Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 75

Thread: CNN Poll .. Should Isreal Dismantle Settlements?

  1. #1
    abu afak
    Guest

    VOTE! CNN Poll .. Should Isreal Dismantle Settlements?

    http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/wolf.blitzer.reports/

    Moderators may move this in a few hours after poll over.
    Last edited by abu afak; 06-16-2003 at 02:00 PM.

  2. #2
    Evgeny
    Guest
    76% yes
    24% no.

    elections are coming up soon for Bush.Jr.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616
    Do you trust completely unscientific surveys? Just click 900 times. Go ahead.

  4. #4
    rferry
    Guest
    it's even worse when you consider the actual question was "Should Israel dismantle all settlements in the West Bank and Gaza?"

  5. #5
    humus_sapiens
    Guest
    Originally posted by rferry
    it's even worse when you consider the actual question was "Should Israel dismantle all settlements in the West Bank and Gaza?"
    I vote for dismantling all the settlements where terror originated from (the Steve Metch's plan).

  6. #6
    Isiah 2:4
    Guest
    The question is not whether Israel should dismantle settle ments in the Territories, but when?

    So far, no-one has offered me any rational reason as to why the Settlements should stay. They bring no benefits to Israel or the Palestinians. They do not aid the resolution of conflict. So why keep them?

    I mean, the larger and older more established towns close to the 1967 borders and the extended Jerusalem surburbs, i agree, should remain. But, the settlements as a whole, as far as helping maintain Israel's security, or the quality and safety of Israeli's lives, offer nothing.

  7. #7
    rferry
    Guest
    well, they do let Palestinians waste Saudi Arabian bullets.

  8. #8
    ibrodsky
    Guest
    Originally posted by Isiah 2:4
    The question is not whether Israel should dismantle settle ments in the Territories, but when?

    So far, no-one has offered me any rational reason as to why the Settlements should stay. They bring no benefits to Israel or the Palestinians. They do not aid the resolution of conflict. So why keep them?

    I mean, the larger and older more established towns close to the 1967 borders and the extended Jerusalem surburbs, i agree, should remain. But, the settlements as a whole, as far as helping maintain Israel's security, or the quality and safety of Israeli's lives, offer nothing.
    I can give you a reason. Because Jews should be allowed to live in their historic homeland. The Jewish community of Hebron was driven out by a rampaging Arab mob in 1929 and re-established after the '67 war.

    Here's another reason: because the Palestinian demand for a Jew-free West Bank is racist and should be opposed.

    It's amazing. Demand that no blacks move into your neighborhood in the U.S. and you are a racist. Demand that a disliked ethnic minority leave any country and you are advocating ethnic cleansing.

    But demand that Jews leave areas in which they have lived for 3,000 years--in their historic homeland--and you are a reasonable person with a just demand.

    Notice that even settlers who said they would be willing to live in a Palestinian state that protects their right as a minority are required to leave.

    I guess it's another one of those exceptions in world politics: Racism and ethnic cleansing are wrong, except when dealing with Jews.

  9. #9
    rferry
    Guest
    That's true, but it's not just racism. Some of the settlements do host extremist fractions that shoot at Palestinians and steal olives. The roads that cut through the West Bank do disrupt daily life a bit. That building permits for Palestinians were restricted and the settlements were for only Jewish Israeli citizens, it is also seen as an illegal exchange of property.

  10. #10
    Communication
    Guest
    It's a drag on Israeli morale at a time when Israel is already losing on the ideological front. Also, this might be the last opportunity to really seperate from the Palestinians and maintain something of a Jewish homeland. No seperation, and the Palestinians will outnumber the Jews within a generation and we will end up with either apartheid or one more Arab controlled country in the ME.

  11. #11
    Isiah 2:4
    Guest
    Welcome back Communication!

    Hope you travels are proving insightful and enjoyable.

  12. #12
    Canajew
    Guest
    It is fairly clear that when the term "settlements" is used, most people have no idea what exactly they are talking about.

