[Tailz]

LINK for the Bolded portion?
This should be good ! !

I don't keep hyperlinks to every factoid in the conflict, what do you think I am, Google? Besides I don't think the Israeli and Turkish newspaper microfilms are accessible online.

Besides, we both know even if I had a link, you would think it Is some kind of anti-Zionist conspiracy.

So... Meh.

Tailz wrote: The creation of etho-religious character states, only guarantees etho-religious discrimination. The only difference will be that the watch towers will be manned by Jews, instead of Aryans.

Are you really at peace with that kind of outcome? That the only way Jews can be protected is if they become the oppressors?

Many states are "ethno-religious", perhaps most.

This is very true, from the break up of the multi ethnic kingdoms, which is ultimately the outcome of the First World War.

Just because there are many states that arose as such, does not mean such violence and discrimination as I defined, did not occurs. Which sadly, it did, and continues to do so.

So why repeat the same mistake?

We can see that as laws evolve, ethnic nationalism is in decline as membership in the state, citizenship, no longer is defined by a native culture, ethnicity, or religion. But it is a slow evolution.

The two/few newest countries are Ethno-religious, in fact were Necessarily so: South Sudan and the break-up states of former Yugoslavia. Ooops. the India/Pak (Muslim/Hindu) Partition was the year Before the Israel/Palestine one.

Your building a straw man argument here, I didn't write that such states don't exist, or that new ones are being or will be created. I wrote that such a model for a state, results in discrimination. The examples your giving, prove this.

Do you think [Hated] Jews would fare any better than Christians in the Middle East were it not for Sovereignty?

The problem was, sovereignty for who? Obviously when you propose powers for one group, over others, the others are not going to be pleased. In every situation throughout history where one group has been given higher status that those about it, you end up with the master and slave mentality. Which results in conflict of one kind or another.

I Love Bigoted Clowns who Pretend they are applying some 'universal principle'.. when they're not at all. And if they did it wouldn't fly.

So putting forward my wish that I don't wish to see Israeli Jews become discriminating racists, makes me a bigoted clown?

BTW, the EU Commission considers the inapt/insult-intended comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany to be Hate Speech.

I think you failed to understand the context of what I wrote. Ter appeared to understand that it was not an insult, but a voice of concern. Why not you?

[Lancer]

Sorry but i don't think I buy that graph. I would like to see the graph that shows how many rockets are fired, how many Palestinian attacks occur in the days and weeks before each of these airstrikes and military operations.

The IDF may have state of the art killing machines but its holding back (most of the time anyway). Hamas and company are trying to do their worse against a civilian population with the little that they have. You can also see the difference between operation pillar of cloud and operation cast lead. More rockets were fired in pillar of cloud including attacks on Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, but Iron Dome was widely deployed and that's why a smaller Israeli military operation was needed. The result is fewer Palestinian casualties.
My advice to the Palestinians is to yeah sure, resist the occupation ..in other ways. They shouldn't try to terrorize the Israeli population when the balance of power is clearly against them, that is just not a good idea.

[jessupjonesjnr87]

The Palestinians are in a desperate fight for survival, I would do everything I could if I was in a desperate fight for survival wouldn't you? By the way Israel aren't holding back, their being held back by the west.

[Buzz62]

Sorry but i don't think I buy that graph. I would like to see the graph that shows how many rockets are fired, how many Palestinian attacks occur in the days and weeks before each of these airstrikes and military operations.

The IDF may have state of the art killing machines but its holding back (most of the time anyway). Hamas and company are trying to do their worse against a civilian population with the little that they have. You can also see the difference between operation pillar of cloud and operation cast lead. More rockets were fired in pillar of cloud including attacks on Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, but Iron Dome was widely deployed and that's why a smaller Israeli military operation was needed. The result is fewer Palestinian casualties.
My advice to the Palestinians is to yeah sure, resist the occupation ..in other ways. They shouldn't try to terrorize the Israeli population when the balance of power is clearly against them, that is just not a good idea.

Should the Palestinian people follow your advise, the violence would be curtailed, but the world focus on this region would also be curtailed.
The best thing the Palestinian people can do is apply as much pressure as possible.
Keep the region in the news.
Make sure the globe is aware if this gross injustice that has gone on for almost a century now.
Push until the gates burst open and the world finally sees the truth behind the wall of media and western governmental white-washes.
The Zionists must be exposed for all to see clearly.
Then...it'll be more than just the Palestinians standing up to this tyranny.

