PDA

View Full Version : Should the US stop funding the Israeli military?



Pages : [1] 2

Shadow12345
12-19-2002, 06:00 PM
Should the US stop funding the Israeli military?

BMJ
12-19-2002, 06:10 PM
Hell no!

I am SO pro-Israel it's disturbing.

minesweeper
12-19-2002, 06:10 PM
Shadow12345,

Man you are on a roll tonight with these anti-military posts.

But anyway I vote yes, can't see there is any justification for it.

MadHatter
12-19-2002, 06:13 PM
i think all the countries should take all the money that they would be spending on milatary, and use it to by marshmallows and chocolate and grahm(?) crackers, and then we can all have smores and sing songs around a campfire together... but that's just me.

Shadow12345
12-19-2002, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by BMJ
Hell no!

I am SO pro-Israel it's disturbing.

Could you explain why? Why don't you take the Palestinian's side?

I don't have a strong opinion either way, I'm actually using you people to form my own opinions because I have little access to humans that can carry on intelligent conversations (none exist in my state, few in my country, in fact most intelligent people are in Germany because they do things like invent lightbulbs that never burn out).

minesweeper
12-19-2002, 06:21 PM
>>(none exist in my state, few in my country, in fact most intelligent people are in Germany because they do things like invent lightbulbs that never burn out)<<


LOL!!!!! That's gonna have me chuckling for quite some time!!

RoD
12-19-2002, 06:22 PM
YES, we have our own problems that need money!

BMJ
12-19-2002, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by Shadow12345
Could you explain why? Why don't you take the Palestinian's side?I'm not going to argue; I stated how I feel, I do have reasoning for it.

Shadow12345
12-19-2002, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by Shadow12345

I don't have a strong opinion either way

You're right, we're not going to argue.


I do have reasoning for it.


What is your reasoning? I'm asking because I'm curious to find out what other people think, as in I'm posting in a completely non-offensive way, cheer up a bit BMJ.

Just to let you know you are pretty much defeating this thread by not Discussing it.

golfinguy4
12-19-2002, 08:57 PM
I definately do NOT support how Israel reacts. Example

[Israel] Oh no, some terrorists attacked us. Let's take it out on the entire population of Palestine.

novacain
12-19-2002, 09:02 PM
Have you looked at the amount the US sends Israel?

Then compared this to the Gross Domestic Products of Israel's neighbours?

The total Palestinian GDP is less than the military aid sent to Israel by the US.

Considering Israel is the 16 richest country with 0.0001% of the worlds population I think 1/3 of ALL US aid is excessive.

Nearly 50% of Palistinians live on less than US$2 per day. Nearly 40% are unemployed.

Total income losses arising from Israeli-imposed border closures amount to around $2.4 billion, in addition to over $300 million in infrastructure damage (caused by Israeli military actions).

US aid is less than US$140 Million to Palistine (compared to over US$4 Billion to Israel)

Sentaku senshi
12-19-2002, 09:26 PM
Isreal has every right to exist on the boarders that it the UN set for it when it was created. It also has the right do to treates from the wars the suronding countries started to keep ocupied land until the countries who land it is admits that isreal has a right to exist. It has done this by giving egypt is land back.

Simply giving the rest of the land back that it occupies will not solve the problem as the terriost orginaztions want it off the map nothing less. The other problem lies in the fact the Palistine Goverment can not control the terorist orginaztions and thus an outside force would be need to control this orginaztions, perfubly though not the US or Isreal.

I however don't agree with a lot of Isreals recent decisions it's general history has been a lot better then Palisitne, Egypt, ect.

Eigenvalue
12-19-2002, 09:38 PM
Sentaku senshi,

Couldn't have said it any better.

