• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What’s Palestine’s objective?

Rival

se Dex me saut.
Staff member
Premium Member
Neither did I, yet you insinuate this. There are Reform anti-zionists, that's true. In fact, from what I know about Reform, one of its main founding principals was anti-Zionism. There are also extremist fringe Ultra Orthodox groups like Neturei Karta, except what you may not know as that they're against mass active Zionism as is it has been for the last 200 years or so. However, when the Jewish Messiah comes and the Temple drops down from heaven, you can bet that they'll hop on a plane straight to Israel. Ask them.

However, to suggest that Zionism is not a part of Judaism is sheer delusion, either willfully, as you'll find in the case of some non-Orthodox groups, or out of ignorance or outright denial, as you'll find in the case of some Orthodox groups.
This reminds me of a 'documentary' I saw a while ago. It was about Charedi Jews and I don't usually watch stuff like that because it strikes me as weirdly fetishising, but it had been in my recommended for weeks so I just watched it. It was about Neturei Karta, their anti-Israel demos, their various collusions, burning Israel flags and whatnot, without even bothering to mention that these guys weren't representative of normative Judaism or doing any interviews with non-NK Charedim. It was such a lopsided view I couldn't believe how crazy it was. It made Charedim in general look like total nutcases. Another reason I stopped watching the MSM with regards to this stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBM

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
This reminds me of a 'documentary' I saw a while ago. It was about Charedi Jews and I don't usually watch stuff like that because it strikes me as weirdly fetishising, but it had been in my recommended for weeks so I just watched it. It was about Neturei Karta, their anti-Israel demos, their various collusions, burning Israel flags and whatnot, without even bothering to mention that these guys weren't representative of normative Judaism or doing any interviews with non-NK Charedim. It was such a lopsided view I couldn't believe how crazy it was. It made Charedim in general look like total nutcases. Another reason I stopped watching the MSM with regards to this stuff.
Day-to-day views vary, but a real debate to prove whether Zionism is an integral part of Judaism or not would be between knowledgeable people opening up all of the relevant biblical, halachic and aggadic sources. But I'm not sure what media outlet would be open to such an event. Probably no one really cares. The narrative is all that matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBM

Rival

se Dex me saut.
Staff member
Premium Member
Day-to-day views vary, but a real debate to prove whether Zionism is an integral part of Judaism or not would be between knowledgeable people opening up all of the relevant biblical, halachic and aggadic sources. But I'm not sure what media outlet would be open to such an event. Probably no one really cares. The narrative is all that matters.
The media pushes people emotions not their intellect. If it doesn't make a good story, then yep, no-one cares.
 

King Phenomenon

Well-Known Member
Great. Let's get down to the nit and grit of history.

First, what's Israel's deal with Judea and Samaria?

Thousands of years ago, Jews lived there. This is evidenced by biblical, historical and archeological records. Several exiles removed them from there, but they stilled dreamed for many thousands of years of returning. Naturally, though, successive foreign conquests brought with them foreign settlers, such as the people we now call the Samaritans and the Arabs who now identify as Palestinians.

The origin of the term Palestine itself is debatable. Most believe that it comes from the Greek pronunciation of the P'lishtim, or Philistines in English, the possibly Minoan-originating people that lived on the coast of Israel, but some think that it comes from the Greek "palaistís" or wrestler, which would be a partial translation of the name Israel, which means "wrestles with God" in Hebrew, echoing back to the biblical story of Jacob wrestling with the angel. Either way, the name "Palestine" has nothing to do with the Arabs that now use that term. And in fact, they did not identify with the term even at the time of the British Mandate, but merely saw themselves as part of the Arab collective. It was due to the machinations of the British and the French that we now have the modern borders that created Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and other Arab countries, seemingly dividing the Arab people into geographical ethnicities: The Jordanian Arabs, the Syrians, the Lebanese, etc. These are, however, artificial divisions, although it's possible that nowadays they've started to root themselves more in the mentality of the Arab people. By the way, the Lebanese aren't the original people of Lebanon. Those were the Phoenicians. And the original Syrians were the Assyrians. But people get around, you know?

