with massacare.
in case you meant the other incidents, there have been rumors, yes there are some soldiers who treat palastinians very badly, but those soldiers go to triel and get judged and get put behind bars like they should be. and you can't blame a country for having some criminals, all countries have some criminals, we don't have more crooks than other countries.
all other incidents are total mistakes, excuse me for saying this but if there was a sighting of a terrorist leader in a building and there are 2 other people in that building, and a sniper takes a shot and accidently kills an innocent man, i am sorry, very sorry, but i would have liked that sniper to take a shot again if he gets the chance. terrorists murder in cold blood, most of the trouble the palastinians get from israel is their fault.
2) When Israel was first created, were there already a lot of people inhabiting the land? Did you just kick them out?
no not really, they left on their own, really, the local gangs who were fighting the israeli armi those days fold them to run away and come back when things cool down and they win the war, they didn't win the war, and naturally you wouldn't let an enemy back into your country. their homes should'nt have been taken, but there is nothing to do about this now that israelis have been living on those specific (very small precent of the lands were inhabitted) lands for over 50 years. just like the americans shouldn't return the USA to native americans. however nowdays sharon's plan actually retreats from lands NO PALASTINIAN EVER WAS EVICTED FROM, just for territorial reasons (i am pro but i can understand people who are against it)
Thanks.
np hope that cleared some stuff up.
That's why you guys play the last laugh game...
MAUS has banned you for a good reason in my opinion, however i will answer the questions you asked which i found reasonable since i believe some are.
At 4/15/05 03:49 PM, BrickMurus wrote: How many Jews does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
one, that's a stupid questions
Why do I always hear about Rabbi's walking into bars with Priests?
because reliegon is a good subject for jokes since everyone has an opinion about it
Have you been to the Saturday only Porkatoriam?
i don't get this question, being israeli doen't make me jewish or vice versa, actually if i'm jewish i can get a citisinship, but personally i'm israeli and sympithise with israelis but i'm atheist.
Do you think that a relatively peaceful compromise over the settlements that are in dispute can ever be reached, or will both sides continue their perpetual and useless hatred towards each other, only leading to more violence?
yep useless hatred all the way. I sure hope someday we can all live in peace, I think people should just relax and try talking seriusly, the problam is (no offense) at the current situation hte palastinian goverment is really really corrupt (not the palastinians which are overall nice people, just their govorment) it is still better than how it was in Arafat's days, but it's still gangish and bribed, I think salvation will come when both sides start working together in a mroe basic personal sort of way. But fanatics on both sides won't let us. buttom line is that if arafat would have signed a peace treaty, he would probebly have been assassinated. there are many people trying to assassinate sharon for his brave moves as we speak.
How can a state possibly be both religious and democratic in nature? It seems naturally contradictory, since even with the best of intentions, favoring one religion will adversely effect those of other faiths.
Also, I'm beginning to become a proponent of a one state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. One reason is because I see the current peace process to be completely flawed. Would you agree? A majority on both sides agress to two states "in theory," but when you start talking about specifics like borders, settlements, et al., no one can agree to anything.
The one thing force produces is resistance.
At 4/15/05 04:06 PM, Cahenn wrote: there are many people trying to assassinate sharon for his brave moves as we speak.
You can call Sharon brave, and I realize how unpopular even giving up the Gaza Strip is, but what do you think Sharon has in store for the West Bank? Remember the one government official a few months ago who said that the Sharon government has no intention of transfering the West Bank to the Palestinians? And with the security fence plans, even if parts of the West Bank were handed over, much of the territory is being carved out and turned over to Israel. Like the entirety of Jerusalem. How can Palestinians possibly agree to these measures?
The one thing force produces is resistance.
At 4/15/05 03:34 PM, Cahenn wrote: As a guy from israel i'm willing to try and answer all your questions regarding Israel and it's actions. I think that Israel is greatly misunderstood, and i'll try to answer all your questions.
please ask only fair questions.
cahenn
What's your opinion on Israel? My idea is that 30 or so nations should not be trying to eradicate a nation (state?) of about 100 miles of land. But I have no right to speak for you, so go ahead.
At 4/15/05 04:19 PM, REDSKVNK wrote: How can a state possibly be both religious and democratic in nature? It seems naturally contradictory, since even with the best of intentions, favoring one religion will adversely effect those of other faiths.