Eigenvalue

Scourfish
12-19-2002, 09:45 PM
We'll stop funding the Isreali military just as soon as we have assimilated the entire world.

minesweeper
12-19-2002, 09:48 PM
>>Isreal has every right to exist on the boarders that it the UN set for it when it was created. It also has the right do to treates from the wars the suronding countries started to keep ocupied land until the countries who land it is admits that isreal has a right to exist. It has done this by giving egypt is land back.

Simply giving the rest of the land back that it occupies will not solve the problem as the terriost orginaztions want it off the map nothing less. The other problem lies in the fact the Palistine Goverment can not control the terorist orginaztions and thus an outside force would be need to control this orginaztions, perfubly though not the US or Isreal.

I however don't agree with a lot of Isreals recent decisions it's general history has been a lot better then Palisitne, Egypt, ect.<<

This debate isn't really about whether Israel has the right to exist or not. More about whether America should continue to supply it with arms when it's clear from the news broadcasts that it uses them to impose curfews (sp?) on the palestinians and even, for example in the case of Jenin, demolish entire towns of civillian property.

Israel does things to Palestinians that we would consider to be enormous breaches of basic human rights. So is it therefore ethical for America to supply it with the tools necessary to do so? That is the real question of this thread.

*ClownPimp*
12-19-2002, 11:23 PM
Yes we should. America as a prime directive (if you will) to support the spread of democracy around the world, esp. in hostile areas. You cant get more hostile than the Middle East.

Supporting the spread includes supporting those already in existence. I cant say that I agree with all of what Isreal does but the blame isnt entirely on their shoulders.

Clyde
12-20-2002, 05:40 AM
Yes, they should stop.

It seems exceedingly unethical to me, and it harms America: a large portion of the anti-US feeling in the Middle-East is due to the US backing of Israel.

*ClownPimp*
12-20-2002, 09:29 AM
Oops, my response should have been No we shouldnt :)

Shadow12345
12-20-2002, 09:30 AM
This debate isn't really about whether Israel has the right to exist or not. More about whether America should continue to supply it with arms


Correct minesweeper, there is no simple answer to 'whether or not israel should exist' and to tell you the truth, it probably won't cease to 'exist' whether it should or shouldn't.

By Clyde:


It seems exceedingly unethical to me, and it harms America: a large portion of the anti-US feeling in the Middle-East is due to the US backing of Israel.

My exact thoughts. I wonder if the support of Israel has/had anything to do with the Al-Qaida (and similar) terrorist groups that oppose the us.

*ClownPimp*
12-20-2002, 09:35 AM
>It seems exceedingly unethical to me

How so?

>I wonder if the support of Israel has/had anything to do with the Al-Qaida (and similar) terrorist groups that oppose the us.

I dont think it does. Supporting Isreal started long before terrorist groups were a large threat to the US.

minesweeper
12-20-2002, 10:28 AM
>>Supporting Isreal started long before terrorist groups were a large threat to the US.<<

That doesn't necessarily mean that the support of Israel wasn't to blame for terrorist groups forming. It could just be that it takes time for these groups to obtain the money, manpower, resources etc to become a threat. But I am just raising a point here, not being part of a middle eastern terrorist organisation means I don't really know.

Clyde
12-20-2002, 10:30 AM
"How so?"

Hmm, the Israel-Palestine issue is not simple, the educated UK population seems to be quite pro-Palestine (but in most cases the arguments presented seem quite biased), in the US pro-Israeli opinion seems to dominate (a skeptic might point to the large Jewish community within the US).

My opinions on the subject has oscillated around a central tenent that both sides have done, and continue to do quite horrible things to each other.

The history is complex, convoluted and contrary to what both sides claim it does not clearly show one side to be in the right.

I find the arming of the Israeli government to be a somewhat arbitrary taking of sides. If we turn back the clock and reverse the Palestinian and Israeli positions i rather think that the US involvement would have been quite different: In 1948 when Israel was attacked, I cannot see the US intervening if it had been the Palestinians who had declared a state of Palestine and were hence under attack from neighbouring pro-Israeli countries wanting to install an Israeli controlled government. That amongst other factors (the damage to the peace process, the US political and economic interests in the area) seems to make the US-involvement unethical.