What's Israel's deal the Judea and Samaria today?

As we've established, the Jews dreamed of returning to all parts of Israel that they used to live in thousands of years ago. However, when, after years of working hard to convince the world powers to allow them to establish a Jewish state in the Land of Israel, the nations agreed but gave Judea and Samaria to the Arabs, the Jews (in general; you can never expect 100% agreement) resigned themselves to taking what they could get. The original partition plan established what would be known as Israel mostly in areas that either had large Jewish populations or were largely unsettled by any people (for example, the large Negev desert area), whilst the Arab country would be established where there were large Arab populations, including Judea and Samaria.

The Jews ultimately accepted the offer while the Arabs didn't. Again, though at this point there were some young new Arab countries, the Arabs living in the British Mandate still viewed themselves as part of the Arab collective. So when the foreign Arab leaders told them to turn down the deal and to attack the Jews, they did. The Jews proceeded with the partition plan, and were promptly attacked by the neighboring Arab countries. The local Arabs - those that turned down Israel's offer of peace and citizenship in the young Jewish country - either joined the ranks of the attacking Arab countries or ran away. Either way, they were convinced that their armies would annihilate Israel and they would return as conquerors and settle not only in Judea and Samaria, but also in Jewish cities such as Tel Aviv and Petach Tikva.

1948 and 1949 came and went, and Israel was victorious. After the war, armistice agreements between Israel and the enemy Arab countries were agreed upon, once again dividing the territory. Here's a 1955 UN map:

View attachment 50592

You may notice something curious: No country known as "Palestine" appears anywhere! Why was that so?
The reason being that Jordan received control of most of the area originally allotted to the Arabs living in British Palestine. Some small portions were handed to Syria in the Golan and the Gaza Strip was given to Egypt. No new Arab country was founded at the time.

The Inter-war Period:

Let's move on. Jordan was now controlling Judea and Samaria. At the time, this area threatened Israel because multiple terrorists crossed the border - the Israeli-Jordanian border, that is - entering from Jordan-controlled Judea and Samaria into Israel and attacking the Israelis. You can read about them here and the original Israeli plan here. The bottom line is that this area of Jordan posed a significant threat to the safety of Israel.

The 1967 Six Day War:

Israel launched the war after having been threatened by the neighboring Arab countries, and in particular, by Nasser, the President of Egypt. I won't get into all of the details of the war. For what's relevant for this subject, suffice it be said that Israel had reached a pre-war agreement with King Hussein of Jordan that the Jordanians would not enter the upcoming war. However, Hussein, upon hearing false claims of victory from Egyptian, Syrian and other countries' radio broadcasts, decided he wanted a piece of the action and began bombing Jewish neighborhoods in West Jerusalem (under Israeli control since 1949). After much debate, the Israeli government decided to retaliate, and proceeded to storm Jordanian-controlled Eastern Jerusalem. They were victorious on that front. However, in order to properly divert the Jordanians' attention, the attack was three-pronged: Other Israeli forces attacked Jordan at Latrun and Qalqilya, and these attacks proved successful as well. Israel proceeded to move further into Jordan-controlled Samaria to clear out the Jordanian artillery forces that had been threatening Israeli cities and towns outside of Judea and Samaria. From there the battle moved to Jenin, being that it was a key strategic location. The Israelis hoped that capturing Jenin would convince Jordan to back off. Jordan continued to wage war, and so Israel proceed to capture more and more territory, until Samaria was entirely under Israeli control.

Around this time, the Jordanians retreated from Judea and Israel took control of that area as well. Thus, the whole of Judea and Samaria came under Israeli control.

The post-War period:

The first Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria were constructed by returnees to places previously populated by Jews during the British Mandate: That's East Jerusalem, Gush Etzion, Hebron and some other places. Later, particularly from the mid-70s and onwards, many new towns and even cities were established.