[Lancer]

^ A lot of hyperbole there, but anyway there are many ways to stay in the news. The Palestinians have been a lot more effective with their constant media campaigns and diplomatic efforts. It worked a lot better than sending suicide bombers and firing rockets, that only managed to destroy the Oslo process and make the Israeli public more hawkish. Not all publicity is good publicity.

[Buzz62]

^ A lot of hyperbole there, but anyway there are many ways to stay in the news. The Palestinians have been a lot more effective with their constant media campaigns and diplomatic efforts. It worked a lot better than sending suicide bombers and firing rockets, that only managed to destroy the Oslo process and make the Israeli public more hawkish. Not all publicity is good publicity.

No news...is bad news.

Tell me something...when was the last suicide bomber? Or perhaps the last rocket launch?
Now...can you tell me when the last house was built on the West Bank for Israeli settlements?
If dip efforts worked so well...why are the settlements still being built?
Why can't Palestinians get fresh drinking water?
Why are Palestinian homes still being demolished?

[Lancer]

Buzz62, why don't you tell me all that.
And while you're at it you can also tell me how Palestinian terrorism was successful in stopping settlements construction.
Because like i said and like Xbow said before me, its seems to me that it only managed to accelerate it and to strengthen the Israeli right.

Another point, i happen to be against the settlements and anything to do with them, but building houses on disputed territory is not the same as trying to kill people. Well actually making the entire Palestinian population homeless and denying them water can be seen as an attempt to mass murder them, but luckily that is just you wildly exaggerating again. Since I'm not really interested in that type of discussion I'll leave that at that.

[Buzz62]

Here's what diplomatic efforts produce.

13 September, 2013 marks the twentieth anniversary of the signing of the Oslo Accords. Since then, Palestinians have come no closer to achieving their basic water rights. In the West Bank, Palestinians have access to less water per capita than they did in 1993 due to Israel’s continued exploitation of the shared mountain aquifer, and the restrictions it imposes on the development of essential Palestinian water infrastructure. As a result, Palestinians are increasingly dependent on purchased water from Israel to meet their basic water needs. In the Gaza Strip, less than 5 percent of the water extracted from the Coastal aquifer – the only source of water available to Palestinians due to unfair water allocations and Israel’s blockade – is safe to drink. The denial of Palestinian water rights has become a permanent feature under the Oslo Interim Accords. Access to safe, reliable and adequate water supplies is a basic right, and should not be held hostage to negotiations or a final agreement. It is time to think outside of the Oslo framework. It is time to act on water.

Quick Facts:

The Oslo Accords left Israel in control over almost all of the shared water resources in the oPt. Palestinian water allocations from these shared resources have remained capped at 1995 levels (Oslo II Agreement), despite the Palestinian population having doubled since then.

Palestinians currently utilize no more than 10 per cent of the shared water resources, while Israel exploits the rest.[1] Under customary international water law, these same water resources should be shared equitably and reasonably.

The average domestic consumption rate among Palestinians living in the West Bank is 70 liters per capita per day (l/c/d). The “absolute minimum” recommended by the WHO is 100 l/c/d. In Israel, it is 300 l/c/d.[2]

Palestinians have the lowest access to freshwater resources in the region as compared to Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Israel.[3]

Largely due to permit restrictions preventing the rehabilitation and development of essential water infrastructure, Palestinian water abstraction rates from the West Bank Mountain aquifers have fallen from 138 million cubic meters (MCM) in 1999, to 113MCM in 2007,[4] to 86.9MCM in 2011.[5]

Palestinian reliance on purchased water from Israel has increased in the West Bank. In 2004, the PWA purchased 38MCM from Israel. In 2011, this had increased to 52MCM.