I don't in any way condone suicide bombers, but i don't condone the Israeli shootings and mistreatment of Palestinian people either. Nor do i believe that responding with more and more force accomplishes anything what-so-ever; the more force Israel throws at the Palestinians the more suicide bombers rise from the Palestinian population. Arming Israel merely furthers the cycle.

The Palestinian people have terrible problems, the money spent on arming Israel with missiles, tanks and bombs, could be spent improving the life of Palestinian refugees thrown out of their homes 50 years ago hence easing some of the Palestinian feelings of hostility towards the Israelis. I also see it as fundamentally damaging to the peace process: the US as the world's strongest super-power can have a very beneficial effect by soothing troubled areas, several attempts have been made to support the peace process in Israel, but remember you are then asking the Palestinians to listen to an outsider who is also arming their enemy! Of course Palestinians are naturally suspect of any proposals from the West as inherently anti-Palestinian. How much more effective could US intervention as a force for peace be, if they weren't seen by the Palestinians as a country in-league with their enemies?

Its a complicated situation with no easy solution, but i really do not think throwing more weapons into the mix helps anyone.

Shadow12345
12-20-2002, 11:36 AM
Well clyde I was going to quote you on a few specific areas but i agree with everything you have just said. I think you have just pretty much summed up the entire situation

*ClownPimp*
12-20-2002, 12:13 PM
hmmm, im starting to reconsider my position...

http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html

Clyde
12-20-2002, 12:43 PM
That source certainly is interesting because its (supposedly) written by someone who is Jewish, but it does seem a little one sided.

Most articles you find about Israel-Palestine are biased, so i am always a little suspect of articles that have a clear conclusion as to whom is in the right.

(I find it odd there is no mention of the Peel and Woodhead commissions of 1937 and 1938 which recommended partioning Palestine into a small Jewish state a large Arab one)

One i have found which seems about as close to unbiased as possible is:

http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm

They only state events without passing judgement on them.

My own personal stance is certainly more sympathetic towards the Palestinians (with regards to the history) BUT i do not think they are entirely blame-less.

Shiro
12-20-2002, 01:04 PM
I voted yes, I don't like war and people funding wars.

Shadow12345
12-20-2002, 02:26 PM
My own personal stance is certainly more sympathetic towards the Palestinians (with regards to the history) BUT i do not think they are entirely blame-less.


I don't know if you knew this or not, I assume you did but I must say it anyway: The Jewish people were the first group in recorded history to live in Israel (don't know what it was called back then, so I just call it Israel always). I don't remember what the specific reasons were, but the Romans considered the Jewish people a nuisance and they were taken out of their land and dispersed all throughout Asia and Europe. And guess who moved in? The Palestinian people. For a very long time the Palestinians lived in 'Israel' (although it was called Palestine when they lived there) until about 50 years ago when the US kicked out the Palestinians in much the same way the Romans kicked out the Jewish people. Israel was subsequently given back to the Jewish people. This happened after the Holocaust (sp?) in an attempt to kind of help the consistently persecuted Jews. It was an attempt to help out a group of people that have always had a rough time. Sadly the whole thing turned south and caused more problems.



I voted yes, I don't like war and people funding wars.

I think we should all pay more attention to Shiro's comment above. There is no real logical answer to this predicament in the Middle Easy, however we can all logically agree that wars are a very bad thing.

no-one
12-20-2002, 02:56 PM
it truely galls(or in the reverse causes me to laugh out loud at it) me how little you all know about the world or politics or generally how stuff works and how it has to work, and yet you still feel confident to state an opinion that you would defend to the death.

