Comment

Israel considering annexing settlements if Palestinians proceed with UN member-state bid.

11
Samson9/18/2011 4:58:57 pm PDT

re: #9 ProLifeLiberal

“re: #6 Samson

“…Except for the Arab Towns in 1948, right? You know, like Deir Yassin, Ramla, and Lydda? No side here is of pure action. Haganah acted as probably the best actor in the 1948 War, but Irgun (which would later become Likud) was one of the worst.

In addition, given enough time, people will be able to visit the religious sites on the other side of the line. However, that means peace as soon as possible.”

No.

I have disputed your comments about Jewish and Muslim holy sites. You are confusing several different issues here:

• “…Except for the Arab Towns in 1948, right? You know, like Deir Yassin, Ramla, and Lydda?” You are referring to alleged massacres and/or expulsions that occurred during a war. This is, as they say, beyond the scope of this particular thread, but I will dispute the notion that the army of the newly-formed state of Israel, fighting for its life, was guilty of worse behavior than the multiple armies that came to drive the Jews into the sea.

• “…Irgun (which would later become Likud) was one of the worst” - the Irgun was absorbed into the IDF, and by the end of Israel’s War of Independence was no longer functioning as an independent entity:

en.wikipedia.org

The Irgun committed several well known acts of terrorism (or resistance, as murder is now called by the Palestinians) prior to the formation of the state of Israel. They are nothing to be proud of, but on the other hand, no one has accused them, or any other Jewish or Israeli group of purposely and systematically destroying or defiling Muslim holy sites. In any case, while Likud has part of its history from the Irgun, the current party leadership is now two generations separated from it.

• “…In addition, given enough time, people will be able to visit the religious sites on the other side of the line.”

This is a dream, unlikely to occur any time soon. In the entire time that Jordan occupied the west bank, Jewish holy sites were systematically destroyed and defiled. No Jew was allowed to visit these sites (or to live in Jordan, for that matter). Had there been no war in 1967, this would certainly still be the case. Even now, the ability of Jews to visit the Cave of Machpelah, Joseph’s tomb and other holy sites within Palestinian areas is limited, visitors are subjected to violent attacks, and attempts are made to damage the sites themselves. In contrast, Muslim sites in Israel (as well as Christian churches, Bahai shrines and other religious sites) are protected. To claim otherwise is simply wrong, and if you are not convinced, I am willing to spend the rest of my Sunday finding enough references to convince you.

Perhaps at some time in the distant future, there will be real peace in which Israel can exist as a Jewish state in harmony and mutual respect with its neighbors, in which religious and historical sites will be appreciated for their significance and beauty rather than their political meaning, and where the political and civil rights of all men and women are respected. Until then, I would trust the State of Israel, whatever its currently elected governing party, far more than the Palestinians or any other group or nation in the entire middle east when it comes to protecting and providing access to holy sites.