In 2011, only 264 Palestinian wells were operational in the West Bank.[6] That compares to 774 Palestinian wells operational in 1967.[7]

Israeli settlers in the Jordan Valley consume on average 81 times more water than Palestinians in the West Bank.[8]

Some 50,000 Palestinians in 151 communities live on less than 20 lpcd, which is the minimum amount recommended by the WHO for “short-term survival” in emergency and disaster situations.[9]

The demolition of essential Palestinian water and sanitation infrastructure – such as wells, cisterns, rainwater tanks, latrines and sewage treatment units – has been a consistent feature of Israel’s occupation, and remains a primary cause of Palestinian displacement, particularly in Area C.[10]

Under Oslo, Israel is obliged to sell approximately 5 MCM/yr to Gaza, a quota that was calculated based on a 748,000 population figure. Today, the population in Gaza has more than doubled but the water quotas have not been revised accordingly.[11]

Gaza’s share of the Coastal aquifer is being over-pumped by twice its sustainable yield to meet growing demands, leading to its depletion and contamination. Demand for fresh water is expected to grow by 60% by 2020.[12]

95% of the water abstracted from coastal aquifer in Gaza is contaminated with dangerous levels of either Nitrate or Chloride or both, and unfit for human consumption.

Gaza´s Coastal aquifer could become completely unusable by 2016 and the damage irreversible by 2020 if no alternative water resources are provided.

http://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/hung-out-dry-%E2%80%93-20-years-denying-palestinian-water-rights
Does this look like a wild exaggeration to you?


And as these people look on while their home in the West Bank is destroyed...

Do you sorta figure watching your family home being torn down to make room for Israel settlements, or anything, is gonna make these Palestinians say, "Oh well...they dispute this land our home is on so...it's OK. We understand."

Man what colour is your sky...

[Wrath_014]

I don't know how you can complain about a few rockets when Israel are attacking Palestinians in the Gaza Strip with some of the most state of the art killing machines available.

The Palestinians are in a desperate fight for survival, I would do everything I could if I was in a desperate fight for survival wouldn't you? By the way Israel aren't holding back, their being held back by the west.

Here's the hero talks.....Have you ever been shot at? I guess not...and I hope you'll never will.

There is a big difference whats the target/purpose of the attack. While they (All the Palestinian "heroes") who target INTENTIONALLY Israeli citizens, and on the other hand the IDF who targets those militants that in a lot of cases hid behind their own people.....

The Palestinians, currently, are not fighting for their survival....They have a more urged things to do..Check out Palestinian inner affairs...

And jesup, Israel is holding back...But you don't know - or don't care, mainly, becase you're full of propaganda nonsese...
Gee..

And as these people look on while their home in the West Bank is destroyed...

Instead of using the lowest kind of debate, why won't you prove what you satated now? Can you prove that this particular house was destroyed to make room for an Israeli settlement? Do you know why it was destroyed?

Pff the idea of a new settlement everyday is absurd(hell even every month)...And even more absurd is that you guys buy it.
Common.

[Buzz62]

Actually...what's absurd is that I'm debating racial equality with a Zionist.

You can and will make you excuses and use that ever so practiced subterfuge that Zionists have become so good with.
But it changes nothing.
The world is slowly lining up against Israel.
Soon all the free money being pumped there by the west...will end.
The Zionists will cry foul...but by that time...none of us will care anymore.
Israel will be alone...surrounded...and left with a choice between nuking the entire region, or giving up.
Should they choose the former...the rest of the globe's Jews will pay the price, as they will once again be social outcasts.
But hey...The Jewish State was worth it...right?

[Tailz]

Here's the hero talks.....Have you ever been shot at? I guess not...and I hope you'll never will.

Being shot at does not justify any kind of reprisal you like. We need to prosecute criminals, not entire societies! Which is the exact problem when Israel punishes all Palestinians for the acts of a few Palestinians.

There is a big difference whats the target/purpose of the attack. While they (All the Palestinian "heroes") who target INTENTIONALLY Israeli citizens, and on the other hand the IDF who targets those militants that in a lot of cases hid behind their own people.....

Not really the complete story there. I think to the Palestinians, they see their attacks - rockets - as an attack against an overall entity: Israel/Zionism. Which sadly means attacks against Jews, any Jew, as an attack against they entity - which also is partially created by the Israeli government narrative that sculpts the image as Israel being the embodiment of Jewishness - an embodiment which Palestinians perceive as an enemy as the agents of "Israel" are those who covet the lands they live upon.

