http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22168697

Israel was founded in 1948 by mainly secular Zionists as both a Jewish and democratic state.

They hoped to confine theocracy to the temples. But just as Islamism is reshaping the Arab world, so too is theocracy reshaping Israel.

Religious nationalism has driven the expansion of settlements well into the West Bank, territory won from the Jordanians in 1967 during the Six Day War.

What lies ahead? I found the article interesting, as it puts forward several possibilities for the future. Israel has achieved immense progress in its 65 years, and it would be a great shame if this was blocked by any of the forces marshalled against it. At the same time, it is difficult to see how Israel can continue to exist in the long term.

Who knows. I agree with the premise in the article that the Palestinians really see two states as a stepping stone to destroying Israel - and that IMO that includes Abbas.

Happy Birthday, Israel!

Songkran Jerusalem style?

Israel's chances of survival depend largely on the current Liberal 'progressives' who rule in the west being discredited and thrown out by their electorates. There is no point making concessions to anhialationists so Israel needs to focus on it's own security needs whilst playing for time until more sympathetic governments exist in the west, Canada being a notable exception though, thankyou Canada.

Israel's chances of survival depend largely on the current Liberal 'progressives' who rule in the west being discredited and thrown out by their electorates. There is no point making concessions to anhialationists so Israel needs to focus on it's own security needs whilst playing for time until more sympathetic governments exist in the west, Canada being a notable exception though, thankyou Canada.

I was mystified by these "anhialationists", but Google saved me. Annihilationists, I think.

This topic has often been side-swiped by other threads, so I thought it deserved a thread of its own when I found a sensible link to pin it to.

I've always been pessimistic over the long-term survival of Israel. If she (is Israel she?) is to survive, I think she has to work on becoming a Middle Eastern state, not a hanger-on of the west, or, as it sometimes seems, the West's guiding force. The two-state solution seems logical, but cannot work against Arab fundamentalism and Jewish religious mania. So long as international Jewry, with its influence on Western governments, tries to pull the strings, Israel is, in my opinion, doomed.

I don't know if Israel is doomed or not doomed any more than I know that America is doomed or not doomed.

For those able to look with a careful eye, a future is unfolding that is
more decent than we usually allow ourselves to see. The truth is, it
takes no great act of imagination to envision an Israel at 100 that is
decent and sustaining for all Israelis, at peace with its neighbors and
at home in the world. In fact, it takes little more than a bus pass and
an open heart.

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/at-64-israel-s-future-is-brighter-than-you-might-think-1.426605

So long as international Jewry, with its influence on Western governments, tries to pull the strings, Israel is, in my opinion, doomed.

I don't see it. IMO, Israel would have been doomed without them.

Israel is doing something A LOT right to have already lasted 65 years in that neighborhood!

Israel's chances of survival depend largely on the current Liberal 'progressives' who rule in the west being discredited and thrown out by their electorates. There is no point making concessions to anhialationists so Israel needs to focus on it's own security needs whilst playing for time until more sympathetic governments exist in the west, Canada being a notable exception though, thankyou Canada.

I was mystified by these "anhialationists", but Google saved me. Annihilationists, I think.

This topic has often been side-swiped by other threads, so I thought it deserved a thread of its own when I found a sensible link to pin it to.

I've always been pessimistic over the long-term survival of Israel. If she (is Israel she?) is to survive, I think she has to work on becoming a Middle Eastern state, not a hanger-on of the west, or, as it sometimes seems, the West's guiding force. The two-state solution seems logical, but cannot work against Arab fundamentalism and Jewish religious mania. So long as international Jewry, with its influence on Western governments, tries to pull the strings, Israel is, in my opinion, doomed.

Thanks for the spelling assistance, I couldn't even get close enough for the spell checker to rescue me.

If you look at the map of civilizations as defined by Samuel P Huntington Israel is shown as belonging to western civilization, which indeed it is due to a shared history in forming what has become known as Judeo-Christian civilization. It is located bang smack in the center of Islamic civilizations. It is not within the gift of Israel as a whole to become 'middle eastern', save for a few common items of cuisine, that would mean dispensing with everything that defines Israeli Jewish identity. A multi-cultural democracy (One state 'solution') would be out of the question seeing as Islam is anathema to democracy, besides which the indoctrination in hatred taught to Palestinians from childhood cements this state of affairs. As an aside, should Islam one day cease to be a political ideology and become an 'enlightened' religion then even a one state solution could work, but until such time just look at what happened to the Christian population of the Middle East to see what would happen if the Jews ever became a minority.