That's simple(not really) we have what we call the "status que" all releigus issues remain the same way they were at 1947 the day before israel was formed, no public transportation on areas there was none before that time, and we do have transportation on areas that had transportation before israel formed.
actually it's not that simple, we struggle amongs ourselved on reliegius issues, but after all, we must get along since we are a small country surrounded by countries which are not exactly fond of us. the third largest political party is based on anti-reliegius people. most people in israel aren't very religius.
to sum it up, i have no answer :/ this is a problam troubling us all in israel. there are conflicts between religius jews and non-religius jews in israel, we live with that since we got more importent trouble, and after all, it doesn't really interrupt that bad.
About other religions, we are 100% theoretically equal in all services towerds all religions and ethnical origins (there is some descrimination but it is discouraged by the govorment and is steadilly detiorating).
We are not equal towerds the outside, we give jews citizinship automatically while non-jews have to go through a long process and don't get a grant upon arriving, but so what? most countries are not democratical towerds people who are not their citizends nor they are obligated to be. We are equal on the inside as much as we can, and we try and get better.
Also, I'm beginning to become a proponent of a one state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. One reason is because I see the current peace process to be completely flawed. Would you agree? A majority on both sides agress to two states "in theory," but when you start talking about specifics like borders, settlements, et al., no one can agree to anything.
You've got one thing right, no one can agree to anything, but Israel has already one greater battles than this, personally I am not fond of the 1 state solution since i'm israeli by my ethnical nature as well as my ID while some poeple are palastinian as their nationallity, they are multiplying 10 times faster than us (although they are the most developed arab nation as far as i know (only democracy) they still have a long way to go) and I personally want to live in a country where my people are the majority, for that reason along i do not agree to the one state solution, (I'm not talking about the arab-israelis, which are completely different just the palastinians).
Another justification is that 2 nations can not live in one ethnical country, and israel is an ethnical us hebrews have been countryless for over 2000 years. The palastinians also want liberty and self governing, if we live in one country outbrakes will occur since we currently are the majority and if there will be 1 country we will be wrongly able to abuse that.
You do have a point since it's very hard to decide about issues, but we really have no choice, personally i don't think 1 state is a real solution, but than again, I don't represent everbody by saying this, just my-self.
At 4/15/05 04:22 PM, REDSKVNK wrote:At 4/15/05 04:06 PM, Cahenn wrote: there are many people trying to assassinate sharon for his brave moves as we speak.You can call Sharon brave, and I realize how unpopular even giving up the Gaza Strip is, but what do you think Sharon has in store for the West Bank? Remember the one government official a few months ago who said that the Sharon government has no intention of transfering the West Bank to the Palestinians? And with the security fence plans, even if parts of the West Bank were handed over, much of the territory is being carved out and turned over to Israel. Like the entirety of Jerusalem. How can Palestinians possibly agree to these measures?
Jerusalem belongs to Isreal, I won't give it up, nor will anyone with a clear mind, it is what we fought for, and i won't give up the historical and national monuments. however most arabs in jerusalem are not palastinans
it is very importent for me to explain this: the arabs in israel devide to 2 categories israeli-arabs which are related to the palastinians but are not palastinians, and the palastinians who define that as their nationallity.
and btw, the fence is not a border it's us locking ourself in a cage since we are too afraid of terror. and as a person knowing those maps, the israeli goverment can not get the fence to pass inside jerusalem since it is surrounded by hebrew and arab settlments, so the fence is just outside jerusalem (it's more complicated than that)
About the sharon goverment, They are not united, about half of the govorment itself is against evacuating settlements and against the prime minister itself, it is a very big struggle among us.
At 4/15/05 04:27 PM, -RedMage- wrote:At 4/15/05 03:34 PM, Cahenn wrote: As a guy from israel i'm willing to try and answer all your questions regarding Israel and it's actions. I think that Israel is greatly misunderstood, and i'll try to answer all your questions.What's your opinion on Israel? My idea is that 30 or so nations should not be trying to eradicate a nation (state?) of about 100 miles of land. But I have no right to speak for you, so go ahead.
please ask only fair questions.
cahenn
I love israel, it is my home. It has always been my home and always will be, I am going to the army for the 3 years manditory service happily and if i die, I know i die to serve my country, and i am willing to do so. There are only 2 nations here, us and the palastinians, I am pro a 2 state solution, but that's just my opinion.
At 4/15/05 04:37 PM, Cahenn wrote: You've got one thing right, no one can agree to anything, but Israel has already one greater battles than this, personally I am not fond of the 1 state solution since i'm israeli by my ethnical nature as well as my ID while some poeple are palastinian as their nationallity, they are multiplying 10 times faster than us (although they are the most developed arab nation as far as i know (only democracy) they still have a long way to go) and I personally want to live in a country where my people are the majority, for that reason along i do not agree to the one state solution, (I'm not talking about the arab-israelis, which are completely different just the palastinians).
What's the difference between an Arab-Israeli and a Palestinian? Or are you talking about Jewish Arabs when you say Arab-Israeli? Because I don't imagine many Muslim Arabs have immigrated into Israel in the past sixty years, so the rest of them are simply Palestinians who stayed where they were during the founding of the state.
Another justification is that 2 nations can not live in one ethnical country, and israel is an ethnical us hebrews have been countryless for over 2000 years. The palastinians also want liberty and self governing, if we live in one country outbrakes will occur since we currently are the majority and if there will be 1 country we will be wrongly able to abuse that.
But different ethnicities certainly can live together. Hell, It's the norm for most modern day democracies. And Hebrews have had countries - where ever they settled during the Diaspora. Zionism is a pretty recent phenomena. Before they were just Polish, or Russian, or Moroccan.
And if you're including the Occupied Territories in this theoretical 1-state, I believe Palestinians would be in the majority. But if a truly democratic and free government continued, I don't see the sort of violence that most people fear. The transition in South Africa from apartheid to post-apartheid was not a bloody one.
The one thing force produces is resistance.
What do you think of the fact that everyone is forced to do military service? Would you rather make it a voluntary thing instead?
What do you think of those who resfuses to do their military service?
At 4/15/05 04:57 PM, REDSKVNK wrote: What's the difference between an Arab-Israeli and a Palestinian? Or are you talking about Jewish Arabs when you say Arab-Israeli? Because I don't imagine many Muslim Arabs have immigrated into Israel in the past sixty years, so the rest of them are simply Palestinians who stayed where they were during the founding of the state.
Completely 2 different states-of-definition, the arab-israelis are defines as full citizends of isreal and enjoy all it's rights 99.5 of them don't want to leave isreal even if a palastinian state pops, they don't define themselves palastinian, but the palastinians' brothers, i can't blame them since most occupied territory is in a bad shape compared to israel itself which probebly has the only stock market who hasn't crashed in the last 4 days, a thriving 4th largest high-tech industry, free education, they even do national-service (kinda like the army but without having to shoot people).
Palastinians want their own state, they live on the occupied territories and have a much rougher life.
But different ethnicities certainly can live together. Hell, It's the norm for most modern day democracies. And Hebrews have had countries - where ever they settled during the Diaspora. Zionism is a pretty recent phenomena. Before they were just Polish, or Russian, or Moroccan.
Ahh, that's because we weren't a nation untill the 19th century, but you can say the same thing about most nations since around that time nationalism just began to form we were just late bloomers encouraged by the english crown to help them get rid of the turks. Yes, zionizm is new but the people it binds together have a long path backwards, know you another nation that can still read it's ancient books which are over 3000 years old? they have a long way back, palastinians are even newer, as a nation they exist less time than israel, before that they were just gangs and farmers who moved here to process the land. Still we are very different people, theoretically i agree to the 1 state solution since it makes sense, practically I don't think it would work, our nations are too devided, each wanting it's own country so bad...
thanks again for your questions that make me think :)
Cahenn
And if you're including the Occupied Territories in this theoretical 1-state, I believe Palestinians would be in the majority. But if a truly democratic and free government continued, I don't see the sort of violence that most people fear. The transition in South Africa from apartheid to post-apartheid was not a bloody one.