While on the flip side, having discussed IDF raids with some friends who used to conduct raids in Gaza and the West Bank - the intention to only go after militants is there, but how individual soldiers act often leads to a situation where anyone can get hurt, not just the militants.

The Palestinians, currently, are not fighting for their survival....They have a more urged things to do..Check out Palestinian inner affairs...

Bit hard to concentrate on internal affairs when an external force is causing problems. I'm quite certain Israel would find it hard to concentrate on internal matters if it was occupied by a hostile external force that prevents trade, restricts movement, and permits hostile settlers to inset themselves into the host population.

And jesup, Israel is holding back...But you don't know - or don't care, mainly, becase you're full of propaganda nonsese...
Gee..

I don't think it is a case of holding back, it is more a case of how individuals act when in the territories. Most IDF soldiers are highly professional and conduct themselves very well. While some others, are less desirable in how they act. That is what you get when you have the kids of parents, put into the military in a confrontation of this nature. How do you think a kid who has been terrified by rockets from Gaza, is going to act when you put him into a position of power as a soldier and send him into Gaza?

[Wrath_014]

Being shot at does not justify any kind of reprisal you like. We need to prosecute criminals, not entire societies! Which is the exact problem when Israel punishes all Palestinians for the acts of a few Palestinians.

Well, Taliz, those "criminals" are being chased (by air, of course, usually when it's clear they're being shot), sadly, they resort to the easy way, in which they hide or even lauch their rockets from crowded areas. Knowingly that the IDF won't attack due to fear of collateral damage.
Yes, in massive fightings, there is a collateral damage (which is a very sad thing) but thats is something that can't be denied all the time. From what I've known, the IDF tries its best to avoid any damage to the civilian population, but when it happens, most of the blame is on the people who intended for it to happen, which is the militants/terrorits (P.R reasons).

Not really the complete story there. I think to the Palestinians, they see their attacks - rockets - as an attack against an overall entity: Israel/Zionism. Which sadly means attacks against Jews, any Jew, as an attack against they entity - which also is partially created by the Israeli government narrative that sculpts the image as Israel being the embodiment of Jewishness - an embodiment which Palestinians perceive as an enemy as the agents of "Israel" are those who covet the lands they live upon.

They know they shoot on innocents, and hell, they are very proud of it.
To say that it's they only way they can "express" their resistance is quite frankly dead wrong. They have many ways, but still, they resort to the easy way. Frankly, they want to hurt the Israeli population, that's their aim (Hamas, Jihad).

Many Palestinians work in Israel (By choice, BTW) so they get to know Israelis and vice versa. Trust me, they do know to make the difference.

While on the flip side, having discussed IDF raids with some friends who used to conduct raids in Gaza and the West Bank - the intention to only go after militants is there, but how individual soldiers act often leads to a situation where anyone can get hurt, not just the militants.

Indeed you're right, you can't control the beheviour of all IDF soldiers. But for that there is the Army court, commanders and well self control.

I don't think it is a case of holding back, it is more a case of how individuals act when in the territories. Most IDF soldiers are highly professional and conduct themselves very well. While some others, are less desirable in how they act. That is what you get when you have the kids of parents, put into the military in a confrontation of this nature. How do you think a kid who has been terrified by rockets from Gaza, is going to act when you put him into a position of power as a soldier and send him into Gaza?

Quite right again. Still, they are trained and taught to avoid these issues. But, again, it's a matter of an individual....

[abu afak]

abu afak: LINK for the Bolded portion?
This should be good ! !


Tailz: I don't keep hyperlinks to every factoid in the conflict, what do you think I am, Google? Besides I don't think the Israeli and Turkish newspaper microfilms are accessible online.

Besides, we both knew even if I had a link, you would think it Is some kind of anti-Zionist conspiracy.

So... Meh.

We Both know you were LYING to embellish Your opinion.
Now we ALL Know you were Lying.
"Factoid" my ass.
:^)

The creation of etho-religious character states, only guarantees etho-religious discrimination. The only difference will be that the watch towers will be manned by Jews, instead of Aryans.

Are you really at peace with that kind of outcome? That the only way Jews can be protected is if they become the oppressors?

Many states are "ethno-religious", perhaps most.

