Israel-Hamas Thread II

[Landon Caeli]

The [some] Palestinians have to stop killing and being evil..! This evil is too persistent, and merciless. It's way, way too much.

 

[essentialsaltes]

You can only get attacked so many times before *consequences*. If you attack me 1500 times in 50 years, I'm gonna do something to you.

Maybe I'll even confiscate your land! Maybe that won't stop you from attacking me, in which case I have to do something else. You see how this works.

Okie doke, boss, but you're making my case for me about who's being the Nazis here.

 

[rjs330]

Or perhaps you don't.

Genocide is the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group in whole or in part, as defined by the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. It involves acts such as killing members of the group, causing serious harm, inflicting conditions calculated to cause destruction, preventing births, or forcibly transferring children. The term was coined by Raphael Lemkin, derived from the Greek "genos" (race) and Latin "cide" (killing), and it is a crime under international law.

Key Aspects of Genocide

• Intent to Destroy: The most crucial element of genocide is the specific intent to destroy a targeted group.
  
  
• • Protected Groups: The definition applies to national, ethnic, racial, and religious groups.
  • Specific Acts: The convention lists five prohibited acts that, if committed with genocidal intent, constitute genocide:
    • • Killing members of the group.
      • Causing serious bodily or mental harm.
      • Deliberately inflicting conditions of life intended to bring about physical destruction.
      • Imposing measures to prevent births within the group.
      • Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The only group Israel is trying to destroy is HAMAS. If they would surrender rhe war would end. That is NOT a genocide.

 

[rjs330]

Okie doke, boss, but you're making my case for me about who's being the Nazis here.

Yup. Hamas and their Palestinian supporters. Those are clearly rhe NAZIS. I think they are worse than Nazis.

 

[Benaiah468]

The only group Israel is trying to destroy is HAMAS. If they would surrender rhe war would end. That is NOT a genocide.

Those who commit genocide no longer want to share the earth with a particular other people. It should be clear who intends to do this in the Middle East.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Those who commit genocide no longer want to share the earth with a particular other people. It should be clear who intends to do this in the Middle East.

Correct.

Israel is in talks to possibly resettle Palestinians from Gaza in South Sudan​

TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Israel is in discussions with South Sudan about the possibility of resettling Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to the war-torn East African country, part of a wider effort by Israel to facilitate mass emigration from the territory left in ruins by its 22-month offensive against Hamas.

That's ethnic cleansing.

 

[Benaiah468]

Israel is in talks to possibly resettle Palestinians from Gaza in South Sudan​

TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Israel is in discussions with South Sudan about the possibility of resettling Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to the war-torn East African country, part of a wider effort by Israel to facilitate mass emigration from the territory left in ruins by its 22-month offensive against Hamas.

That's ethnic cleansing.

In the aftermath of WWII, over 12M Germans were expelled from Eastern Europe between 1945-50. At least 3.5M of them came from the Sudetenland (modern-day Czechia). Imagine, if instead of being resettled in Germany, they were denied German citizenship and forced to live in refugee camps for generations. Over the years those refugees start calling themselves the "Sudeten" nation and claim ownership over the Sudetenland but also the entire Czechia. Due to natural population growth, the "Sudeten" nation would now number over 10M, exceeding the population of Czechia.

Yet that is precisely what happened with the "Palestinians". The "Palestinians" regarded themselves as Arabs or "Syrians" until at least 1960s. They were content to be ruled by Jordan and Egypt between 1948-67. However, the Arab states (except Jordan) explicitly refused to integrate "Palestinians". The Arab League Resolution 1547 (9 Mar 1959) explicitly ordered its member states not to give "Palestinians" citizenship, in order to avoid dissolution of their identity and protect their rights to return to their "homeland". As opposed to the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), which resettled 50M refugees in the last half-century, the Arab states set up up a separate agency, UNRWA, whose mandate doesn't include resettlement at all. UNRWA then repeatedly changed the definition of "refugee" to accommodate more "Palestinians" with each passing year.