RoD
12-20-2002, 03:33 PM
Originally posted by no-one
it truely galls(or in the reverse causes me to laugh out loud at it) me how little you all know about the world or politics or generally how stuff works and how it has to work, and yet you still feel confident to state an opinion that you would defend to the death.

u you just insulted 90% of the worlds population :P

no-one
12-20-2002, 03:37 PM
unfortunatly that includes me...heh.

RoD
12-20-2002, 04:12 PM
well as long as were admitting it......

Shadow12345
12-20-2002, 04:21 PM
it truely galls(or in the reverse causes me to laugh out loud at it) me how little you all know about the world or politics or generally how stuff works and how it has to work, and yet you still feel confident to state an opinion that you would defend to the death.


Okay, well, then you obviously know a lot about the world and politics and how stuff works and how it has to work. If you didn't know a lot about the world and politics and how stuff works and how it has to work then you wouldn't know how little we know about the world and politics and how stuff works and how it has to work. You are obviously the solution to all of the world's problems so let's not keep the world waiting and have out with your brilliant suggestions already.



unfortunatly that includes me...heh.

Oh wait, so that means that if insulting 90% of the worlds population about not knowing how the world or politics or 'stuff' works and how it has to work includes you, then you don't really know enough about the world or politics and how stuff works or how it's supposed to work to know how little we know about how the world and politics and how stuff works, but yet you are confident enough to post a strong opinion about it? Wasn't posting strong opinions about something others don't know enough about what you were opposed to?

If I had to write a broadway musical about this, I'd call it recursive hypocrisy.

RoD
12-20-2002, 04:22 PM
NOW recursion makes sense!! Thnx man! :P

Shadow12345
12-20-2002, 04:24 PM
NOW recursion makes sense!! Thnx man! :P

No problemo R-O-D!

You know what they say:
If your brain hasn't turned to spaghetti you haven't really thought about recursion!

(did that seriously help you out? lol, that's really cool if it did)

RoD
12-20-2002, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by Shadow12345
No problemo R-O-D!

You know what they say:
If your brain hasn't turned to spaghetti you haven't really thought about recursion!

(did that seriously help you out? lol, that's really cool if it did)

actually yea it kind of did lmao, i mean u can't really lamens term it any more then using it in an insult haha...

thats classic right there.

Shadow12345
12-20-2002, 04:31 PM
actually yea it kind of did lmao, i mean u can't really lamens term it any more then using it in an insult haha...

thats classic right there.


Well I wasn't really insulting him, just defending myself I guess because I was insulted about his post. I always try to remain neutral and not take too much of a bias either way so I can formulate realistic opinions, and I rarely let myself get insulted by things. This is a rare opportunity to see shad argue!
And actually I'm not going to argue anymore, because no one can
argue against my post :) But then again someone will argue with me on that

no-one
12-20-2002, 08:11 PM
appearantly shadow you take things a might seriously.

>because no one can argue against my post

yes i can!!

>But then again someone will argue with me on that

your damn straight.

::edit:: is it just me or am i becomming a bit of a troll?

eats only heads
12-21-2002, 09:12 PM
going by your logic no-one we shouldn't send support. If we have no clue who is right it would should we just help one side and hope the were right after all.

zahid
12-22-2002, 12:07 AM
Originally posted by Shadow12345
Could you explain why? Why don't you take the Palestinian's side?

In fact most intelligent people are in Germany because they do things like invent lightbulbs that never burn out).

That's not bad... better than war. I cann't think of it, how in these days people love war. Here I dare to say that some people really love war.

ohh.. another thing.. recently we do not see much talk about human rights. once we have seen lots of talks & trade with it. But at least one good thing happened and that is people became more carefull and educated to listen and understand what world leaders really say in their saying.

zahid
12-22-2002, 12:35 AM
Originally posted by Clyde
Yes, they should stop.

It seems exceedingly unethical to me, and it harms America: a large portion of the anti-US feeling in the Middle-East is due to the US backing of Israel.

Yes, they should stop.

I voted for Yes but did not say in my earlier reply.