This is very true, from the break up of the multi ethnic kingdoms, which is ultimately the outcome of the First World War.
Just because there are many states that arose as such, does not mean such violence and discrimination as I defined, did not occurs. Which sadly, it did, and continues to do so.
So why repeat the same mistake?We can see that as laws evolve, ethnic nationalism is in decline as membership in the state, citizenship, no longer is defined by a native culture, ethnicity, or religion. But it is a slow evolution.

1. It isn't/wasn't a "mistake".
You were not able to address my point as to what would have happened to Jews in the Area without Sovereignty.

2. At The Time, Your Singular objection was to the Jewish state, and Only it's ethnicity.
You claimed Ethnicity Guaranteed oppression. (when talking about Israel of course) This is precisely the 'universal principle' BS I debunked.

I pointed the universality of this oft basis for statehood.
In Fact Jews, Unlike Today's Palestinians, Accepted Their state with 540,000 Jews and 390,000 fully Enfranchised Arabs in a Democracy.
Also unlike say, Jordan, where a Saudi Hashemite was given Permanent power/King-ship over a Majority of 'Palestinians'.
Nothing on that huh?

The two/few newest countries are Ethno-religious, in fact were Necessarily so: South Sudan and the break-up states of former Yugoslavia. Ooops. the India/Pak (Muslim/Hindu) Partition was the year Before the Israel/Palestine one.

Your building a straw man argument here, I didn't write that such states don't exist, or that new ones are being or will be created. I wrote that such a model for a state, results in discrimination. The examples your giving, prove this.

On the contrary, I was destroying/Destroyed Your Strawman on the same topic.

Do you think [Hated] Jews would fare any better than Christians in the Middle East were it not for Sovereignty?

The problem was, sovereignty for who? Obviously when you propose powers for one group, over others, the others are not going to be pleased. In every situation throughout history where one group has been given about en higher status that those about it, you end up with the master and slave mentality. Which results in conflict of one kind or another.

Arabs were given 77% of the Mandate in 'Jordan'.
AS I said above...
Jews were not only Not given most of the Mandate but Not all of "lesser Palestine' Either.
Arabs (aka 'palestinians') were given a 'Palestine' Alongside 'Israel ... but Rejected it. Rejected sharing the land/Sovereignty.
These Arabs would be a minority in a second/Third state, Israel (tho fully enfranchised) as well as getting a separate near 100% Arab state.
More than Fair and not at all Unjust.
You FAILED in your fair-sounding but non-historically-educated (more likely Disingenuous) post.

I Love Bigoted Clowns who Pretend they are applying some 'universal principle'.. when they're not at all. And if they did it wouldn't fly.

So putting forward my with that I don't wish to see Israeli Jews become discriminating racists, makes me a bigoted clown?

No, but everything you said was Historically inaccurate with the intention of Painting Israel AS Racist.
A/another dishonest semantic attempt at deception.
You're quoting but Not addressing what's in it. I debunked your many refs to Israel as singularly an ethnic (and ergo necessarily racist) state.
I not only know the history better, I'm much more clever semantically.

BTW, the EU Commission considers the inapt/insult-intended comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany to be Hate Speech.

I think you failed to understand the context of what I wrote. Ter appeared to understand that it was not an insult, but a voice of concern. Why not you?

Um.... In the very post I was answering you alluded to the Jews manning the watchtowers instead of Aryans.
And I'll bet I can find Many more from you.
`

[Tailz]

Well, Taliz, those "criminals" are being chased (by air, of course, usually when it's clear they're being shot), sadly, they resort to the easy way, in which they hide or even lauch their rockets from crowded areas. Knowingly that the IDF won't attack due to fear of collateral damage.

Yes, in massive fightings, there is a collateral damage (which is a very sad thing) but thats is something that can't be denied all the time. From what I've known, the IDF tries its best to avoid any damage to the civilian population, but when it happens, most of the blame is on the people who intended for it to happen, which is the militants/terrorits (P.R reasons).

I totally agree that criminals act unjustly - such as hiding amongst the innocent. But just because they do, does not justify throwing away ethics and morals in the methods of pursuing them (eg: causing collateral harm to innocent people).

They know they shoot on innocents, and hell, they are very proud of it.