Israel has not officially recognized the Fourth Geneva Convention as valid in terms of Judea and Samaria, being that Jordan originally captured Judea and Samaria against the 1947-48 UN partition plan, during the '48-'49 War period, which means that those areas legally never belonged to Jordan, at least per UN agreements, and therefore, in Israeli hands, they are not considered "occupied" by Israel, thus not subject to the agreements of the Convention. However, Israel, on its own accord, decided to follow at least some of the Convention rulings when dealing with Judea and Samaria, which created a whole load of internal Israeli legal issues with the creation and expansion of new towns and cities.

Today:

The Oslo Accords in the '90s brought the creation of the Palestinian Authority, an autonomous Arab government controlling Area A and Gaza and some portions of Area B and the IDF withdrew from these areas. Together with the creation of the PA, the Arabs were given weaponry and promptly used them against Israel. This brought upon the lead-off to the Second Intifada and the Intifada itself, where hundreds of Israelis were murdered in the five year period between 2000 and 2005 and many more injured. To put an end to the violence, Israel began Operation Defensive Shield to confiscate weaponry in the PA area. The operation was mostly successful with regards to collecting weaponry, but was unsuccessful in dampening the violence of the Intifada.

read all that couple days ago
I still think Jews are in the wrong
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
There isn’t a single monolithic “Palestinian” objective. They have several objectives and Palestinians are not unified in what those are and how to attain them. The biggest problem with resolving the Israel-Palestinian issues are outsiders meddling.
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
There isn’t a single monolithic “Palestinian” objective. They have several objectives and Palestinians are not unified in what those are and how to attain them. The biggest problem with resolving the Israel-Palestinian issues are outsiders meddling.

The same could be said for Israel with some political groups opposed to the siege of Gaza and the colonization of the West Bank while others are in favor of them and even more. The difference is that the State of Israel is healthy enough to manage those differences through a democratic process while the Palestinian territories are not.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
There isn’t a single monolithic “Palestinian” objective. They have several objectives and Palestinians are not unified in what those are and how to attain them. The biggest problem with resolving the Israel-Palestinian issues are outsiders meddling.
Yes, the existence of a free international press has often been a thorn in the sides of the IDF, and regrettably, they always seem to find some secret terrorist base right underneath an AP press office that needs a good bombing.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
I'd very much appreciate your take on Wikipedia: Haredi Judaism and Zionism.
I gave a short take here:
There are also extremist fringe Ultra Orthodox groups like Neturei Karta, except what you may not know as that they're against mass active Zionism as is it has been for the last 200 years or so. However, when the Jewish Messiah comes and the Temple drops down from heaven, you can bet that they'll hop on a plane straight to Israel
As I'm sure you know, the same can be said of most Ultra Orthodox Jews.

I've never managed to figure out what your exact view of the relationship between Jews and the Land of Israel is, but I think we can both agree that Orthodox Jews expect that the land in its entirety will be ours one day, one way or another. The differences between the views stem from disagreements on how must this be done, per disagreements on interpretations of the relevant sources. Yes, there are sources to this.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
If you are a Zionist Jew, yes.
Are you willing to look over the sources with me? I can prove to you that Zionism is an integral part of Judaism and always has been. As stated above twice now, Ultra Orthodox Jews believe as well that the land belongs to us and they dream of the day that it will return to us in its entirety and the Temple will be rebuilt.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Are you willing to look over the sources with me?
No. We've already established that this is integral to your personal identity as a Jew, and I don't expect any amount of Thorah-thumping to change that, so it would simply be an exercise in frustration and futility.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
I'm shocked.
We've already established that this is integral to your personal identity as a Jew, and I don't expect any amount of Thorah-thumping to change that, so it would simply be an exercise in frustration and futility.
So stop spouting nonsense about Judaism if you don't care to understand it.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
As I'm sure you know, the same can be said of most Ultra Orthodox Jews.
Thanks for the response.

My problem is that I truly lack a nuanced understanding of "Ultra Orthodox Jews" as a category but, yes, I do understand that the Orthodox believe that the land is their God-given birthright as a People.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Is spreading misinformation part of your ideology? Then if so, go for it.
There is no misinformation when I state that I will not debate you on a subject where you will not be swayed by arguments.
It's a simple assessment of your position on the issue; I recall you asserting that Zionism is an integral part of your Jewish identity, did you not speak the truth about that?