The point raised by Clyde is how true can only be judged by the people who are not American and have access to outside world. I guess more than the majority of the Americans don't have access to the feeling of nonamericans even to the media of outside world.

Just observe every veto of US for Israel. Is that mean, US is the only country who is doing the right thing (in this case)? And 14 other country is hostile to Israel? Even observe every deny of resolutions passed by UN since 19.. (I don't know). What would happen if that is Iraq?

I expect comments from few of you.

Years ago I was searching for information, history, logic to make an opinion myself as Shadow is trying to do.

rick barclay
12-22-2002, 03:46 AM
The U.S. vetoes U.N. resolutions that aren't in it's interests.
The Russians vertoed how many resolutions that weren't in their
interests? Blah, blah, blah. Who're the hypocrites here?

Politics is politics. Friends are friends, and enemies are enemies.
Christianity (as well as Islam) is rooted in Judaism. The U.S.
owes its origin to Christian pilgrims who came here and paved
the way for the nation we live in today. Thus, it should be
plainly evident that a nation that owes its roots to a religion
rooted in Judaism might consider a nation of Jews as its friend.
And being true to one's friends holds that a friend, especially
a big friend will stand up and defend its little friend from those,
like Hitler and others who would destroy it. And if some of you
don't understand that, then go bite yourseves, because you
can't change it.

Fountain
12-22-2002, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by minesweeper
>>Isreal has every right to exist on the boarders that it the UN set for it when it was created. It also has the right do to treates from the wars the suronding countries started to keep ocupied land until the countries who land it is admits that isreal has a right to exist. It has done this by giving egypt is land back.

Simply giving the rest of the land back that it occupies will not solve the problem as the terriost orginaztions want it off the map nothing less. The other problem lies in the fact the Palistine Goverment can not control the terorist orginaztions and thus an outside force would be need to control this orginaztions, perfubly though not the US or Isreal.

I however don't agree with a lot of Isreals recent decisions it's general history has been a lot better then Palisitne, Egypt, ect.<<

This debate isn't really about whether Israel has the right to exist or not. More about whether America should continue to supply it with arms when it's clear from the news broadcasts that it uses them to impose curfews (sp?) on the palestinians and even, for example in the case of Jenin, demolish entire towns of civillian property.

Israel does things to Palestinians that we would consider to be enormous breaches of basic human rights. So is it therefore ethical for America to supply it with the tools necessary to do so? That is the real question of this thread.

Sorry I cant be arsed reading the rest of this thread!

Minesweeper is on the right track about the real thread reasons.

I just need to know...If Israel had no more terrorist attacks would it stop the action........answer = yes.

Would the palestinians? Answer=NO

The land has been sorted by the UN. End of story.

So, the answer to the thread is NO, money should be still forthcoming until the terrorist attacks stop-thus there would be no need for arms money etc etc.

You may think this is a simplified solution, but all of you-COME ON-what year is this?! Think more carefully about your replies.

Clyde
12-23-2002, 06:12 PM
"The U.S. owes its origin to Christian pilgrims who came here and paved the way for the nation we live in today."

Ok...

"Thus, it should be plainly evident that a nation that owes its roots to a religion rooted in Judaism might consider a nation of Jews as its friend."

Uh....... no.

"And being true to one's friends holds that a friend, especially a big friend will stand up and defend its little friend from those, like Hitler and others who would destroy it"

Uh....... what?

"I just need to know...If Israel had no more terrorist attacks would it stop the action........answer = yes. Would the palestinians? Answer=NO"

What?

"The land has been sorted by the UN. End of story."

Right... except, its not the end of the story, because err.... they're still fighting 50 years later.

"So, the answer to the thread is NO, money should be still forthcoming until the terrorist attacks stop-thus there would be no need for arms money etc etc"

And you think that the terrorists will just give up one day do you? One day they will be bombed so hard, have so many of their friends and family killed, that they'll forget about hating Israel? I don't think so.

