Comments on: Soviet-Jewish Migration to Israel: Why do the Arabs fear it and fight it?

By: Curtis

Curtis — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:20:06 +0000

You’re right about that difference. The Arab peoples were much weaker than the US would be in a similar situation. However, my point was that we would not stand for our land to be taken away from us without our consent period, and if it was somehow forced upon us, and the Indians continued to encroach further upon our land and take more than the UN gave them, and if they were somehow able to oppress us and create the kind of place that Palestine is now… you get the picture. There is good reason for animosity between Israelis and Arabs. As I stated, the Arab nations appear to desire peace as is put forth in the Arab-Israeli peace initiative where normalization of relations would be a result.

The US history of industry and strength is, by the way, brought about by a pasttime of killing people as well.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:44:47 +0000

Chavez’s Idiot:

The UN can create away. The difference in such a situation would be that the U.S. is (would be, presumably) stronger than the Fantasy Indian State–so that if these ‘first people’ were to terrorize us, we would likely “erase them from the pages of history.”

This is not a small difference. Since the Arab peoples have made a pastime of killing each other instead of developing any cohesive society, they are in no position to force Israel out. The U.S. on the other hand has a history of industry and strength.

The closest parallel in your Indain homeland to the current situational reality, I suppose, would be if the U.K., China, Russia, Germany and whoever else decided to back Cherokee Nation 2.0. Then, yes, I suppose the U.S. would be forced to admit inferiority and draw a proverbial line in the sand somewhere. But even in such a bizarre situation, the best interest of all involved is to admit that the Indians have more influential friends, and live as Americans on whatever is left of the country–NOT KILL EVERYONE. This is somewhat similar to what Mexico was forced to do when the U.S. decided that part of Mexico was in fact part of the U.S. I assume you would vigorously defend suicide bombers in San Diego?

By: chavez's idiot

chavez's idiot — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:24:35 +0000

Mike,
The American Indian lived in North America for a long time before we white people came here. The UN should create and Indian state along the most prosperous east coast states and allow the Indians to terrorize the white people who live there so they’ll move out. We don’t have any right to be upset with this in America since we are the underlings.

This article is mistaken in its perception of the Arab world’s “hostility” towards Israel. The Arab Israeli peace initiative that most arab nations back and Iran backs as well, call for normalization of relations with Israel for certain concessions in land for palestinians. I think the people at FLAME are mistaken to believe that it is every arab nations desire to knock Israel out of the middle east.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:00:06 +0000

Dan:

Who cares? Why should the CEO of a company need consent from the underlings (and yes, to preempt your inevitable snide question–something along the lines of, “oh, so now the U.K./U.S./insert-your-own-hated-first-world-power-here is the CEO of the world?”–the most powerful country is the CEO of the world)?

I don’t wonder why there is animosity. I know why there is animosity and don’t care. Israel is less insane, wants to kill us less, thus they are right. And since the U.S. has the power to ensure their existence, it doesn’t matter a lick who gave consent to what.

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:11:00 +0000

It is important to remember that Israel was created for a specific purpose.

Note how even this article fails to note that it was created without the consent of the people who resided in the land! And you wonder why there is still such animosity towards both the Jews and the West from the Arabs.