At 4/15/05 04:47 PM, Cahenn wrote: Jerusalem belongs to Isreal, I won't give it up, nor will anyone with a clear mind, it is what we fought for, and i won't give up the historical and national monuments. however most arabs in jerusalem are not palastinans
Jerusalem was an international area that the UN was in charge of following the creation of Israel. It was captured by Israel during the '67 war, correct? The place is extremely important to all three Judea-Christian faiths. And there are still a large number of Palestinian Muslims living in Jerusalem. Heck, many Palestinians want Jerusalem to be the capital of any future Palestinian state. See the problem?
it is very importent for me to explain this: the arabs in israel devide to 2 categories israeli-arabs which are related to the palastinians but are not palastinians, and the palastinians who define that as their nationallity.
I know this. There are a million plus Palestinians in Israel proper. They are who I'm mainly talking about here.
and btw, the fence is not a border it's us locking ourself in a cage since we are too afraid of terror. and as a person knowing those maps, the israeli goverment can not get the fence to pass inside jerusalem since it is surrounded by hebrew and arab settlments, so the fence is just outside jerusalem (it's more complicated than that)
Yeah. But Sharon recently OK'd more homes to be built in the settlements outside of Jerusalem. This is more Israeli expansion all around Jerusalem, into the West Bank. Palestinian-Muslims can't agree to being completely sectioned away from Jerusalem. It's things like this that, in my mind, make a 2-state solution unworkable. *shrug*
The one thing force produces is resistance.
At 4/15/05 05:05 PM, The_Toller wrote: What do you think of the fact that everyone is forced to do military service? Would you rather make it a voluntary thing instead?
I think it's bad, but we have no choice, our country needs us so we must obey.
What do you think of those who resfuses to do their military service?
-If they are just lazy, they should be put in jail, and they are put in jail.
-If they can't do this because they are pacifict they should do socialist work instead like help in hospitols
as for the releigius ones who get to skip the army, they should be all put in small boxes and sent off to distand islands, really, I really hate those guys who don't do their time while the rest of us do, but only the ones who do this to scam, the ones who really believe they are helping us by praying i can forgive by like shorten their service by a year or so. out first prime minister only allowed this because they used to be only .1% of the population, now they are over 10%, we're trying to cencal that law, but it's harder since the govorment is having trouble and it needs all the support (including dirty) it can get from other parties.
I understand them, Personally spending 3 years of my life which in my peers in other countries already get a diploma in is dipressing, but i love my country and i'll do my time happily.
At 4/15/05 05:07 PM, Cahenn wrote: thanks again for your questions that make me think :)
Sure, same to you. It's nice to find level-headed people who are closer and more involved in things such as this. I look forward to your response about compulsory military service, since it intrigues me.
The one thing force produces is resistance.
At 4/15/05 05:08 PM, REDSKVNK wrote:
Jerusalem was an international area that the UN was in charge of following the creation of Israel. It was captured by Israel during the '67 war, correct? The place is extremely important to all three Judea-Christian faiths. And there are still a large number of Palestinian Muslims living in Jerusalem. Heck, many Palestinians want Jerusalem to be the capital of any future Palestinian state. See the problem?
Yep, I am proud to say that my relatives took place in that action, but it only happened after we were engaged war against. This place is importent to everyone, and we welcome all pilgrims and tourists, they may want jerusalem to be the capitol of their palastinian state, but I really am against giving it up since
a-there is a majority of jews in the jerusalem area
b-territory trouble
I indeed not only see, but live the problam, it's ok for them to want to have jerusalem, but i know not a single israeli wanting that to happen and frankly i don't think they think it's practical, some areas of jerusalem are already in palastinian control but i don't consider them jerusalem anymore, heck, most of the sacred areas are on the palastinian area. Yep i see the problam, but I think there is nothing more to explain about jerusalem, the problam is there but I think they'll settle for alternative territory.
I know this. There are a million plus Palestinians in Israel proper. They are who I'm mainly talking about here.
ok
Yeah. But Sharon recently OK'd more homes to be built in the settlements outside of Jerusalem. This is more Israeli expansion all around Jerusalem, into the West Bank. Palestinian-Muslims can't agree to being completely sectioned away from Jerusalem. It's things like this that, in my mind, make a 2-state solution unworkable. *shrug*
both solutions are "unworkable" if you try to find their weak spots, but hey, I really believe that the gaza strip should be taken care of first for them to at least have a state first, afterwards we can talk about the exact borders, sharon only authorised one neighborhood project on an area which obviusly won't be returned to the palastinians (a 90000+ population city).
