Welcome to Gaia! ::

Mahdi will kill the dajjal at Israel beffore judgement day 3nodding

And Israel currently got most powers, they know everything. All the systems

*sigh*

This is why I support a two-state solution. Prejudice on both sides isn't solving any problems, and people on both sides want peace. In fact, most people on both sides desire it. I personally know personally many people of various religions, including Judaism and Islam, that desire peace in that region.

Keep in mind, I was raised Jewish, but I also agree that we really had no right to that land from the natives, the same way we Americans had no right to kill the Native Americans to take our land. But also, from my days in Hebrew school, I learned the history behind the founding of Israel. We had three options of where to put our nation: near our holiest city, Jerusalem; in the middle of Argentina, where the ex-Nazis were fleeing; and in the middle of Uganda (or some other civil war-torn nation in Africa; clearly not an option). Frankly, the first seemed like the obviously best choice at the time.

As far as I can tell, the responsibility of the poor execution of Israel's foundation falls on the shoulders of the UN. Talks between the nations the land was coming from were nearly nonexistent. We basically just showed up one day and started kicking the Arabs out. That was clearly not fair. However, from a world foreign policy perspective, it must be considered that Israel had won all major wars with the Arabs. Historically speaking, the victors of war have always taken the prize. And yet, Israel is smaller than the state of New Jersey, and shrinking all the time. To take an example of this, let's look at my own country, the USA. We came from Europe, killed the Native Americans in one of the worst genocides since the Crusades, and the racial, ethnic, and religious gaps only worsened from there. We had African slavery. We had blocks in cities dividing immigrants up by their heritage, because Anglo-Saxon was somehow better than Celtic, Italian, Spanish, Russian, or even worse, Asiatic or African. We had different working opportunities not only for not only different races, but between the sexes, as well. The Native Americans were forced out of their homeland on various "Trails of Tears" throughout the 19th century. Lynchings of African American were especially common in the South until the 60s. Prior to 1954, all schools were segregated between black and white, and then Brown v. Board was passed. Prior to 1961, no one here thought we'd have a President who "kissed the Pope's ring"; and yet, John F. Kennedy, a Catholic, was elected that year. Prior to 2008, no one thought we'd have a black President-- and now we have Obama. And even now, we have our hate crime issues. First, our scapegoat was the Germans. Then it was the Russians, the commies. Now, it's the Muslims-- another Red Scare, if you ask me, and totally unjustified in every case. Obviously, terrorism is not acceptable in any context. In this particular context, even many Muslims reject Jihadists as real Muslims because you aren't supposed to kill ANY civilians in warfare. Though it isn't talked about in the West, many of my Middle Eastern friends have talked to me about how in Middle Eastern nations, some Jihadists are being physically ostracized from their societies because the Jihad is considered unacceptable to the less radical-- which is most. However, on our end, racial profiling is simply not the way to stop terrorism. Not only is it unfair, but it's impractical because literally anyone of any race or creed can be a terrorist.

Granted, democracy is generally the "people's form of government," but as you can see, even the so-called "best democracy in the world" has its problems. Were our own (American) genocides against the Native Americans justified? Or our kidnapping of Africans to be our slaves in the Triangle Trade? Absolutely not. The same goes for the war in Gaza. But it needs to also be considered that in both cases, wars were won. And from a historical and foreign policy perspective, that means they win land. Should we (Americans) repay the Native Americans for destroying their ways of life in irreversible ways? Absolutely. Should we (Jews) do the same to the Arabs? Again, yes. However, kicking both victors out would just be impractical. What are you going to do with 8 million Jews, put them back in concentration camps? Uh, sorry, don't think so. Someone would get nuked for that, I'm sure, and no one wants that. The case of "giving back the land" is even more complicated for America, because there's over 300 million of us, and though I won't be able to access censuses for another 70 years, I have a feeling that most of those are not Native American. So, say we have... 350-500 million non-Native Americans on this continent (Canada and Latin America count too-- Mayans, Aztecs, and Canadian tribes preceded Europeans, as well). Where would you put them all? Nowhere. That's why a two-state solution in the Middle East is necessary, and the sooner, the better.

Now, historically speaking, from what I've been able to gather, the more industrialized Middle Eastern nations (like Egypt) held no particular animosity towards Jews until after Israel was founded. That says a LOT. The only reason they began fighting was because of land quarrels; religion was brought into it later to gain public support. It was at that point that the conflict escalated beyond anyone's control, especially not the UN's.

I understand both sides of this. On the one hand, the Jews had not only just escaped from probably the most disgusting, degrading, and inhuman genocide since... actually, I can't think of one besides the Crusades, which lasted centuries. Anyway, not only did we just escape the Holocaust, but we'd also endured a whole history of nonstop persecution just for being Jewish. The attitude was, "It's about time we had a country!" Everyone else had a homeland, and our Diaspora had gone on since thousands of years before Christ-- and it's still going on. Think about it: if you'd just escaped the Holocaust, wouldn't you be pissed off enough to do anything for your people? However, the lack of negotiation involved led to countless conflicts between Jews and Muslims, and many Muslims have unfortunately died because of the technology Israel's army has developed. (For example, Israel was the first to implement practical UAV's, or Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, in combat and reconnaissance. This was a technology adapted from less effective American tech.)

In any case, if serious talks don't begin soon, the conflict will never end. Killing all the Jews in Israel won't accomplish anything; in fact, that would only anger all the other Jews worldwide (including myself) and make worldwide relations decay further. It's an endless cycle. The Israeli government recognizes how holy Jerusalem is to other religions, and as such divided it into sections so all three Abrahamic religious groups can (hopefully) live peaceably together. That's a very mature move, if you think about it. The division sucks, but I don't see the Arabs giving back even part of Hebron (a holy city to both groups in the West Bank) any time soon, either.

So please, on both sides, don't be prejudiced against the other. It only exacerbates problems in an endless cycle. Besides, there are plenty of people on both sides of this particular conflict that dream of peace. I myself have been dreaming of peace in the Middle East since I was old enough to know what war was. And I know for a fact I'm not alone there. I hate to see people acting so ignorantly and making such blanket statements about anyone. Our worldwide society is pluralistic; whether you like it or not, you're going to have to get used to it.

i hate them im phalastinian but i dont live in phalastine
and to say the truth i rlly love my country i wish i go to it someday and go to qodos