- This topic has 29 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
That got your attention…
Good evening,
I’m very into the situation in the middle east and would like the opinions of our esteemed YWN commentators. i’d also like to hear the opinions of the REEEAALY lib guys.(Proud Liberal, that means you!)
I think Israel should give land for peace.
The Gedolim also think so.
Speaking of Glenn Beck, he’s really putting his neck out there, calling for a “rally in Jerusalem” in August. I’m nervous that he’ll turn out to be a complete nutcase after all (I’m OK with him being a little bit of a nutcase). But here’s an American public figure openly calling for Americans to stand with Jews and Israel, with no fear. That’s pretty remarkable these days.
Rav Shach, amongst others, supported land for peace.
Michtavim U’Maamaromim Volume 1, Letter 8 is one of the places I believe he mentions this.
Pac, we accomplished loads by offering Gush Katif (su-eeeere). At what point do we realize we’ve given enough and accomplished nothing? How much of Israel are you willing to sacrifice? 10%? 50%? more? less? How much giving up will yield a true and lasting PEACE (not pieces)?
OC: I’m willing to sacrifice 100% if it will result in peace.
Pac, what if it results in passionate desire and determination of our enemies to exterminate another few million homeless (as a result of such sacrifice) Jews ch”v?
I said if it results in peace.
“Land for Peace” is a moot issue.
–Our Pereh/adam neighbors have no intention of allowing a Jewish State of ANY size or with ANY borders!
–They started the war in ’67 BEFORE there was an “occupation” of the “West Bank”, Gaza, and the Golan.
–They massacred Jews in Hevron in ’29, almost 20 years BEFORE there was any ‘State of Israel’ at all.
–AND… as “Ofcourse” mentioned (above), expelling 9,000 Jews from Gush Katif (and destroying their lives) and giving the land to those savages, did nothing but give them a terrorist base right on our border.
So… “Land for Peace” – well, no disrespect to the Gedolim who may have opted for it, but that opinion is only theoretical, since no yishmaeli is offering to give peace for land – unless it’s the ENTIRE Land.
unless it’s the ENTIRE Land.
As I said, then its a go. If they will give peace for the entire land, give it to them. We live under non-Jewish rule in the U.S., and we’ve lived under non-Jewish rule in the Holy Land. If, as AinOhdMilvado indicated, they will realistically give peace for the entire land, do it.
AinOhdMilvado is right that giving Gaza to Hamas was dumb and accomplished nothing. He forgets that giving the Sinai to Egypt for peace has worked (and hopefully will continue to). The (succesful) peace with Jordan was also a territorial concession, as it mean an end to Israel’s claim to the eastern half of the British Mandate.
Land for peace shouldn’t be a yes-no question. It can be done with seichel, or it can be done stupidly without a partner, like happened with Gush Katif.
By the way, ProudLiberal is neither “proud” nor “liberal.” He’s a troll wasting our time, and we should stop responding. He’s not even subtle about it.
Pac, I’d like to hear Gedolim’s take on that.
I’m sure there are those who feel we might have 6 millon+ more Jews had we had a State of Israel pre WW2. It’s called Hishtadlus.
Ain Somchin al Hanes.
Pac-man…
You missed one critical point.
Their peace requirement is not JUST for the ENTIRE land,
it’s for the entire land WITHOUT any LIVING Jews in it!
Note what I mentioned above about what happened (just as one example) in Hevron in ’29, when the yishmaelim HAD the whole land and we had NO state AT ALL.
Please don’t be naive enough to think that these savages would let Jews live in an arab “palestine”. This is not just MY opinion, THEY have said themselves, b’faiyrush, that they will not allow Jews to live in “palestine”.
-For further clarification of the yishmaeli position (by a yishmaeli), please see…
Land for peace is a great idea. How about this: The Arabs give up all claims to Greater Israel, including the Golan Heights, Yehuda, Shomron & Aza, and in return Israel agrees not to blow up buses, fire rockets into civilian centers or murder families in their beds.
While we’re at it … Two-state solution? Excellent idea! We get Greater Israel and they can have Jordan. Or Syria. Or Iraq. Or Saudi Arabia. Or whatever. We’re not picky!
Name one gadol who advocated land for peace after we gave them Aza.
ChanieE: As everyone from Bill Clinton to our own friend AinOhd pointed out, land for peace only works with a clearly defined plan. Let us say that Jordan gives up all claim to the occupied East Bank in exchange for Israel not bombing them.
Ari: Yes, Sinai worked, and b’ezras Hashem it won’t break down with the new Egyptian government. Jordan was not a territorial concession because the 47 plan didnt give Jews any land over there, that was the 21 declaration.
Like Sinai, it can work.
actually, in reality, pac man may be correct – if it truly guaranteed peace, i don’t think the gedolim say not to give up land. the problem is that any sane human being knows that giving up land does not ensure our peace AT ALL!!!! in fact, every time, we give up land, the Arabs just want more. they won’t be happy until they’ve thrown every Jew in to the Nile (their own words, not mine).
I think we need to acknowledge each nation for what it is, not disillusion ourselves with some politically correct but totally false notion that all peoples have the same essence.
ChanieE: Love your post! (I would press the ‘like’ button if there was one).
Obama wants a “Palestinian State” and I am all for it!
I’m thinking maybe Montana or North Dakota!
Cholent guy: Don’t delude yourself. Hamas’s charter doesn’t say push Israel into the sea. It says “push the JEWS into the sea.”
itchesrulik:
Exactly!!
the PA/ Hamas do NOT want peace, nor do they want land.
they only want US- yidden- in the sea.
You know how many peace agreements they have walked out of?
You want to know why?
Because they want it ALL.
even when we offered them more then the super majority, not enough!!!
I am curious, being undereducated in this area: Did the Sinai agreement work (so far) because there is a difference between Mitzrayim and the other Arabs? The way that Bnay Yisrael was told they could not oppress Egyptians as they could Bnay Yishmael? Are the Mitzri’im Bnay Yishmael, or Bnay Cham? Thank you for any clarification.
what does Shabbos have to do with this thread?
Cholent guy: You’re welcome. 🙂
ursula: It has nothing to do with racial politics. Simply put, Egypt is a nation state that had plenty to lose after a second ?? ? ???? ??? ?????? (which, while not as open as the first, was still a nes.) The palestinians were not a nation then and didn’t lose a war. Furthermore, they are kept from joining any arab country precisely so that they will see destroying Israel as the solution to all their problems.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.