At 4/15/05 05:12 PM, Cahenn wrote:At 4/15/05 05:05 PM, The_Toller wrote: What do you think of the fact that everyone is forced to do military service? Would you rather make it a voluntary thing instead?I think it's bad, but we have no choice, our country needs us so we must obey.
Yeah I think I know what you mean... My country also has conscription, I think that's neither good or necissary. But then again, my country haven't been at war for around 200 years so few people in my country really know what war is like.
-If they are just lazy, they should be put in jail, and they are put in jail.
What do you think of those who resfuses to do their military service?
-If they can't do this because they are pacifict they should do socialist work instead like help in hospitols
Didn't know you were allowed to do a more peaceful form of service... Are you free to choose this or do you have to motivate it?
as for the releigius ones who get to skip the army, they should be all put in small boxes and sent off to distand islands, really, I really hate those guys who don't do their time while the rest of us do, but only the ones who do this to scam, the ones who really believe they are helping us by praying i can forgive by like shorten their service by a year or so. out first prime minister only allowed this because they used to be only .1% of the population, now they are over 10%, we're trying to cencal that law, but it's harder since the govorment is having trouble and it needs all the support (including dirty) it can get from other parties.
Religous people doesn't have to do military service? How do you prove that you're religous? Does this apply to all religions or just some?
I understand them, Personally spending 3 years of my life which in my peers in other countries already get a diploma in is dipressing, but i love my country and i'll do my time happily.
Ugh... I personally I would hate being in the army for 3 years (or maybe not if my country was at war...) I've been in the army, but just for a very short while (just one month) I was supposed to serve in the National guard but I got injured and the training was just 3 months total (We were basically just supposed to go through basic training)
You probably already know this, but the army is pretty tough. Be sure to be in shape when you get enlisted otherwise it's going to be hell:P
lol swedish army, people i know told me it's really fun :P :)
Yeah I think I know what you mean... My country also has conscription, I think that's neither good or necissary. But then again, my country haven't been at war for around 200 years so few people in my country really know what war is like.At 4/15/05 05:05 PM, The_Toller wrote:
lol, yea in Isreal conscription is not just necissary, it's essntial.
Didn't know you were allowed to do a more peaceful form of service... Are you free to choose this or do you have to motivate it?
well, basically the army gives you a choice of where you wanna serve, the higher your profile is the more chance they will make you force in the front line within elite units, the lower it is the more chance you'll be cooking the food. if you have high tech-exam (exams the army does to you) skills you might be taken for espionage or computer developping units, depends on your ability.
If you can prove you are a pacifist, or just ask and have a very good reason, they will allow you to serve in "nation-service" which is a seperate body whom in people aid the needed, work for hospitals, aid the health services, and so on. it is the alternative.
Religous people doesn't have to do military service? How do you prove that you're religous? Does this apply to all religions or just some?
only jews have to serve in the army itself, others like arabs go streight to nation-service because we can't really expect them to be willing to fight other arabs. you prove you're religius if you live in a "yesheeva" and study "tora" and "talmud" all day. If you prove this (get a rabbi from your "yesheeva" to say so) youi don't have to do any service. I am against that rule.
You probably already know this, but the army is pretty tough. Be sure to be in shape when you get enlisted otherwise it's going to be hell:P
Viva la hell, we are probebly the most elite army nowdays, and the best trained one since we are at constant war, we statistically have the best fighting skills and the best soldiers nowdays (we don't have the strongest army, but we have the most elite one according to most researches), in our army if you complain noone cares, for 3 years the army owns you, no offense but i doubt the swedish army can make you run 20 miles for not saying sir, or give you 5.5 hours of sleep every day, maybe that's just my pride speaking, but i'm very proud of our army for the most part. I'm getting into shape, and i'm sure i'll go through hell or training anyway, but morall will keep me live and kicking, and maybe i'll be a pilot if i can make it, flying my own F-15 I :).
btw, it's 1:28 am here, so i'm calling it a night, you can ask questions, but you won't get a reply untill tomorrow.
At 4/15/05 06:25 PM, Cahenn wrote: lol swedish army, people i know told me it's really fun :P :)
Well compared to the Isreal army, the Swedish army seems more or less like a cake walk lol!