I agree, but you find the same mentality on both sides when we saw Israeli's toasting with wine, each time Israeli artillery shelled Gaza on a BBC report during the last big raid.

To say that it's they only way they can "express" their resistance is quite frankly dead wrong. They have many ways, but still, they resort to the easy way. Frankly, they want to hurt the Israeli population, that's their aim (Hamas, Jihad).

Not my point at all, I didn't write that what they currently do, is the only thing they can do. Plus, terrorism is not the only form of resistance the Palestinans have tried. They have tried various forms of civil disobedience, approaching international groups and governments, and boycotts.

So obviously, your wrong that terrorism is all they do.

Many Palestinians work in Israel (By choice, BTW) so they get to know Israelis and vice versa. Trust me, they do know to make the difference.

20% of the population of Israel is Palestinian, a lot more than those who work in Israel from the occupied territories. While many Israeli settlements even involve many Palestinian labourers who build them. So obviously there is interaction.

So yes, they do know to make the difference. I agree. But the same can be said of Israeli settlers, yet we still see settlers coveting the land upon which the Palestinians live - or the scenes of Israeli Jews chanting a certain chant that does not warrant repeating.

So they both know better - while you say only the Palestinians know better but still do wrong. They both know better...

Indeed you're right, you can't control the beheviour of all IDF soldiers. But for that there is the Army court, commanders and well self control.

The intention for legal oversight is there, but groups like Peace Now have found that this sadly fails in execution. For example palestinian testimony is often discarded in favour of testimony from IDF solders (even to the point of the preferring accused vs victim testimony). Don't take my word for it, go read about it on Peace Now, or Btslam (or the legal NGO for Palestinian representation, the name of which escapes me at the moment).

Quite right again. Still, they are trained and taught to avoid these issues. But, again, it's a matter of an individual....

You can teach a person the highest degree of morals and ethics, yet they can still turn out to be an asshole.

[Tailz]

Now we ALL Know you were Lying.

Well... you think I was lying, most other folks around PoFo whom I have discussed this topic with for a number of years now, know me a bit better than you.

N"Factoid" my ass.
:^)

Then you could try and prove that there was an abundance of joy by the local Jewish community upon the arrival of the European Zionists. Or that Zionism itself, didn't gain in popularity until the Nazi persecutions, and really got going in the years after the Holocaust - in the face of disapproval by the diaspora community towards Zionism before such an about face in reaction to the Nazi persecution and subsequent terror of the holocaust.

1. It isn't/wasn't a "mistake".

Acts that result in massive amounts of discrimination, violence, and bloodshed... I count as mistakes.

You were not able to address my point as to what would have happened to Jews in the Area without Sovereignty.

I'm not quantifying a "what if" question with an answer to which you can make up any outcome. Try rephrasing the question from a basis of what could have happened, to what did happen.

2. At The Time, Your Singular objection was to the Jewish state, and Only it's ethnicity.

I have been posting here for a good few years, my objection to ethno-religious character states of all flavours, is well known. So yes, you can try that old trick that I am only against a Jewish state, but incrimination fails because I'm also not in favour of an Arabic state, or an Islamic one, or a Christian one, or Asian, Atheist, White, Black, or a state for Artists.

You claimed Ethnicity Guaranteed oppression. (when talking about Israel of course) This is precisely the 'universal principle' BS I debunked.

I defined that characterising a state by one overall etho-religious identity, guarantees discrimination against members of the state who do not fit that profile. Although my comment was made in relation to Israel, my point of view is worded with all ethno-religious states in mind.

I pointed the universality of this oft basis for statehood.
In Fact Jews, Unlike Today's Palestinians, Accepted Their state with 540,000 Jews and 390,000 fully Enfranchised Arabs in a Democracy.

When? Which point in time and which leaders? David ben gurion is on record as accepting smaller concessions of territory, which he saw as stepping stones for military expansion into greater Israel. While using economic coercion to force Arabs of Jewish territory by a refusal to employ them. Which is not as accepting of such agreements as you make out.

While a reliance on the demographic imbalance to political disempower Israel's non-Jewish population at the ballot box has been entrenched in Zionist ideology for generations. Thus why any moves to redress this, such as the Palestinian right of return, are hotly contested.

