Iran president wants Israel ‘wiped off the map’

[LogicChristian]

The US functions on a Permanent War Economy...it is what got us out of the Great Depression and maintains our economic livelyhood...that is the Permanent War Economy that is being referred to.

So you're saying that we were still on a war economy after WWII despite military spending decreasing by over half, the US cutting the majority military aircrat production, rifle production, and tank production?

Gimme a break.

edit: I just checked, the US actually only spends 3.3% of its GDP on defense.

My post spoke specifically of prayer...and the end result is referencing a "rat's behind."

I responded to your post, you thought my post didn't address your post, even though it did. I didn't care what you thought, and i told you that. end of story

 

[chokmah]

It is the use of nationalism that trumps religious institutions, and more often than not, an amalgamation will occur that obfuscates any relic of nobility in either institution. If that does not answer the question, I am not sure what else to say, but I did my best.

You stated originally:

The Israel in the Bible is not the same concept as Israel the nation that was formed just 60 years ago.

And when I ask you what the difference is outside of a theocracy, you present the above.

What I find interesting is that:

1) It's the same people involved: the Jews.
2) It's the same land area. (actually smaller than the Biblical parameters).

And somehow you feel justified in stating that the Israel of today is different because of an immaterial concept.

Sounds like a precursor to Replacement Theology.

 

[k]

You stated originally:



And when I ask you what the difference is outside of a theocracy, you present the above.

What I find interesting is that:

1) It's the same people involved: the Jews.
2) It's the same land area. (actually smaller than the Biblical parameters).

And somehow you feel justified in stating that the Israel of today is different because of an immaterial concept.

Sounds like a precursor to Replacement Theology.

Not quite...and the "immaterial" concept has some concrete and realistic repercussions.

 

[Defensor Fidei]

What I find interesting is that:

1) It's the same people involved: the Jews.

The Biblical Israelites were one people who occupied land God had given them. The Jews are a "mish-mosh" of peoples from all different regions and backgrounds, Ashkenazi from Russia or Poland, Sephardics from the Middle East/ North Africa, etc. Their claims to Palestine are based on nothing but greed and racial supremacy (Despite their obvious mixed-race status, the Jews are obsessed with having "pure" Jewish blood, especially the Khazars.)
They don't want to have to live with the goyim.

2) It's the same land area. (actually smaller than the Biblical parameters).

And somehow you feel justified in stating that the Israel of today is different because of an immaterial concept.

Sounds like a precursor to Replacement Theology.

The old Israel was founded by God's mandate. The new state of 'israel' was founded by self-serving men seeking power in open violation of the will of Almighty God, Who has forever abandoned the Jews.
The New Israel is indeed the Christian Church.

 

[chokmah]

Not quite...and the "immaterial" concept has some concrete and realistic repercussions.

Such as?

Furthermore, when you tell me that there are essentially no differences between the present Israel and the former Israel EXCEPT for some ideological interpretations, I'm afraid that it sounds more like think-tank considerations that can vary upon bias. Therefore, the validity is inferred instead of exacted.

 

[chokmah]

The Biblical Israelites were one people who occupied land God had given them. The Jews are a "mish-mosh" of peoples from all different regions and backgrounds, Ashkenazi from Russia or Poland, Sephardics from the Middle East/ North Africa, etc. Their claims to Palestine are based on nothing but greed and racial supremacy (Despite their obvious mixed-race status, the Jews are obsessed with having "pure" Jewish blood, especially the Khazars.)
They don't want to have to live with the goyim.

It's good to see that you remain consistent in your ignorance of Jews and Judaism.

And the emboldened is even more ridiculous. The plain face of reality sends this argument to File 13.

The old Israel was founded by God's mandate. The new state of 'israel' was founded by self-serving men seeking power in open violation of the will of Almighty God, Who has forever abandoned the Jews.
The New Israel is indeed the Christian Church.

Ahhh... I knew that RT had a face. I just couldn't tell if you were going to mask it in this discussion or not.

 

[k]

Such as?

Furthermore, when you tell me that there are essentially no differences between the present Israel and the former Israel EXCEPT for some ideological interpretations, I'm afraid that it sounds more like think-tank considerations that can vary upon bias. Therefore, the validity is inferred instead of exacted.

Those ideological manifestations are the birthright of everything that contradicts the Torh.

edit: too much to say "everything" instead, let's look at what the Torah says about Nationalism.

 

[chokmah]

Those ideological manifestations are the birthright of everything that contradicts the Torh.

edit: too much to say "everything" instead, let's look at what the Torah says about Nationalism.

Forgive my skeptical point of view that you have any understanding of Torah.

Feel free to present your Scripture passages that present your ideas though.

 

[chokmah]

Neverstop:

I should clarify something for you.

I was asking you for things of a "less-abstract" nature that separate the present Israel from the former.

Abstract ideas, in this endeavor, tend to not take into consideration the physical criteria that I have discussed previously. Therefore, what you present is open to every opinion possible and does not have an absolute understanding.

 

[Kelly]

No matter what new coventant we may be under, I feel that the land of Israel is the epicenter of the Lord's attentions and the Jews are special to Him. I am not speaking about salvation.

Seeing Pres. Bush praising Abbas, supporting the pullout, etc etc etc makes me very sad. We were blessed when we blessed Israel (i.e. liberation of concentration camps, UN setting up Israeli state, etc) now we have began turning our backs. The recent statements by Iran and our government's silence, speaks VOLUMES.

 

[CCGirl]

The President of Iran is a terrorist, that is why. He was involved in the kidnapping of several Americans and God knows how many other terrorist operations. I can't understand why we have not nuked him yet.

This was proven to be false.

Maybe Iran doesn't like Israel having all those nukes so close?

 

[chokmah]

Maybe Iran doesn't like Israel having all those nukes so close?

Maybe Israel wouldn't need nuclear and other military deterrents if neighbors would leave it alone?

 

[CCGirl]

Maybe Israel wouldn't need nuclear and other military deterrents if neighbors would leave it alone?

I guess it depends which side of the fence you are on whether they are for defense or offense!

Iran should also have nukes to balance the "power"

 

[chokmah]

I guess it depends which side of the fence you are on whether they are for defense or offense!

How many times has Israel initiated an offensive v. defensive?

Iran should also have nukes to balance the "power"

I don't recall seeing an edict from an Israeli government official that calls for the destruction of any other country.

 

[8TarHeel8]

I guess it depends which side of the fence you are on whether they are for defense or offense!

Iran should also have nukes to balance the "power"

This presupposes that it would be legal for Iran to posses an arsenal in the first place. This is easily shown not to be the case (see link below).

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/25/world/main882946.shtml

Key paragraph from the story above:

Iran has repeatedly said it was permitted under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to pursue such activities for peaceful purposes and won't give up its right to enrich uranium to produce nuclear fuel.

Ok. Here is the million dollar question: Why is Iran trying to persuade the world that it's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only? Because a nuclear program for weapons production is illegal according to the aforementioned Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (see link below for a text of the treaty).

http://www.state.gov/t/np/trty/16281.htm

Article I



Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices.

Article II ​

Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to receive the transfer from any transferor whatsoever of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or of control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices; and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.

​

​

​

​

The list of parties to the treaty appears here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Non-Proliferation_Treaty

Iran is on the list as a non-nuclear power. Israel is one of three nations listed as having not signed the treaty. Pakistan and India are the other two.

Cheers.

 

[Inconel]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9823624/

Iran’s hard-line president called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” and said a new wave of Palestinian attacks will destroy the Jewish state, state-run media reported Wednesday.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also denounced attempts to recognize Israel or normalize relations with it.

Please remind me again why this maniac should have the Bomb?

 

[MaryS]

Yes, but like many leaders, Sharon may be simply exercising restraint in his commentary, his actions say other wise, but I could be wrong.

Sharon's actions indicate he is willing to remove his own people from their homes in order to try to bargain for some peace in the area. Some of the Jews that were forced from their homes by Sharon's police were willing to disavow themselves from Israeli rule in order to stay in their homes and businesses, but they were not allowed to become part of the Arab-ruled land simply because they are Jewish.

I'm glad that Harry Truman stood up for the creation of Israel. President Eisenhower was totally opposed to Israel and there was a long-time arms embargo imposed on Israel. Luckily, a long-time friend of Israel, John F. Kennedy became President and allowed Israel to advance in their weapons system. President Lyndon Johnson advanced their weapons even more because they were a great ally in the war to stop the spread of communism.

Personally, I think George Bush has pushed Israel too far in his quest to establish a nation called "Palestine".

"And, make no mistake, the United States will oppose any proposal from any party and at any point in the negotiating process that threatens the security of Israel.
America's commitment to the security of Israel is ironclad, and, I might add, so is mine," --- President Ronald Reagan

"For decades, as Israel has struggled to survive, we have rejoiced in your triumphs and shared in your agonies. In the years since Israel was founded, Americans of every faith have admired and supported you. ... In times of war and times of peace, every President of the United States since Harry Truman, and every Congress has understood the importance of Israel. The survival of Israel is important not only to our interests, but to every single value we hold dear as a people."-- President William Jefferson Clinton
Address to the Israeli Knesset
October 27, 1994


Jewish exodus from Arab lands
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Israel_from_Arab_lands
(link includes photo of a 1948 NYTimes article titled: JEWS IN GRAVE DANGER IN ALL MOSLEM LANDS

--------
I admit I favor Israel in this dispute, but it has nothing to do with my religious beliefs and they certainly have done plenty of things that I think are shameful. I just happen to prefer people who don't indoctrinate and train their children to strap bombs to themselves in order to kill Jews for religious reasons.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/12/60minutes/main655482.shtml
(excerpt:
Wallace: You say you want peace, correct, Mr. President?

Arafat: Yes

Wallace: But you incite Palestinians, especially young Palestinians, to violence. Just this past week, you said publicly, "Millions of holy warriors are on their way to Jerusalem. Jihad, jihad, jihad, jihad, holy war, holy war, holy war." What does that mean?

Arafat: I am repeating some of holy Muslim words, not mine.

Wallace: On your state-controlled television, a cleric – here's what he said.
"Whoever can fight them with his weapons should go out to battle. Nothing will deter the Jews, except the color of their filthy people's blood. Nothing will deter them, except for us voluntarily detonating ourselves in their midst."

 

[Scholar in training]

Besides the lack of a theocracy, how does the state of Israel differ from the Israel of antiquity?

A better question might be: can the state of Israel trace its past to the Israel of antiquity?

 

[chokmah]

A better question might be: can the state of Israel trace its past to the Israel of antiquity?

Considering the people are the same, and that the land is semi-representative, I would say, 'yes'.

What other ways would need to be verified for you?

 

[invisible trousers]

i think it's time for another osirak