Didn't know you were allowed to do a more peaceful form of service... Are you free to choose this or do you have to motivate it?well, basically the army gives you a choice of where you wanna serve, the higher your profile is the more chance they will make you force in the front line within elite units, the lower it is the more chance you'll be cooking the food. if you have high tech-exam (exams the army does to you) skills you might be taken for espionage or computer developping units, depends on your ability.
If you can prove you are a pacifist, or just ask and have a very good reason, they will allow you to serve in "nation-service" which is a seperate body whom in people aid the needed, work for hospitals, aid the health services, and so on. it is the alternative.
Darn.. Got no idea what I would do if I were in your place. What I would go for... I mean a non combat service sounds... boring... but a combat service is freakin' dangerous :P Would hate getting shot or get hit in the face by a stone.
One of my friends tough, he would probably love it. He wanted to become either a "Kustjägare" (The Swedish version of a Navy seal I would think) or a "Fallskärmsjägare" (A paratrooper) Unfortunely he couldn't do it since he's got glasses, so he got to be a Combat Engineer Squad leader instead (I think it was squad leader at least). He also wants to go on one of the peacekeeping missions that Sweden has around the world (His goal is to become a officer)
Religous people doesn't have to do military service? How do you prove that you're religous? Does this apply to all religions or just some?only jews have to serve in the army itself, others like arabs go streight to nation-service because we can't really expect them to be willing to fight other arabs. you prove you're religius if you live in a "yesheeva" and study "tora" and "talmud" all day. If you prove this (get a rabbi from your "yesheeva" to say so) youi don't have to do any service. I am against that rule.
Aha ok. Thought you meant religous jews there for a second, so I was like WTF??? There's only 10% religous jews in Isreal? lol
You probably already know this, but the army is pretty tough. Be sure to be in shape when you get enlisted otherwise it's going to be hell:PViva la hell, we are probebly the most elite army nowdays, and the best trained one since we are at constant war, we statistically have the best fighting skills and the best soldiers nowdays (we don't have the strongest army, but we have the most elite one according to most researches), in our army if you complain noone cares, for 3 years the army owns you, no offense but i doubt the swedish army can make you run 20 miles for not saying sir, or give you 5.5 hours of sleep every day, maybe that's just my pride speaking, but i'm very proud of our army for the most part. I'm getting into shape, and i'm sure i'll go through hell or training anyway, but morall will keep me live and kicking, and maybe i'll be a pilot if i can make it, flying my own F-15 I :).
Yeah the Swedish army is probably not very tough compared to your army. No you don't get to run 20 miles for not saying "Sir" (actually we don't have a word for "sir" in the Swedish army, we just say the rank of the person we talk to instead. Example: If I'm speaking to a captain, then I say "Yes, Captain" and not "Yes, sir") Of course if you've told several times that you should say their rank when you talk to them then they might punish you :D
We definetly got more then 5.5 hours of sleep most days with maybe some exceptions.
Hope you become a pilot. It seems much safer then being on the ground getting shot at.
So just wondering what's the opinion of the general public about the war? Are they getting tired of it and just want it to end or have people got a very high fighting spirit?
Well, a few questions,
First: Do you think Abbas (spl) will actually come up with a Treaty that Sharon or the Israeli Parliament will accept or do you think we got another Arafat in the PA?
Second, this is more personal, but I was wondering if you ever fear that whenever you drink in a cafe or ride a bus that it might be the last time you ever do it because of a suicide bombing? If you do fear the attacks, how do you calm yourself to actually do so?
Third, what's your opinion on the Palestinians, do you think your government was too -harsh with them, too easy or just right with their treatment?
Lastly, do you think the wall will stop the bombers from getting into Israel or do you think it is just a distraction from actually getting rid of them?
I will thank you in advance for reading and possibly answering my questions
-Commanderkai
Jews aren't supposed to be in Israel because they abused it thousands of years ago and god banished them. I'm fairly certain it was lost to them in a war, fair and square. Israel is not supposed to be occupied by Jews until the Messiah comes. The current state of Israel is heresy, and the basis for its founding is a lie. How do you justify the uprooting of many thousands of Palestinians for the creation of a state that is completely against what it's supposed to stand for?