So we have the so called two state solution, or should that be two civilization solution? Even if a Palestinian leader were serious about peace and recognizing Israel he would not imho have the authority to speak for the entire Islamic civilization, so any peace treaty would not stop Jihaddists from all over the globe continuing to wage a long term war of attrition through terrorism. I fear Israel will be forced to compromise even so called defensible borders due to pressure from western progressives and leftists attempting to isolate 'apartheid' Israel via BDS or even trade sanctions. Islamic influence in Europe has already made the E.U hostile to Israel to the degree they refuse to even designate Hezbollah as a terrorist group, eventually the U.S will go the same way and Israel's atomic capability would be the only thing left delaying their disappearance.

A small ray of hope for Israel is their being 95% self-sufficient in food, also they have vast untapped oil and gas reserves. If they can keep going long enough to be a major energy exporter they may be able yet to gain enough support to block UN resolutions too damaging to their security needs. Finally, I suspect Islam can't in the long run survive direct scrutiny without undergoing a crisis, possibly even resulting in a complete modernization, global communications may bring such scrutiny far quicker than would have been possible in the past.

In other words Israel's survival depends on many concurrent races against time, logically it does not look good odds for Israel's long term survival, but Israel has routinely defied the odds for 65 years.

How many of you have been to Israel or Palestine?

How many of you have been to Israel or Palestine?

I haven't. Been to most other Middle Eastern and North African countries though.

An excellent show on this topic:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s0zkt

Interestingly, the show ends with optimism from an elder ex-chief of Mossad. He feels when push comes to shove Israel WILL do the right thing for both peace and it's future as a secular, democratic, and Jewish state, and that involves CAVING on the west bank. He feels this will happen but it will have to wait until the midnight hour when Israel has no other possible choice. Yes it is true many Arabs see an official Palestinian state as the first step towards wiping out Israel, but that doesn't necessarily mean they will ever achieve that.

'Caving' on the West Bank (or any other principle that has been expounded in the past 65 years) will be taken as a sign of weakness by the Arab principals. In negotiation with any Middle Eastern citizen one must establish a fortress of strength and proceed to batter the opposition. It is the only way that succeeds. Any mediation, any offer of concession, any offer of any sort (Please sit down / Would you prefer tea or coffee / I trust your family is well / yadda yadda yadda) will be taken as a sign of weakness on your side, although they will offer such phrases themselves in order to fulfill their notion of being hospitable Arabs.

These are not people who have the social mores of a 'Western' nation. One has to live with them, negotiate with them, for many years in order to have any sort of understanding of what one is expected to do. If you go in on advice from your usual political advisors, you'll come out sans pants and unable to sit down for a week.

Israel's chances of survival depend largely on the current Liberal 'progressives' who rule in the west being discredited and thrown out by their electorates. There is no point making concessions to anhialationists so Israel needs to focus on it's own security needs whilst playing for time until more sympathetic governments exist in the west, Canada being a notable exception though, thankyou Canada.

I was mystified by these "anhialationists", but Google saved me. Annihilationists, I think.

This topic has often been side-swiped by other threads, so I thought it deserved a thread of its own when I found a sensible link to pin it to.

I've always been pessimistic over the long-term survival of Israel. If she (is Israel she?) is to survive, I think she has to work on becoming a Middle Eastern state, not a hanger-on of the west, or, as it sometimes seems, the West's guiding force. The two-state solution seems logical, but cannot work against Arab fundamentalism and Jewish religious mania. So long as international Jewry, with its influence on Western governments, tries to pull the strings, Israel is, in my opinion, doomed.

Thanks for the spelling assistance, I couldn't even get close enough for the spell checker to rescue me.