Also unlike say, Jordan, where a Saudi Hashemite was given Permanent power/King-ship over a Majority of 'Palestinians'.
Nothing on that huh?

Although I see a use for royalty - see the current British monarchy as a role model - the Saudi royal system has been a step towards stagnation, not progression.

The two/few newest countries are Ethno-religious, in fact were Necessarily so: South Sudan and the break-up states of former Yugoslavia. Ooops. the India/Pak (Muslim/Hindu) Partition was the year Before the Israel/Palestine one.

Tailz wrote: Your building a straw man argument here, I didn't write that such states don't exist, or that new ones are being or will be created. I wrote that such a model for a state, results in discrimination. The examples your giving, prove this.

On the contrary, I was destroying/Destroyed Your Strawman on the same topic.

I fail to how? Each example you gave are the result of, and continue to struggle with a legacy of ethno-religious violence. Which, in essence makes my case: define the state with a specific character, and discrimination against those who do not fit the profile ensues - as it did and still does in the examples you outlined.

Do you think [Hated] Jews would fare any better than Christians in the Middle East were it not for Sovereignty?

Tailz wrote: The problem was, sovereignty for who? Obviously when you propose powers for one group, over others, the others are not going to be pleased. In every situation throughout history where one group has been given about en higher status that those about it, you end up with the master and slave mentality. Which results in conflict of one kind or another.

Arabs were given 77% of the Mandate in 'Jordan'.
AS I said above...
Jews were not only Not given most of the Mandate but Not all of "lesser Palestine' Either.
Arabs (aka 'palestinians') were given a 'Palestine' Alongside 'Israel ... but Rejected it. Rejected sharing the land/Sovereignty.
These Arabs would be a minority in a second/Third state, Israel (tho fully enfranchised) as well as getting a separate near 100% Arab state.
More than Fair and not at all Unjust.
You FAILED in your fair-sounding but non-historically-educated (more likely Disingenuous) post.

You seem to perceive that I favoured giving title to any particular organisation in this conflict. I do not. So your huffing and puffing over who wanted what, and who got what, fails to move me as I see all belligerents in the conflict as power hungry leaders grasping for larger and larger nationalist selfish self interest goals.

But again, you have crafted another question based on a "what if?" Of history, again I feel no desire to answer a hypothetical "what if?" Which is an obvious philosophical trap, that has no correct answer.

I Love Bigoted Clowns who Pretend they are applying some 'universal principle'.. when they're not at all. And if they did it wouldn't fly.

Tailz wrote: So putting forward my with that I don't wish to see Israeli Jews become discriminating racists, makes me a bigoted clown?

No, but everything you said was Historically inaccurate with the intention of Painting Israel AS Racist.

Surely even you can see the dichotomy of evil between the preferential treatment of Jews and Palestinians that creates the ground for such accusations?

A/another dishonest semantic attempt at deception.

Ah no dude, I am not really smart enough to use deception. I find my simplistic ideals of universal equality scary enough on its own for ethno-religious nationalists to fear me.

You're quoting but Not addressing what's in it. I debunked your many refs to Israel as singularly an ethnic (and ergo necessarily racist) state.

I never asserted Israel is of one ethno-religious homogeneous people, which is obvious because the Israeli state population includes more than just Jews. What I have taken issue with is attempts to legislate and create policy that seeks to grant one class of people within the state, a greater degree of importance and higher status. For doing so creates discrimination between those who fit that character, and those who do not.

I not only know the history better, I'm much more clever semantically.

You do realise that a Superiority complex, as just demonstrated by yourself, is a psychological defense mechanism in which a person's feelings of superiority counter or conceal his or her feelings of inferiority.

BTW, the EU Commission considers the inapt/insult-intended comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany to be Hate Speech.

Tailz wrote: I think you failed to understand the context of what I wrote. Ter appeared to understand that it was not an insult, but a voice of concern. Why not you?

Um.... In the very post I was answering you alluded to the Jews manning the watchtowers instead of Aryans.
And I'll bet I can find Many more from you.

Yet you still fail to see that My conversation with Ter, was over a concern that I don't want to see Jews as watch tower guards as the Aryans were. That is not hate, but compassion that I do not wish to see people do wrong to others.