Go Pay for it Yourself!

When is Democracy not Democracy?

When it is foisted on those whose cultural, social, political and economic circumstances and history are such that the basis and principles of democracy get undermined.

In other words, the only way to hold an election that anyone would vote in was to allow terrorist organisations to put forward candidates, something that would not happen in any Western democracy.

It's Democracy Jim, but not as we know it.

I'm not sure this is fair. If the prevailing attitude in the US was in support of terrorists, then I'm quite sure terrorist organizations would put forward candidates.

The real issue seems to be that the situation in Palestine is so toxic that when the public is given political voice, they use that voice to express the same hatred we've been hearing for years.

No political system, not even democracy (a really good one), can fix Palestine. Its only hope is for the hearts and minds of its people (and Israel's) to undergo dramatic change.

'm not sure this is fair. If the prevailing attitude in the US was in support of terrorists, then I'm quite sure terrorist organizations would put forward candidates.

Absolutely not! There is no room for terrorists in any genuine democratic process anywhere. If there were lots of pro Al Qaeda feeling in the US you'd be OK with Osama bin Laden standing for President?

No political system, not even democracy (a really good one), can fix Palestine. Its only hope is for the hearts and minds of its people (and Israel's) to undergo dramatic change.

Israel changing? We're talking about democracy or otherwise within the palestinian areas. How is it Israel's responsibility to help genuine democracy arise in the palestinian areas?

I don't think we're disagreeing as much as you seem to think.

My point is that all democracy does is give power to the political will of the citizenry. If the people are calling for blood, perfect democracy will do nothing but legitimize and empower that hatred. This is just as true in the US as it is in the rest of the world.

Unfortunately, by electing Hamas (for example), Palestinians have demonstrated a genuine political will which is, too put it mildly, unacceptable. Peace will be impossible until the people change, regardless of what the government does.

Israel changing? We're talking about democracy or otherwise within the palestinian areas. How is it Israel's responsibility to help genuine democracy arise in the palestinian areas?

Well, as I said, I don't think genuine democracy is nearly enough. I was talking about peace. And while I would hesitate to talk about responsibility, I don't think it's debatable that an Israeli attitude adjustment would make good accompaniment to a Palestinian one.

I don't think it's debatable that an Israeli attitude adjustment would make good accompaniment to a Palestinian one.

Do you not? What sort of attitude adjustment did you have in mind?

I'm not trying to place blame here. And if I was, I wouldn't be trying to place it on Israel.

I was just saying that for peace to work, everybody needs to be willing to forgive and let go of their animosity.

Would you disagree? Do you think Israeli's have no entrenched animosity towards Palestinians at this point? You could be right... I don't live in Israel so I can't say for sure. But it would really surprise me.

Better to ask Yaakov, but from my own knowledge the only reason some Israelis are anti-Palestinian is because of the suicide bombings etc, rather than because of any fundamental anti-Palestinian ideology.

I'd say if Israelis are allowed to live in peace they'd really have nothing against the Palestinians coming out OK too. Can't generalise of course.

speaking of tax dollars. Check this out Israel Gives Some Tax

Where exactly does the $23,240 number come from? I divide the Total Cost to U.S. Taxpayers by 300 million (we are almost there!) to get $449.31, even if you do not consider all U.S. citizens as taxpayers, the number should be nowhere near as high as $23,240.

I assume he's dividing by # of Israelis, to get US Subsidy per Israeli.

That bit about defence contractors is true, although "defence contractor subsidies" does not sound like a program very many people would endorse.

I suppose it's one of those statistical anomalies that occur with average's. It is U.S. gov. data

Thanks simonesq, I just misread that one.

It says clearly in his own post:

Total Taxpayer Cost per Israeli
$23,240

Yes, but that is kind of irrelevant. I don't care about the cost per Israeli but the cost per American. Which works out to approx. $500, which isn't too bad, considering Israel is the only real democracy in the Middle East. (There are Arabs in Knesset, btw)

What about when they're all democracies? After the PNAC happens?

Then we can stop subsidizing Israel. At that point, Israel will not need our subsidies, because there will be peace.

Unless the U.S. can no longer afford to subsidise them and they just run out of bullets

Ha I don't know if you can say anything good about that wall. What it is in response to has no relevance. Its gaining Israel more land. If it was only to keep bombers out, why is it outside of the lines previously drawn? And please don't say its temporary.

Yaakov do you have any sites to back up if the wall is actually Israel giving up land? I really don't know much about the total land the wall takes, just that it is outside the 1949 armistice lines.