If you look at the map of civilizations as defined by Samuel P Huntington Israel is shown as belonging to western civilization, which indeed it is due to a shared history in forming what has become known as Judeo-Christian civilization. It is located bang smack in the center of Islamic civilizations. It is not within the gift of Israel as a whole to become 'middle eastern', save for a few common items of cuisine, that would mean dispensing with everything that defines Israeli Jewish identity. A multi-cultural democracy (One state 'solution') would be out of the question seeing as Islam is anathema to democracy, besides which the indoctrination in hatred taught to Palestinians from childhood cements this state of affairs. As an aside, should Islam one day cease to be a political ideology and become an 'enlightened' religion then even a one state solution could work, but until such time just look at what happened to the Christian population of the Middle East to see what would happen if the Jews ever became a minority.

So we have the so called two state solution, or should that be two civilization solution? Even if a Palestinian leader were serious about peace and recognizing Israel he would not imho have the authority to speak for the entire Islamic civilization, so any peace treaty would not stop Jihaddists from all over the globe continuing to wage a long term war of attrition through terrorism. I fear Israel will be forced to compromise even so called defensible borders due to pressure from western progressives and leftists attempting to isolate 'apartheid' Israel via BDS or even trade sanctions. Islamic influence in Europe has already made the E.U hostile to Israel to the degree they refuse to even designate Hezbollah as a terrorist group, eventually the U.S will go the same way and Israel's atomic capability would be the only thing left delaying their disappearance.

A small ray of hope for Israel is their being 95% self-sufficient in food, also they have vast untapped oil and gas reserves. If they can keep going long enough to be a major energy exporter they may be able yet to gain enough support to block UN resolutions too damaging to their security needs. Finally, I suspect Islam can't in the long run survive direct scrutiny without undergoing a crisis, possibly even resulting in a complete modernization, global communications may bring such scrutiny far quicker than would have been possible in the past.

In other words Israel's survival depends on many concurrent races against time, logically it does not look good odds for Israel's long term survival, but Israel has routinely defied the odds for 65 years.

The section I have blocked is the reason why I have always been pessimistic about the long-term survival of Israel. Locating a Western state bang in the middle of increasingly vocal Islamic neighbours seemed to me to be asking for trouble.... and trouble there has been. That is why I suggested the 'pie in the sky' approach of Israel re-inventing itself as a Middle eastern state. It cannot go on being Fortress Israel for ever. It has done pretty well to last this long.

'Caving' on the West Bank (or any other principle that has been expounded in the past 65 years) will be taken as a sign of weakness by the Arab principals. In negotiation with any Middle Eastern citizen one must establish a fortress of strength and proceed to batter the opposition. It is the only way that succeeds. Any mediation, any offer of concession, any offer of any sort (Please sit down / Would you prefer tea or coffee / I trust your family is well / yadda yadda yadda) will be taken as a sign of weakness on your side, although they will offer such phrases themselves in order to fulfill their notion of being hospitable Arabs.

These are not people who have the social mores of a 'Western' nation. One has to live with them, negotiate with them, for many years in order to have any sort of understanding of what one is expected to do. If you go in on advice from your usual political advisors, you'll come out sans pants and unable to sit down for a week.

I agree and with Obama trying to force negotiations and make Israel grant more concessions, Israel is in trouble until he leaves office.

John Kerry claims that 'the window for a two-state solution will be shut within two years."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/18/kerry-two-state-solution-middle-east

While I can understand him wanting to hurry up the process, this seems to be going precisely the wrong way about it. ( see latest posts by HB and UG).

How many of you have been to Israel or Palestine?

Israel three times, in occupied Al-Quds (aka Jerusalem) twice.

The Jews have "occupied" Jerusalem since 1,000 BC - long before the Palestinian Arabs suddenly decided that they were a nationality in 1967.

The Jews have "occupied" Jerusalem since 1,000 BC - long before the Palestinian Arabs suddenly decided that they were a nationality in 1967.

Not an ethnicity, UG?

They started claiming that they had been a country. That would make them a nationality - if there were any truth to it.

Kerry may be right. He may be wrong. He says there is urgency. I wish there was MORE urgency. There doesn't seem to be much urgency on the ground among the actual players!

The Jews have "occupied" Jerusalem since 1,000 BC - long before the Palestinian Arabs suddenly decided that they were a nationality in 1967.

if Jerusalem existed before the Jews occupied it then logic dictates there must have been other occupants. who or what was/is a "nationality" is irrelevant and completely besides the point.