Of course, the circumstances of the 1947-48 war in "Palestine" differ from those of the German refugees. Unlike the 12M Germans who were explicitly forced to leave, historians (e.g. Benny Moris) assert that only 10-15% of the "Palestinians" were directly expelled by the IDF forces. Another 15-25% were ordered to leave by the Arab leaders, and the rest fled out of a general fear of hostilities. While at least 2M German civilians died in the process, the total civilian death count in 1947-48 was ~800. Despite losing the war in the early months, the Israeli leadership didn't have a centralised plan to expel "Palestinians", and many were allowed to remain, now making up 21% of its population. However, overall the analogy still holds.

 

[Benaiah468]

So how did it all begin?

In May 1948, the local Arab population was joined by seven Arab countries in a collective attempt to destroy the newly reestablished Jewish state. Encouraged by Arab leaders who promised they would return as victors, and later on as a result of their failed war efforts, an estimated 500000 Arabs fled to neighboring Arab territories.

But is this the full picture?

I’d like you to take a look at the refugees in these photos

Many people assume they are Arab refugees fleeing Israel. But in fact, they are innocent Jewish refugees forced out of Arab countries.

There were far more Jewish refugees than Arab refugees. Over 850000 Jews from ancient Jewish communities predating Islam and the Arab occupation of the Middle East where forced out of their homes. Jews were stripped of their citizenship in many countries, and their porperty was confiscated.

In contrast, 160000 Arabs accepted Israel’s offer to remain, and today, there are more than one million Israeli Arab citizens with full equal rights living in Israel.

Now here is a question.

Have you heard of any Jewish refugee camps?

I didn’t think so.

The jewish refugees were immediately welcomed and absorbed by Israel or by other nations.

Then why, after more than 60 years, are the Arab "Palestinian" refugees still not welcomed and absorbed among their own brethren?

And how could their numbers have grown from 500000 to 4700000 million?

The sad reality is that the arab refugees never had a chance.

Attempts at resettlement were blocked by a variety of discriminatory laws.

Enacted in Arab countries, such as a ban on receiving citizenship (with the exeption of Jordan), blocking them from entering many professions, restrictions on owning land, restrictions on movement and a denial of education and health services.

Sir Alexander Galloway, a former director of the UN Refugee Agency in Jordan, gave the reason for this discrimination

Egyptian President Gmal Abdel Nasser explained the effect of this weapon aimed at overwhelming Israel demographically, with generations of refugees cultivated to hate

And what role did the United Nations play?

Sadly, they were less than helpful.

While all refugees in the world are assisted by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), a separate agency, UNWRA, was established specifically for the "Palestinians"

Why can’t the "Palestinian" refugees share an agency with the refugees of Bosnia, Congo, or Darfur, to name a few?

The answer ist because while the UN Central Refugee Agency helps refugees resettle, the UN "Palestinian" Refugee Agency helps perpetuate their status by applying unique criteria.

For example refugees lose their status after receiving citizenship frm a recognized country. "Palestinian" refugees do not. Refugees cannot transmit their status from generation to generation. "Palestinian" refugees can. Refugees are encouraged to resettle in other countries or integrate in their host countries. UNWRA avoids such policies. The United Nations spends on a single "Palestinian" refugee almost three times more than on a non-"Palestinian" refugee and employs over 30 times the staff.

The bottom line is, throughout the 20th century, the UN found durable solutions for tens of millions of refugees, while the "Palestinian" Refugee Agency has found, well, none.

Some people may suggest this is hypocrisy.

600000 Jews from Arab states were resettled in Israel. History has proven that resettlement and integration helped tens of millions of refugees during the 20th century reclaim their lives.

However, the "Palestinian" refugees are trapped between Arab leaders unwilling to accept their brothers and UN agencies who do not apply equal and universal principles to all refugees.

Is this just?

 

[Philip_B]

So how did it all begin?

In May 1948, the local Arab population was joined by seven Arab countries in a collective attempt to destroy the newly reestablished Jewish state. Encouraged by Arab leaders who promised they would return as victors, and later on as a result of their failed war efforts, an estimated 500000 Arabs fled to neighboring Arab territories.

But is this the full picture?

I’d like you to take a look at the refugees in these photos

View attachment 369528View attachment 369529
View attachment 369530

Many people assume they are Arab refugees fleeing Israel. But in fact, they are innocent Jewish refugees forced out of Arab countries.

There were far more Jewish refugees than Arab refugees. Over 850000 Jews from ancient Jewish communities predating Islam and the Arab occupation of the Middle East where forced out of their homes. Jews were stripped of their citizenship in many countries, and their porperty was confiscated.