You have stated that Israel should not be returned to the Palestinians, just like the Americans shouldn't give their land back to the native peoples. However, in Canada and America, native people get huge benefits as a way of repaying that debt. Palestinian people seem to be treated like second class citizens in what only 50 years ago was their land. How can this be justified?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that when Israel was still Palestine, the British had troops there to try and maintain order because so many radical Jews entered the country and wanted to take it over. Then American public approval shifted to be pro-Jew, and the British backed down. With what was definately their land now stolen from them, some Palestinians turned to terrorism. Now that Sharon's government wants to pull out of some territories, radical Jews are threatening terrorist actions. So is it really fair to say that Palestinian people deserve what they get because of a few radicals? I mean, bulldozing houses with families still inside and whatnot?
Finally, why is Israel one of the only nations in the world that could get away with being in direct violation of 65 UN resolutions from 1955-1992? And shouldn't a country that's truly innocent of crimes against humanity not need the United States to veto a further 30 UN resolutions since September 1972?
I feel compelled to answer some of these questions from the viewpoint of someone who once lived in Israel and hopes to return eventually but can not due to circumstances.
At 4/15/05 07:53 PM, commanderkai wrote:
:: First: Do you think Abbas (spl) will actually come up with a Treaty that Sharon or the Israeli Parliament will accept or do you think we got another Arafat in the PA?
The sole fact that the majority of the population doesn't fight and/or isn't involved with combat would statistically mean the chances are good that the current leaders will not be as inflexible as Arafat. As each generation is born, the hatred becomes less due to the interactions between sides in communal environments such as hospitals and universities.
Third, what's your opinion on the Palestinians, do you think your government was too -harsh with them, too easy or just right with their treatment?
Some Palestinians are not treated harshly at all compared to their actions. There have been Palestinian terrorists arrested and found guilty in international courts for the deaths of hundreds of people and the sentance they receive is life long imprisonment. Others, who have produced bombs that haven't been used often face extensive jail time. I definitly think they need to be punished but a more practical means, in my opinion, would be a short jail time and then removal from the country to another country willing to accept them. Once they join an army, soldiers killing soldiers is a way of life.
Lastly, do you think the wall will stop the bombers from getting into Israel or do you think it is just a distraction from actually getting rid of them?
Psychological enforcement for those that fear bombers and a cause for resentment by those whose lives it interferes with. Just another cause of fuel being added to the flames.
At 4/15/05 09:31 PM, Jerconjake wrote: Jews aren't supposed to be in Israel because they abused it thousands of years ago and god banished them. I'm fairly certain it was lost to them in a war, fair and square. Israel is not supposed to be occupied by Jews until the Messiah comes. The current state of Israel is heresy, and the basis for its founding is a lie. How do you justify the uprooting of many thousands of Palestinians for the creation of a state that is completely against what it's supposed to stand for?
Palestinians were never uprooted. Also, the belief that Jews should not have a homeland until the coming of the Messiah is very flawed. In fact, one of the prerequisites for the Messiah's return according to Judaic doctrine is that all Jews who follow the laws of the Torah and observe the days of worship will live in Eretz Yisrael when the Messiah comes. Also, the current State of Israel was actually controlled by the British who had through treaties and public statements promised that a refuge for the survivors of the German Holocaust would have a place to settle and start life anew. Of the territories offered, it was the land that came to be known as the State of Israel that was chosen due to a few factors. 1) Jewish immigrants from all over the world had been moving into the area for many generations.
2) The land was not considered viable for survival so the British fealt that the petitioners would not be able to hold the land.
3) The governing body that created the State of Israel had also proposed the creation of a State of Palestine since no land by the name of Palestine has ever existed but the diplomats representing the Palestinian contingent refused to sign any agreement that allowed for a State of Israel and therefore never received their statehood or recognition as a country.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that when Israel was still Palestine, the British had troops there to try and maintain order because so many radical Jews entered the country and wanted to take it over. Then American public approval shifted to be pro-Jew, and the British backed down. With what was definately their land now stolen from them, some Palestinians turned to terrorism. Now that Sharon's government wants to pull out of some territories, radical Jews are threatening terrorist actions. So is it really fair to say that Palestinian people deserve what they get because of a few radicals? I mean, bulldozing houses with families still inside and whatnot?