The only answer to the Israel-Palestine conflict is through, negotiation and compromise, I fail to see how fueling the conflict by supplying more weapons benefits anyone.

no-one
12-23-2002, 07:34 PM
why does the U.S. send money to israels military?
because every country in the middle east wants ever jew dead. end of story. we support them so they dont get wiped of the face of the earth.

so the short answer is no, we shouldn't stop the funding.

well at least till the bigotry ends.

kermi3
12-23-2002, 10:44 PM
why does the U.S. send money to israels military?
because every country in the middle east wants ever jew dead. end of story. we support them so they dont get wiped of the face of the earth.

so the short answer is no, we shouldn't stop the funding.

well at least till the bigotry ends.

First of all I'll point out that I'm American. Secondly I'll point out that I'm Jewish, yes it comes in that order.

Now...This is the totally wrong reason for the US to support Isreael. The US can't be the world's police or the world's mother. It is not our government's place to defend every ethnic/religious group in the world outside of our boarder. However, I do think that the US should continue to support Israel for several reasons...I'm gonna name a couple quickly, but I'm sick so these are probably really easy to shoot down...

1. A stable and absolute ally in the middle east. this is very important since the middle east is such an important place to us economy.

2. mutual military and intel research/development. Israel and US have helped each other in this reguard. For example, anti-missle and tank technologies.

3. I don't feel well, I'm going to bed.

RoD
12-24-2002, 01:14 PM
We fund them since they are allies, even a army buddy of mine says glass em lol.

kermi3
12-24-2002, 02:19 PM
Reasons that the US maintains high aid rates to Israel:

1. Much of the money to Israel comes right back into the US enconomy through sales of weapons by US companies to Israel, thus surving a duel purpose, and keeping domestic lobbiest happy.

2. Weapon sales to Israel benifit development of US weapons.

3. Israel is going to be strong, we are talking about a nation who made round casingins out of lipstick containers when they were struggling for independance. It is pretty safe to assume that they aren't going anywhere, especially now (particuarlly since they have nukes). However, while they are in the middle east, they provide a constant destablizing factor. Through US aid to Israel the US government maintains a large amount of control over Israelie forgien policy, thus helping to stabalize the region for the US, and for the oil we need.

4. Israel is always seeking ways to gain $ so that they can continue to develop themselves. In the past the US has been known to use funding to Israel as a means of ensuring that Israel does not sell said advanced weapons systems to other nations, like advanced radar systems to China.

These are some reasons, perhap later I will research and think or more.

Clyde
12-24-2002, 06:26 PM
1. Much of the money to Israel comes right back into the US enconomy through sales of weapons by US companies to Israel, thus surving a duel purpose, and keeping domestic lobbiest happy.

2. Weapon sales to Israel benifit development of US weapons.

3. Israel is going to be strong, we are talking about a nation who made round casingins out of lipstick containers when they were struggling for independance. It is pretty safe to assume that they aren't going anywhere, especially now (particuarlly since they have nukes). However, while they are in the middle east, they provide a constant destablizing factor. Through US aid to Israel the US government maintains a large amount of control over Israelie forgien policy, thus helping to stabalize the region for the US, and for the oil we need.

4. Israel is always seeking ways to gain $ so that they can continue to develop themselves. In the past the US has been known to use funding to Israel as a means of ensuring that Israel does not sell said advanced weapons systems to other nations, like advanced radar systems to China.


Well indeed, they sound very plausible reasons, but that doesn't exactly make it right.

rick barclay
12-24-2002, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by Clyde
"The U.S. owes its origin to Christian pilgrims who came here and paved the way for the nation we live in today."

Ok...Thanks

"Thus, it should be plainly evident that a nation that owes its roots to a religion rooted in Judaism might consider a nation of Jews as its friend."

Uh....... no. Uh...yes. It's a fact.