In contrast, 160000 Arabs accepted Israel’s offer to remain, and today, there are more than one million Israeli Arab citizens with full equal rights living in Israel.

Now here is a question.

Have you heard of any Jewish refugee camps?

I didn’t think so.

The jewish refugees were immediately welcomed and absorbed by Israel or by other nations.

Then why, after more than 60 years, are the Arab "Palestinian" refugees still not welcomed and absorbed among their own brethren?

View attachment 369537

And how could their numbers have grown from 500000 to 4700000 million?

The sad reality is that the arab refugees never had a chance.

Attempts at resettlement were blocked by a variety of discriminatory laws.

Enacted in Arab countries, such as a ban on receiving citizenship (with the exeption of Jordan), blocking them from entering many professions, restrictions on owning land, restrictions on movement and a denial of education and health services.

Sir Alexander Galloway, a former director of the UN Refugee Agency in Jordan, gave the reason for this discrimination

View attachment 369536

Egyptian President Gmal Abdel Nasser explained the effect of this weapon aimed at overwhelming Israel demographically, with generations of refugees cultivated to hate


View attachment 369535

And what role did the United Nations play?

Sadly, they were less than helpful.

View attachment 369532

While all refugees in the world are assisted by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), a separate agency, UNWRA, was established specifically for the "Palestinians"

View attachment 369533

Why can’t the "Palestinian" refugees share an agency with the refugees of Bosnia, Congo, or Darfur, to name a few?

View attachment 369534

The answer ist because while the UN Central Refugee Agency helps refugees resettle, the UN "Palestinian" Refugee Agency helps perpetuate their status by applying unique criteria.

For example refugees lose their status after receiving citizenship frm a recognized country. "Palestinian" refugees do not. Refugees cannot transmit their status from generation to generation. "Palestinian" refugees can. Refugees are encouraged to resettle in other countries or integrate in their host countries. UNWRA avoids such policies. The United Nations spends on a single "Palestinian" refugee almost three times more than on a non-"Palestinian" refugee and employs over 30 times the staff.

The bottom line is, throughout the 20th century, the UN found durable solutions for tens of millions of refugees, while the "Palestinian" Refugee Agency has found, well, none.

Some people may suggest this is hypocrisy.

600000 Jews from Arab states were resettled in Israel. History has proven that resettlement and integration helped tens of millions of refugees during the 20th century reclaim their lives.

However, the "Palestinian" refugees are trapped between Arab leaders unwilling to accept their brothers and UN agencies who do not apply equal and universal principles to all refugees.

Is this just?

The argument fails because it is premised upon regarding Palestinians as simply Arabs, interchangeable with any other sort of Arab. The Irish are as interchangeable with the English as the Belgians are interchangeable with either the Dutch or the French. Culture and heritage are part of who we are as people made in the image and after the likeness of God. So, in answer to your question, NO it is not just.

 

[rjs330]

The Irish are as interchangeable with the English as the Belgians are interchangeable with either the Dutch or the French. Culture and heritage are part of who we are as people made in the image and after the likeness of God.

What arw saying here? That all.white people are interchangeable, but olive skinned people aren't? What's all of this have to do with image of God?

The Arabs are the ones not allowing the Palestinians in. Could it be the Palestinian culture is too radical and violent for other Arabs?

 

[JosephZ]

Israel army begins targeting Gaza City high-rises

Despite mounting pressure at home and abroad to halt its nearly two-year offensive in Gaza, Israel has been calling up reinforcements, intensifying its bombardments and closing in on Gaza City ever since announcing its intention to capture the Palestinian territory's largest city.

Defence Minister Israel Katz said in a statement on Friday that "the bolt has now been removed from the gates of hell in Gaza", vowing to intensify operations until Hamas accepts Israel's terms to end the war.

"The news about Israel beginning to bomb towers and apartment buildings is terrifying. Everyone is scared and doesn't know where to go," said Ahmed Abu Wutfa, 45, who lives in his relatives' partially destroyed fifth-floor apartment in western Gaza City.

"My children are terrified, and so am I. There is no safe place -- we only hope that death comes quickly."

Israel expects its new offensive will displace around a million people towards the south.

