Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Why I support Israel's 'settlements'

Firstly, 'settlement' implies that the land is recently 'settled.' That is a mistake to assume - in fact many of the settlements - such as Hebron, East Jerusalem, and Gush Etzion, are in land that was traditionally Jewish - until the Palestinians (1929 Hebron massacre) and/or Jordan (in 1948) took the land away. I do not believe in 'land for peace.' I believe the land CAN be given up...But only if there is REAL EVIDENCE of a REAL PEACE that is coming. This requires a change in the textbooks, media, and Palestinian attitudes. Anything short is suicide. I did not always think this way. But the Second Intifada convinced me of this. See: Raccoon's personal reaction to the Intifada. Lest we forget, the land is of strategic importance. (see: Pentagon memo stating as such) That should be reason enough to not give up the settlements unless there is evidence that the Palestinians (and Arab world) are SERIOUS about a REAL PEACE. A summary of why I support the settlements in the territories:
  1. Most of the settlements are on land that was not even occupied by Palestinians.
  2. Many of the OTHER settlements are on land where Jews lived since recorded history - until they were kicked out by Palestinians (1929, Hebron massacre), or Jordan in 1948.
  3. The West Bank is of strategic importance, and Israel otherwise does not have defensible borders.
  4. Absolutely the West Bank (Judea/Samaria) and PARTICULARLY Jerusalem are places where Jews have long historical land ties and a deep emotional connection. You cannot compare this to anywhere else, save possibly Mecca/Medina.
  5. In any case, any argument that the settlements are a block to peace is lost - since Israel is willing to give up the settlements.
DO NOT believe the lie that '40% of the settlements are on Palestinian-owned land.' THIS WAS A LIE PERPETUATED BY PEACE NOW, A GROUP OUT TO DISCREDIT ISRAELI ACTIONS! Camera debunked this nonsense right here. There are very real, non-insano religious reasons to support the settlements in Judea/Samaria.

4 comments:

BaconEating AtheistJew said...

Something more to ponder. The idea that only Arabs should exist in the West Bank is another false pretense.
Jordan gave up the rights to the West Bank in 1987. It is up for grabs, yet nobody uses the term Arab settlers.

Check this article out.

Red Tulips said...

BEAJ:

Thanks for the link. It's obviously 100% true.

IsraeliDiary said...

You are partially right about the settlements. It's a very complicated and sensitive issue for both sides.

The west bank has become globally recognized as Palestinian land. The Palestinians would never give up on these lands and one day or another we will have to give it away.

It's either war or peace - only these two options can solve this conflict. But Israel cannot start a war with the Palestinians, nor can it give land to a terrorist organization that vows to destroy Israel.

These lands may have a strategic value, but only if there's a threat of war. If these lands are given for a real peace and Israel will be backed by the West, a war would be unlikely.

P.S. - it's good to see open-minded people who can change their political views and are loyal to the truth. I like your point of view and I learned something new from your post. Thank you.

Hope you'll like it here in Israel when you come.

Have a good year.

Red Tulips said...

Israelidiary:

Thanks for posting here! I agree about the West Bank. This land is only of strategic importance if there is an ongoing war - if in fact there is a real peace, then the land is not needed for its strategic importance.

Hope to see you here again!