Not when one is making ridiculous claims that the city is "occupied." It was never a "Palestinian" City as there has never been a country or people called Palestine or Palestinian that was not Jewish.

John Kerry claims that 'the window for a two-state solution will be shut within two years."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/18/kerry-two-state-solution-middle-east

While I can understand him wanting to hurry up the process, this seems to be going precisely the wrong way about it. ( see latest posts by HB and UG).

Kerry is a clown, the two year window he speaks of is imho the two years or so that the current Democrat administration have left to try and bully Israel into accepting terms that would put it's survival at stake. Indeed shortly after Obama twists Netanyahu's arm into appologizing to Turkey for the Mavi Mamara incident he has the gall to liken the deaths of the armed Turkish political activists to those of innocent civilians watching the Boston Marathon.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/04/22/john_kerry_likens_to_victims_of_turkish_flotilla_in_2010_to_boston_bombings.html

It's difficult to know where to begin with this. Armed activists trying to break a legal blockade when doing so would have facilitated arms supplies to a terrorist organization, verses innocent bystanders watching a sporting event. To conjoin the two transcends ineptitude and stinks of political agenda. Had he mentioned Turkish civilians killed in a PKK bombing he might have had half a point.

To me and I venture to the vast majority of Israelis it explains why Obama's second term in office can't end soon enough.

Not when one is making ridiculous claims that the city is "occupied." It was never a "Palestinian" City as there has never been a country or people called Palestine or Palestinian that was not Jewish.

yada yada yakety yak. what about presenting your old utmost ridiculous fairy tale that the Palestinians hail from an area north-east of the Midde East? that really gave me a good laugh.

note: for nearly two-thousand years a country called Israel did not exist. and if ancient existence would justify the right and used "re-occupying" an area the global map of countries would look pretty messed up. the only thing the various ethnic groups would miss staking their claims is the title deed signed by the LORD himself.

As matter of historical fact, the first stamps bearing the name Palestine were issued in 1920. They continued to be issued under the British Mandate until 1948. True, it wasn't independent, but a country can be a country without being independent (Wales, for example). It was not Jewish, though many Jews lived there (so did many Arabs, who would have called themselves Palestinians). Oh yes, and Jerusalem was in Palestine , so defined.

Not when one is making ridiculous claims that the city is "occupied." It was never a "Palestinian" City as there has never been a country or people called Palestine or Palestinian that was not Jewish.

As matter of historical fact, it was a zone, not a country, run by the British who issued stamps. The stamps carried a Hebrew inscription that included the abbreviation for "Land of Israel". The Palestinian Authority issued copies of these stamps in 1994 without realizing the meaning.

Was Palestine ever recognized as an entity by another country? By whom? What was the language of the country called Palestine? What was Palestine's religion? What was the name of its currency?

Wales was an independent country until England annexed it. There has never been a country or people called Palestine or Palestinian that was not Jewish.

Israel became a nation in about 1440 BC (at Mount Sinai), two thousand years before the rise of Islam. They arrived in this land forty years later in about 1400 BC. We will skip the next fifteen hundred years or so and rejoin them in about 70 AD when the Romans took over the whole land, flattened Jerusalem, burnt down the Temple and killed and exiled a large part of the Jewish population of the area.


At that time, however, the Romans did not expel all the Jews and in 139 AD, the descendants of those who remained, under the command of Bar Kokhba, again rebelled against Rome. The Roman army came in again and this time they killed many thousands of Jews, flattened Jerusalem again and built a new Roman city on the ruins, calling it Aelia Capitolina. They then expelled all the Jews, who had survived the slaughter....




"Of their forts the 50 strongest were razed to the ground, 985 of their best known villages were destroyed.....Thus the whole of Judea became desert, as indeed had been foretold to the Jews before the war. For the Tomb of Solomon, whom these folks celebrate in their sacred rights, fell into it's own accord into fragments, and wolves and hyenas, many in number roamed howling through their cities"
(Dio Cassius, History of the Romans, lxix, 12-14 cited by DeHass, History, pp 55-56).