 

[Philip_B]

What arw saying here? That all.white people are interchangeable, but olive skinned people aren't? What's all of this have to do with image of God?

The Arabs are the ones not allowing the Palestinians in. Could it be the Palestinian culture is too radical and violent for other Arabs?

I am not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or if your cultural blinkers are preventing you from seeing the meaning.

I said

The argument fails because it is premised upon regarding Palestinians as simply Arabs, interchangeable with any other sort of Arab. The Irish are as interchangeable with the English as the Belgians are interchangeable with either the Dutch or the French. Culture and heritage are part of who we are as people made in the image and after the likeness of God. So, in answer to your question, NO it is not just.​

The Irish do not see themselves as English, and the Belgians do not see themselves as being Dutch or French. I know that Canadians clearly want to see themselves as Canadian and not American (as in USA). Your argument fails in the same way. Canadians are most assuredly American, as Canada is surely part of North America. Palestinians are Semitic people and generally speak Arabic; however, they would distinguish themselves from other Arab Nations in the same way.

Another American Nation, of course, is Mexico, and it seems fairly evident that the United States is not overfond of Mexicans resettling in the United States en masse.

My point, in reference to Genesis 1:26, is that part of recognising the dignity of the human condition is to recognise that we are all of great worth, having been made in the image and after the likeness of God, yet we are all different, and part of that difference is culture.

 

[rjs330]

I am not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse or if your cultural blinkers are preventing you from seeing the meaning.

I said

The argument fails because it is premised upon regarding Palestinians as simply Arabs, interchangeable with any other sort of Arab. The Irish are as interchangeable with the English as the Belgians are interchangeable with either the Dutch or the French. Culture and heritage are part of who we are as people made in the image and after the likeness of God. So, in answer to your question, NO it is not just.​

The Irish do not see themselves as English, and the Belgians do not see themselves as being Dutch or French. I know that Canadians clearly want to see themselves as Canadian and not American (as in USA). Your argument fails in the same way. Canadians are most assuredly American, as Canada is surely part of North America. Palestinians are Semitic people and generally speak Arabic; however, they would distinguish themselves from other Arab Nations in the same way.

Another American Nation, of course, is Mexico, and it seems fairly evident that the United States is not overfond of Mexicans resettling in the United States en masse.

My point, in reference to Genesis 1:26, is that part of recognising the dignity of the human condition is to recognise that we are all of great worth, having been made in the image and after the likeness of God, yet we are all different, and part of that difference is culture.

Thanks for clarifying, I was confused about what you were saying.

The thing is though most places one group can still mix with another without any problems, especially when in rhe same region. While our culture might be a bit different than Canada, we could easily go live in Canada without much trouble and Canadians could come here. In fact it appears that almost anyone from anywhere can come here to America and live here. And Americans will allow it as long as you are here legally and don't cause any trouble. We have people here from all over the world and we are pretty tolerant about it.

An Irishman, could go live in England and vice versa or a Fenchman could live in Ireland and vice versa. Language might be a bit if a barrier, but you could adjust to the culture fairly quickly if allowed to live there.

It doesn't seem to be that way with other Arabic countries and the Palestinians. Are their cultures that wildly different? What is it that is so wildly different that they just can't adapt or fit in? Rhe Arabic countries aren't tolerant at all about rhe Palestinians apparently.

 

[Philip_B]

Thanks for clarifying, I was confused about what you were saying.

The thing is though most places one group can still mix with another without any problems, especially when in rhe same region. While our culture might be a bit different than Canada, we could easily go live in Canada without much trouble and Canadians could come here. In fact it appears that almost anyone from anywhere can come here to America and live here. And Americans will allow it as long as you are here legally and don't cause any trouble. We have people here from all over the world and we are pretty tolerant about it.

An Irishman, could go live in England and vice versa or a Fenchman could live in Ireland and vice versa. Language might be a bit if a barrier, but you could adjust to the culture fairly quickly if allowed to live there.

It doesn't seem to be that way with other Arabic countries and the Palestinians. Are their cultures that wildly different? What is it that is so wildly different that they just can't adapt or fit in? Rhe Arabic countries aren't tolerant at all about rhe Palestinians apparently.

How would the USA feel about having to accommodate a large block of Canadians as in several million? Maybe not so accommodating.