"And being true to one's friends holds that a friend, especially a big friend will stand up and defend its little friend from those, like Hitler and others who would destroy it"

Uh....... what? What, what?


"So, the answer to the thread is NO, money should be still forthcoming until the terrorist attacks stop-thus there would be no need for arms money etc etc"

And you think that the terrorists will just give up one day do you? One day they will be bombed so hard, have so many of their friends and family killed, that they'll forget about hating Israel? I don't think so.

The only answer to the Israel-Palestine conflict is through, negotiation and compromise, I fail to see how fueling the conflict by supplying more weapons benefits anyone.

The attacks will stop when one side or the other renders the
other side unable to attack. The Israelites to this very moment consider Jerusalem and the surrounding lands as given to them by God and have no intention of giving it up. The Palestinians
have come to the U.S. and told us that the land claimed by
Israel rightfully belongs to the Palestinian people and until
justice is served, there will be no peace. They emphasize: "No
justice; no peace."

Neither side has any intention of compromising their respective
positions. They never have and they never will agree to live
in peace so long as a nation called Israel resides on land
the Palestinians claim as their own. The only way anyone will
reign over there is through force and power. The Palestinians
know it. The Israelites know it. And now---you know it.

Clyde
12-25-2002, 05:42 AM
Thus, it should be plainly evident that a nation that owes its roots to a religion rooted in Judaism might consider a nation of Jews as its friend."

Uh....... no.

Uh...yes. It's a fact


A fact? What a pile of balls. US interaction with Israel has nothing to do with the fact that the US "owes its existance to a religion rooted in Judaism", its not like their paying off some kind of favour.

There is a large Jewish community in the US, thats the only "religious reason", there are also many political and economic reasons, (see Kermi's posts).



And being true to one's friends holds that a friend, especially a big friend will stand up and defend its little friend from those, like Hitler and others who would destroy it"

Uh....... what?

What, what


It's a meaningless statement; you seem to be implying that being "true" to "friends" in a political or national sense is somehow a "good" thing. Which of course is again, a pile of balls. Besides its not like arming Israel actually helps them in the long term, in the long term what would help them would be a resolution to the conflict.

"The attacks will stop when one side or the other renders the
other side unable to attack"

Jesus, WAKE UP. You fool, people are dying right now in Israel because IDIOTS like you are in charge. How exactly are you going to render terrorists unable? You can't, the more innocents you kill the more terrorists will sign up. You can knock out Palestinian governmental bodies, which helps exactly no-one because they are the only ones with whom peace can be brokered.

"The Israelites to this very moment consider Jerusalem and the surrounding lands as given to them by God and have no intention of giving it up."

...... Excellent religion causes death and destruction to continue indefinately because moron fanatics think they have divine right.

You realise of course that the Palestinians think they have divine right too ya know?

"The Palestinians
have come to the U.S. and told us that the land claimed by
Israel rightfully belongs to the Palestinian people and until
justice is served, there will be no peace. They emphasize: "No
justice; no peace."

Right and that means we should just give up on peace does it? We should just accept that for all eternity people are going to be killing each other over that tiny piece of land? BALLS.

Peace has nearly been achieved several times, and eventually thats how the conflict will end, negotiation not bombs is the answer.

"Neither side has any intention of compromising their respective
positions"

Each "side" is made up of individual people, and there are plenty of people on both sides willing to compromist, extremists fuel the conflict, but that does not mean peace is impossible. As i said before they have come close to a resolution several times, that shows people ARE willing to compromise.

"They never have and they never will agree to live
in peace so long as a nation called Israel resides on land
the Palestinians claim as their own"

Balls; if Israel acknoledged a nation of Palestine, and allowed it 70% of the land, the conflict would be over. Of course that is a totally unreasonable figure, but it negates your claim that peace is inherently impossible.

"The only way anyone will
reign over there is through force and power. The Palestinians
know it. The Israelites know it. And now---you know it."

You sir, are a fool.