One story has it that the Roman Procurator in charge of the captured Jewish territories called for historians and asked them who were the worst enemies of the Jews in their history.


The historians replied, "the Philistines";


Thus, the Procurator declared that the Land of Israel would from then forward be called "Palaestina" to dishonor the Jews and obliterate their history.
Wikipedia








During the Biblical Period, it was the site of the ancient Canaan and the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and later of the independent Jewish kingdom of Judea.


In A.D. 135, the Roman emperor Hadrian changed the name of the province from Syria Judea to Syria Palaestina, which is the Latin version of the Greek name, and it became an administrative political unit within the Roman Empire.


In approximately A.D. 390 Palaestina was further organised into three units: First, Second, and Third Palaestina.


Palaestina Prima consisted of Judea, Samaria, the coast, and Peraea which the governor residing in Caesarea.


Palaestina Secunda consisted of the Galilee, the lower Jezreel valley, the regions east of Galilee, and the western part of the former Decapolis with the seat of government at Scythopolis. Palaestina Tertia included the Negev, southern Jordan — once part of Arabia — and most of Sinai with Petra the usual residence of the governor.


Palestina Tertia was also known as Palaestina Salutaris. This reorganization reduced Arabia to the northern Jordan east of Peraea.


Roman administration of Palestine ended temporarily during the Persian occupation of 614-28, then permanently after the Arabs conquered the region beginning in 635.


The new Arab rulers divided the province of ash-Sham (Syria) into five districts, of which Palestine (in its modern sense) comprised two.


Jund Filastin was a region extending from the Sinai to south of the plain of Acre. At times it reached down into the Sinai. Major towns included Rafah, Caesarea, Gaza, Jaffa, Nablus, Jerico, Ramla and Jerusalem. Initially Ludd (Lydda) was the capital, but in 717 it was moved to the new city of ar-Ramlah (Ramla). Much later, it was moved to Jerusalem.


Jund al-Urdunn was a region to the north and east of Filastin. Major towns included Tiberias, Legio, Acre, Jerico, Beisan and Tyre. The capital was at Tiberias. Various political upheavals several times led to readjustments of the boundaries. After the 10th century, the division into Junds began to break down and the establishment of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem completed that process.


After Muslim control over Palestine was reestablished in the 12th and 13th centuries, the division into districts was reinstated, with boundaries that were frequently rewritten.


Around the end of the 13th century, Palestine comprised of several of nine "kingdoms" of Syria, namely the Kingdoms of Gaza (including Ascalon and Hebron), Karak (including Jaffa and Legio), Safad (including Safad, Acre, Sidon and Tyre) and parts of the Kingdom of Damascus (sometimes extending as far south as Jerusalem).


By the middle of the 14th century, Syria had again been divided into five districts, of which Filastin included Jerusalem (its capital), Ramla, Ascalon, Hebron and Nablus, while Hauran included Tiberias (its capital).


At the beginning of the 16th century, Palestine was captured by the Ottoman Turks, who remained in control until World War I.

The Ottoman Empire governed the area known now as Israel/Palestine under the Villayat of Beirut. and part of that Villayat was divided into three Sanjaks - one to the North comprising parts of what is now Lebanon and the Northern part of Israel, one in the centra covering the Acre to Ramallah area (roughly) including the West Bank and one to the South incorporating Jerusalem, Gaza and the Negev.

When WWI was over the Sykes-Picot agreement divided the entire area up into 'spheres of influence' for France and Britain and we were unfortunate in getting the Palestine Mandated Territory. Better for the inhabitants, maybe, because British anti-Semitism was just a touch less than that of the French. (Both were very racist - the French still are )

Another great column by Charles Krauthammer:

Israelis have wanted nothing more than peace and security for all the children. That’s why they accepted the 1947 U.N. partition of British Palestine into a Jewish and Arab state. Unfortunately — another asymmetry — the Arabs said no. To this day, the Palestinians have rejected every peace offer that leaves a Jewish state standing. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-what-really-happened-in-jerusalem/2013/03/28/5b018070-97d2-11e2-b68f-dc5c4b47e519_story.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22565285

Ultra-Orthodox Jews in mass protest against Israel army draft

Nothing new, but a weakness at israel's core.