    Example: How many of the "settlers" live within, say 5 miles of the Israeli border, in suburbs that are, in effect, mere continuations of Israeli cities and towns? What percentage of "settlers" live in Jerusalem?

    I don;t know the numbers, but I would suspect that of the x million settlers, a large proportion of them live in appendages to existing Israeli communities. And they should not have to leave. the 1948 armistance lines were NEVER borders, and they were never meant to be. that's why the land is both occupied AND disputed. And in any agreement on any final borders, there is no reason these Jewish areas should not remain Israeli.

    And how come the Palestinians can so easily go on saying they want all the Jews to leave when if Israel said that about her Arabs the world would be up in arms? I'm not really sure its anti-semitism at all. In fact, I suspect its the opposite. It's not that the world perceives the Jews to be untrustworthy or evil or the like, rather they accept the fact that the Arabs, as a polity, are more or less savages. The world accepts that it is ok for them to act that way, to deny schooling to women, to condone slavery and the rest. I think that's where this double standard comes from. the Arabs are given more leeway because THEY are the ones that Europe and the rest perceive to be inferior. And the Jews, as a civilized people, are expected to get out of their way, lest they become more violent and more hostile.

    This just came to me, but it seems to explain so very much. Comments?

  13. #13
    Adversary2Arabs
    Guest
    CNN is owned by a Saudi Prince
    (Parent company is AOL-Time Warner - owned by allah akbar price of saudi arabia holy muslim land sdfsd) lol

  14. #14
    takeo
    Guest
    can give you a reason. Because Jews should be allowed to live in their historic homeland. The Jewish community of Hebron was driven out by a rampaging Arab mob in 1929 and re-established after the '67 war.
    all right, but according to this same logic, palestinian refugees and their family should be able to reestablish their communities within Israel.



    Here's another reason: because the Palestinian demand for a Jew-free West Bank is racist and should be opposed

    It's amazing. Demand that no blacks move into your neighborhood in the U.S. and you are a racist. Demand that a disliked ethnic minority leave any country and you are advocating ethnic cleansing.
    well, let's follow your example. presume you live in a white suburb of a big Texan city. Suddenly mexico invades texas(because of some historic claim), mexicans force you out of your house, destroy your house and built their own armed settlements with their own houses and own roads inaccessible for you, you will not become a citizen of Mexico and you have no rights in this new situation. Wouldn't you ask the mexicans AND the colonisers to leave Texas??? Wouldn't you resist and fight for your property?(this would be called terrorism by the Mexicans) perhaps you would even go as far as attacking innocent mexican settlers. That's comparable to what happened to the occupied territories, not some ordinary ethnic cleansing.


    But demand that Jews leave areas in which they have lived for 3,000 years--in their historic homeland--and you are a reasonable person with a just demand.
    ok, i'm a reasonable person with a just demand and i claim Louisiana because the French lived there some 200 years ago.

    Notice that even settlers who said they would be willing to live in a Palestinian state that protects their right as a minority are required to leave.
    well i think the ones who would be willing to live in a palestinian state as equal citizens should be able to do so. unfortunately most settlers consist of die-hard radical ultra-nationalist or ultra-religious fanatics who don't see the palestinians as equal human beings.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616
    Originally posted by takeo
    well i think the ones who would be willing to live in a palestinian state as equal citizens should be able to do so. unfortunately most settlers consist of die-hard radical ultra-nationalist or ultra-religious fanatics who don't see the palestinians as equal human beings.

    Other than being a completely biased racist ill informed statement did you have anything else?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Why they hate us....
    By MGB8 in forum Israeli-Arab Conflict
    Replies: 474
    Last Post: 09-28-2002, 01:39 AM
  2. Why the settlements are essential to peace
    By ibrodsky in forum Israeli-Arab Conflict
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-23-2002, 07:59 AM
  3. Americans approve Israel's acts (Poll)
    By Ezra in forum In The News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-09-2002, 02:11 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •