Nursey & Chester's Israel thread

Prompted by a suggestion from Nursey here ...

Same story, different location.

So it's the end of WWII, and the Holocaust has given the US administration the emotional artillery it needs to actually get international support for the dispossession of an entire group of Arab peoples. (Thank you, Adolf.) Those people, of course, are the Palestinians.

The US gets (with remarkable foresight, given the intellects that now inhabit the Oval Office) the "democratic" presence it knows it will need in the Middle Eastern area, given that it's the only region with any decent oil supplies.

And anyone who questions the fairness or legitimacy of any of this is anti-Semetic (i.e. racist), or a communist (a less fashionable insult these days, but powerful in its time).

Why's it the same story? Because it's once again about the colonisation of land occupied by the poor, for the ultimate benefit of the rich and powerful. Religion is merely the cloak it's all shrouded in.

Land and class. As always, it's land and class.

 

So this, if I interpret correctly, is the reason for the US policing every far off shithole country except Isreal.. [/i]

 

Bingo.

 

That was an excellent opening post, Chester! And nice title...very homely.

 

But why keep it up all this time, Israel is losing influence fast, and everybody feels sorry for the poor Palestinians. Why not give the Palestinians a leg up "for all the time they were abused by those nasty Israelites" ? That'll go over great with the general public, and hey presto, instantly renewed hold on the middle east. .

 

You're joking, right?

For one, the rich US supporters of Israel (who must at all time be appeased) would never wear it. Handing over land "owned" by the rich to a bunch of poor rag-heads will never do.

Secondly, the poor in the US would never wear it, because they've been force-fed a steady diet of anti-Arab sentiment in various forms since the early 50s. (And ramped up even further since the end of the Cold War.)

And thirdly, for some reason I don't understand, it just never works that way. The rich take the land off the poor. That's how it works. That's it.

(As an aside, consider even the worldwide boom in real estate throughout most Western countries. Poor people who own their homes see these outrageous land prices, sell up to investors, then rent elsewhere. Sure, they get a cash injection, but their land is gone and the rich now have it. The rich take the land off the poor. End of story.)

 

This forum really is too depressing for me . . i think i'll go back to general mayhem and make a couple of fart jokes to make me feel better. .

 

I'm inclined to agree with you about this Chester. Israel never should have been formed in the first place. I'm going to use my Jersey analogy again. If Germany had won WWII, and occupied the United States, how would Americans have reacted if they kicked everyone out of Jersey and gave it to all the leftover communists? That would have worked out much better than Israel has. Israel has no right to that land. In addition the concept of "owning" land in the west was only introduced about 300 years ago. The concept of owning your own land, and one of Thomas Jeffersons main goals in the framework of the constitution, was that you would have your own land, that you could work, and provide for yourself. No one else took the fruits of your labor off of your hands. This stems from John Locke's concept of land ownership. You didn't "own" land unless if you had broken that land, with your own labor, and turned it into "something". This concept has been lost again on the west. There's still hope though.

 

And I say it's deeper than that, the idea of money and power is the cloak the true nature of these things are shrouded in.

 

The jews that fled to Palestine after the ww2 might not all have been rich greedy brooklyn goldsmiths.
The english tried to stop the exodus. US papers gave them hell for it. The jews did not start throwing out the palestinians untill the arab states decided that a jewish state was untollerable within the reach of the muslim world.
( Be it the Kaliphat of Babylon or Kairo. Sultanate of Kairo or of Istanbul. I presume they were not reinventing the Sultanate of Granada, and Samarkand is a far call ).
I 1945 they were colonies. The sionist-movement allready owned a lot of land. I find it disgusting to put all of this into a rich vs poor context. Its a disgusting simplification.

Diogenes
A lot of the land that was bought by the settlers in the late 1800s was tilled and used and plowed and sowed. Do they have the right to use it then ?
And why dont you get the hell out of america ? It belongs to the empire of the Siux and the Cheyenne and the Arapaho and the other nations. Perhaps pure theory is one of the most dangerous drugs known to man.

 

Oh really? And just like that *BAM* it becomes a full on nuclear power? Please...

 

Small countries in Europe have had nuclear reactors for research since 1948, at least.

I would like to see a moral and ethical platform that would work worldwide. Nuclear Bam Please ? It took some time but since nobody stopped them they got it.

You seem to suggest that there is an international conspiracy that wanted Israel in the middleeast to sow discord. Is that correct ?

 

There are no boundaries amongst these guys, but it's important to them that we remain separated. But hell yeah, Israel's there for a purpose. These old Jewish sacrificed an assload of their guys so that the westerners would go along with it. A small patch of land in the middle of nowhere is a superpower? What the hell do they export, anyways?

 

I think you call the beginning the end, and the end the beginning. Isnt it more likely that they got extra clout after they were @sacrified@. Rather than jews planning holohcaus, just to get Israel back ?

All nations beget their purpose. The purpose of Turkey might be to keep the USSR Black Sea fleet in check. But not anymore. Etc. You have gotten it all wrong. Its just the argument creationists use when they say: Look at it, its so brilliant it had to be planned. The truth is that life and history could have taken any other course than this, and it would still fall into place and look brilliant. Animals and people and nations find their ecological nische. Their crooks and crannies ,for survival. Its preposterous to say its planned from up high. The division reaches all through the levels. Its just that the big guys cant fight it you like the kids can. Notice the difference between grownups and kids :wink:

 

It will always be planned from way high up, Xerxes, because someone will always climb to the top so that they can achieve their goals. When you understand the true nature of how everything works, then that little spur of greed makes you want to grab the reigns and run the world with your crew. But of course there will always be those big hiccups, like getting sent back to the stone age by someone bigger and badder than you. There's always a plan, Xerxes, and the division is an important part of it.

 

Spoon said:

And really shattered the whole conspiracy theory to pieces.

Dio wrote:

And was 180 degrees off in several respects.
Most notably though.
New Jersey? nah more like a remote desert in Nevada where three displaced Piute Indians are starving on their breath and ready to die. Then 50 years later a thriving community exist. Only the Piute Indians have multiplied like rabbits with a population that rivals the commies. Piute from all over the globe have migrated to that remote Nevada location and are demanding now that the commies (who fattened them up and allowed them to multiply) leave and give them back their land. Never mind that most of the Piute land is across the California border where they have been partitioned of in a reservation.

But with that comparison would have to be that Commies always were there from the beginning and were slowly migrating back, albeit in fewer numbers before the Germans put them there in mass.

Then your anology would be more accurate.

 

I never said they were. But they were a fuck of a lot richer (and more importantly, backed by people who were richer again) than the people living upon the land they moved in on.

You're disgusted by an accurate generalisation? You should get out more.

 

I should get out more, but refuse to compare that with generalisations and their accuracy.

 

As long as you belive that that mountainrange has more than one mountain !
The division is an important part of how it WORKS. Work aint plan.

The survivors from the Holocaust were not richer than the farmers in Palestine. The Jewish settlers in Palestine were "richer". At least in terms of technical know-how and a scientific world view.

I doubt that the total number of jews supporting the settlers owned more than the total number of kings and presidents that declared war on the postage-stamp.

Why dont you all worry about those two petite cities Spain holds on maroccan soil in stead. It is a better focus and a world wide shift where Spain was the bad imperialist would alleviate the pain for millions of palestinians. Does this righteous rethoric help the palestinians or just make a nice warm post-"christian" feeling of righteousness in the one repeatinmg this old stance :roll:

 

That should be CONTROLLED more. Not OWNED more. Sorry