1) Definition of Palestine according to yourDictionary.com: A historical region of southwest Asia at the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea and roughly coextensive with modern Israel and the West Bank. Occupied since prehistoric times, it has been ruled by Hebrews, Egyptians, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, and Turks. A British League of Nations mandate oversaw the affairs of the area from 1920 until 1948, when Israel declared itself a separate state and the West Bank territory was occupied by Jordan. The West Bank was subsequently annexed (1950) by Jordan and occupied (1967) by Israel. In 1988 the Palestine Liberation Organization under Yasir Arafat declared its intention of forming an Arab state of Palestine, probably including the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the Arab sector of Jerusalem. The Palestinians achieved limited self-rule in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank in 1993 and 1994.
2) Very few Jews actually wanted to take over the land and the British held the land and maintained troops due to WWI. The Jews in the area and the Muslim Arabs would from time to time have arguments over boundaries of properties but this rarely happened. The majority of the violence before the resolve of WWI was against the British occupation and this was by both sides. As the atrocities of the German Holocaust came to be known, many Jews from the area enlisted in the British Army in hopes that when the war was ended, that the British would be more sympathetic to the influx of immigrants that was sure to follow. The British accepted the troops and often comprised an entire unit from just these volunteers.
3) The American public was actually opposed to the creation of the State of Israel in the location it currently resides at but many nations including the USA came to realize that the number of displaced persons required that land be opened to them. Since the majority favored what is now known of as the State of Israel, it was agreed to by the British that they would open the borders to a larger number of immigrants. Unfortunatly, the number that applied and were smuggled in was so great that the British government after meeting with representatives of proponents for the creation of the State of Israel and proponents against the creation announced that it would turn the land over to the survivors of the German Holocaust contingent upon a democratic government being formed and that the government be able to protect its borders. After an acceptable government was propoesed, the United Nations forced the British government to expediate the process. The British response was that it wanted to do something for the Palestinians too. Draft after draft of proposals were denied by the Palestinian delegation and so the United Nations declared that the offers had been fair and as such, the State of Palestine would not be created at the time and that the State of Israel would be since its delegation was amicable beyond expectations.
:: Finally, why is Israel one of the only nations in the world that could get away with being in direct violation of 65 UN resolutions from 1955-1992? And shouldn't a country that's truly innocent of crimes against humanity not need the United States to veto a further 30 UN resolutions since September 1972?
If you did your research, you would note that no resolution or international law was ever violated. The UN would often make suggestions of how they wished to see business change but it was not a mandate. Also, both sides have been accused and are arguably guilty of many actions that would be considered a crime during peace time. Of the vetoes mentioned on that site, only 1 was vetoed alone by the US but the others were all vetoed by various members of the security counsel and half were also vetoed by what is now known as Russia who was considered the strongest ally of the movement for the creation of a State of Palestine.
At 4/15/05 10:52 PM, Bullbound wrote: I feel compelled to answer some of these questions from the viewpoint of someone who once lived in Israel and hopes to return eventually but can not due to circumstances.
Thank you very much for your answers to my questions
Hah,,,
Well this is brief history about Arab-Israeli conflict. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab-Israeli_conflict
In my opinion, there is no short brief about those conflicts. There is Jewish extremists and Arabs extremists who destroys any chance for peace.
I'm sorry for saying this but Jerusalem was always bloody city and it will stays :(
At 4/16/05 03:46 AM, confy wrote: Hah,,,
Well this is brief history about Arab-Israeli conflict. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab-Israeli_conflict
In my opinion, there is no short brief about those conflicts. There is Jewish extremists and Arabs extremists who destroys any chance for peace.
I'm sorry for saying this but Jerusalem was always bloody city and it will stays :(
Jerusalem is a city that blood is constently spilled over but I don't think it is the location of most of the conflict. The conflicts tend to involve small border and settlement towns that are already barely able to survive but they aren't heard about because the areas are isolated. When the international communities hear of the fighting, it is because it happened in a well populated area and is easily sensationalized. It really is sad how "personal touches" to a story make many actions seem worse and/or better than they are and in turn fuel the conflict instead of reporting the straight facts and showing how no side is morally better than the other when it comes to violence.