I respect your position on the issue, so please respect my decision not to debate you over it.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Israel’s wrong for violating 1948 peace treaty and Hamas is wrong for wanting to violate it as well.

why don’t the ‘Palestinian authority’ as you put it remove Hamas?
If I remember correctly Israel did not violate the treaty. The Arabs did. They attacked Israel in the 1960's. The six day war. Their goal was to eliminate Israel. The Israelis fought back and won. And took a good sized chunk of land when they did so.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
If I remember correctly Israel did not violate the treaty. The Arabs did. They attacked Israel in the 1960's. The six day war. Their goal was to eliminate Israel. The Israelis fought back and won. And took a good sized chunk of land when they did so.
Based on all the information available to me, that's the exact opposite of what happened in 1967.

Six-Day War - Wikipedia
Wikipedia said:
On 5 June, Israel launched a series of airstrikes against Egyptian airfields, initially claiming that it had been attacked by Egypt, but later stating that the airstrikes were preemptive.[27][28] The question of which side caused the war is one of a number of controversies relating to the conflict.[29]

The Egyptians were caught by surprise, and nearly the entire Egyptian Air Force was destroyed with few Israeli losses, giving the Israelis air supremacy. Simultaneously, the Israelis launched a ground offensive into the Gaza Strip and the Sinai, which again caught the Egyptians by surprise. After some initial resistance, Nasser ordered the evacuation of the Sinai. Israeli forces rushed westward in pursuit of the Egyptians, inflicted heavy losses, and conquered the Sinai.[28]

Jordan had entered into a defence pact with Egypt a week before the war began; the agreement envisaged that in the event of war Jordan would not take an offensive role but would attempt to tie down Israeli forces to prevent them making territorial gains.[30] About an hour after the Israeli air attack, the Egyptian commander of the Jordanian army was ordered by Cairo to begin attacks on Israel; in the initially confused situation, the Jordanians were told that Egypt had repelled the Israeli air strikes.

Egypt and Jordan agreed to a ceasefire on 8 June, and Syria agreed on 9 June; a ceasefire was signed with Israel on 11 June. In the aftermath of the war, Israel had crippled the Egyptian, Syrian and Jordanian militaries, having killed over 20,000 troops while losing fewer than 1,000 of its own. The Israeli success was the result of a well-prepared and enacted strategy, the poor leadership of the Arab states, and their poor military leadership and strategy. Israel seized the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, from Jordan and the Golan Heights from Syria.


You may have confused this war with the war of 1973, colloquially known as the Yom Kippur War, which did indeed open with a joint Syrian and Egyptian surprise attack on IDF positions. By that point, the IDF had already been occupying Sinai, West Bank, Gaza and the Golan heights for several years.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Based on all the information available to me, that's the exact opposite of what happened in 1967.

Six-Day War - Wikipedia



You may have confused this war with the war of 1973, colloquially known as the Yom Kippur War, which did indeed open with a joint Syrian and Egyptian surprise attack on IDF positions. By that point, the IDF had already been occupying Sinai, West Bank, Gaza and the Golan heights for several years.
Not really. You ignored what caused the start of the war. Egypt reneged on their earlier treaty agreement and had engaged in an "act of war". The exclusion of Israeli shipping from the Suez canal. Israel may have struck first, but both sides were all set to go. If Egypt had it gone back on the treaty the war may have never occurred.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Not really. You ignored what caused the start of the war. Egypt reneged on their earlier treaty agreement and had engaged in an "act of war". The exclusion of Israeli shipping from the Suez canal. Israel may have struck first, but both sides were all set to go. If Egypt had it gone back on the treaty the war may have never occurred.
So instead of accepting the simple fact that the IDF was the first to strike in 1967, you are now shifting the goalposts and quibbling over the definition of what it means to have "started" a war. You could have said from the start that you're not interested in the historical facts and are merely looking to spread a particular narrative, then I wouldn't have needed to waste my time.
 
Top