Yaakov

I don't like the wall because it is losing land for Israel, not gaining it. Unfortunately I think that the plan of the government is to make it permanent, and forcibly resettle 80,000 people because they are Jews. Ethnic cleansing on a large scale.

is a great tragedy such a shame that this seems to be the eternal reality of the middle east. Personally I hope that the wall will be a thing for both groups to focus there hate on. Walls are never permanent and tend to be rather porous.

I'm pretty sure before the book begins, there is a statement by Brown saying everything is researched and is true. Though I don't remember if he specified what he had researched.

I believe it is that unwilling to compromise that fuels this horrible battle.

I am of the opinion that all of the land between the Jordan and Mediterranean, from Syria and the Golan down to Eilat belongs to Israel. Thus, setting up a border wall by which Israel gives up land is Israel losing land.

Out through the window goes your credibility.

Why stop at these borders? Why not claim it up to the Persian Gulf?

Your comment reveals why this Israel-Palestine thing has been so intractable; The land grab, the bloodlust and the outright wild-eyed irresponsibility of the various positions.

You write about pro-Palestinian bias, but you incite it with comments like that.

My opinion of what Israel deserves, and my outlook for what will eventually happen and what will need to happen for a peaceful solution are not necessarily the same.

I don't understand how you think Israel deserves all of the land. Based on what?

I wouldn't claim for Israel that much land - Yaakov is basing his claims on the Bible and solid archeological evidence. However, the 1948, 1967 and 1973 wars were not instigated by Israel. The 1948 and 1973 wars were caused by straight-up invasions of Israel by the surrounding Arab nations. The 1967 war was caused by Egypt blocking the Straits of Tiran - an act of war under International law. Also under International Law, a country is allowed to keep land gained in a defensive war - the "spoils of war". Therefore Israel is/was justified in keeping the Golan, West Bank, Gaza, a (current) piece of Lebanon whose name I forget and the Sinai. However, in the interests of peace Israel has given up its claims for Gaza, Sinai, the piece of Lebanon, and most of the West Bank (including portions of Jerusalem).

I don't believe the wall is a good solution for any amount of time more than a few months while the withdrawal is sorted out. Palestinians need to 1.) elect leaders who will work towards peace as Israel has done. 2.) Stop acting entitled to jobs in Israel. The complaint that the wall will separate them from their jobs is bogus. (The claim about seperating them from their land is not.)

I don't feel that the country who wins a war deserves to fully take over the other nation. It usually doesn't unfold like that.

As for religious/we were there first reasons... land is always rented. If you think differently, I would take it more seriously when all the Jews in America gave their land back to the Indians.

insert_name_here In the case of these wars there were certain agreements reached between nations which has permanently bound Israel. Contrary to the popular belief that Zionists control the white house from Israel the truth is that Israel cost 1 Trillion $ and they do what their told. A shift in the U.S. policy to VETO all decisions about Israel would have profound effects.

Recognizing Israel is the first step. How can Hamas demand payment from an entity which doesn't have the right to exist, in their (humble?) opinion? How can it demand payment from an entity while also swearing to destroy it?

Hamas has no right to anything from Israel while Hamas doesn't recognize Israel's right to existance. Then we can sit down and have talks - the Israeli gov't has already said it is willing considering that step, which requires no material action, only words, is taken.

Yes I have been concerned about this wall position too Yaakov. Strategically it is a disaster. Even old or out dated artillery would have no trouble pounding this "NECK" to use the military term. Are there any alternate defense plans to cope with this possible threat.

Yaakov, that first statement makes no sense, it's like telling the people in Peru to get lost out of where they live because there are plenty of other Spanish speaking countries in the region. In the same logic, you could say to the Jews that there are 200 other countries in the world to go live in. If they were born there, they should be able to stay there.

I know that a border will not end all hostilities, I said it would be a great first step in the process of cooling the region down. And how does giving away a bit of high ground match up against a state of the art, multi billion dollar, US supported army defending that border against some old, pretty much useless army equipment at the other side. Plus, if a border was drawn, it would be a real, internationally recognised border, not one inside a country, but a real one that can be closed and can be controlled without the controls being pretty much illegal.

So you are saying Israël isn't capable of maintaining an army on it's own? That the equipment isn't bought from the US, but given by the US? Cause if it's bought, then there can always be more stuff bought in 20 50 years, from the US or from somewhere else. Weapons manufacturers are present all over the world.

If U.S. aid stopped Israel would run out of Ammunition in a few months of concentrated fighting. They have collected Booty ( Military Hardware from war ) in the past and it is usually sold to the Iranians.