 

[Benaiah468]

The argument fails because it is premised upon regarding Palestinians as simply Arabs, interchangeable with any other sort of Arab.

The Arab refugee problem was caused by a war of aggression waged by the Arab states against Israel in 1947 and 1948. Let us be very clear here: if there had been no war against Israel with the resulting bloodshed, misery, panic, and flight, there would be no Arab refugee problem today. Once you have identified responsibility for this war, you have determined responsibility for the refugee problem.

 

[Benaiah468]

The Arab states have repeatedly paid lip service to the Palestinian cause. They maintain these camps and the miserable living conditions that prevail there in order to pressure Israel into granting a "right of return", which would allow millions of Palestinians to flood the Jewish state and destroy its Jewish majority and thus its very existence (Neither under the general international conventions, nor under the major UN resolutions, do the "Palestinian" refugees have a right to return to Israel). Arab leaders do not care whether the refugees live or die.

In the current war between Israel and Hamas, Egypt has kept its border with the Gaza Strip closed because it does not want "Palestinian" terrorists to enter the country and destabilize Egypt. Jordan has also refused to take in "Palestinians" caught between the fronts in the war between Israel and Hamas. In fact, not a single Arab state has offered refuge to the "Palestinians".

In short, most Arab states view "Palestinians"" as pariahs and use them as a tool to achieve their own goals. They have kept "Palestinians" impoverished and stateless, refusing to integrate them into their societies in the hope that this would support "Palestinian" self-determination.

Nevertheless, Arab states continue to condemn Israel's treatment of the "Palestinians".

As it turns out, Gazans have steadily emigrated from the Strip for years, with few political repercussions abroad.

In Gaza, a recent "Palestinian" research study noted,

Since 2007, local reports have confirmed that over 250,000 youths migrated from the Gaza Strip in pursuit of a thriving life in Europe. In August 2023, alone, there were over 16,700 Turkish visa applications submitted by young adults living in the Gaza Strip’s five governorates.

And all of this movement occurred before the war, one can only imagine today’s pent-up demand for leaving the Strip and seeking a better life elsewhere.

Arab states currently reject the very idea of voluntary relocation because they fear numerous Gazans would in fact take that option, more than their societies can absorb.

Postwar plans for Gaza on the concept of voluntary refugee resettlement could result in 40 percent or more of the Strip’s total population leaving of their own accord. If half of Gaza’s refugee population chose to relocate over a ten-year reconstruction period, that would average out to around 70,000 per year. Finding homes for 70,000 per year is not an insurmountable burden.

 

[PK_VDMA]

Arguments that could lead to this assumption such as lack of protection for churches and Christian communities, or the isolation of Christian Arabs, however, do not concern the State of Israel. It is not anti-Christian by definition, but a secular state with religious freedom for all faiths, including Christians.

The Israeli Constitution guarantees religious freedom and the ability to practice religions privately and publicly. Israel has a diverse population with Jewish, Muslim, and Christian minorities who generally enjoy a certain degree of freedom. The State of Israel is a secular state and not per se a religious state that would promote any specific religion.

Christians support Israel because they have recognized G-d's intentions for the Jewish people through the Bible, because they strive for a new, respectful relationship with the Jewish people, and because they recognize the historical and political legitimacy of the State of Israel.

The Bible states very clearly that the Jewish people received the land of Canaan from G-d Himself. He gave the land to Abraham and his descendants through Isaac as an eternal possession (Gen 12:1-3). G-d's intention was to form a people through whom He would reach the world.

In G-d's plan of salvation, the land of Canaan played an essential role as the national home of the Jewish people. And through this people, He gave His Word, the prophets, the covenants, and the Messiah to a lost world (Rom 9:4-5).

Furthermore, we read in the Bible that although G-d announced that Israel would be driven out of the land because of its disobedience, He also promised to bring it back, not once, but twice! (Isa 11:11).

G-d's plans for Israel are not yet complete (Jer 31:36): one day Israel will become the first among the nations. Then the word of the Lord will go forth from Jerusalem to the nations (Isa 2:3) and the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea (Hab 2:14). Israel's Messiah will reign in righteousness (Isa 32:1), he will rule the nations with a rod of iron (Rev 2:27), and the peoples will no longer learn to wage war (Isa 2:4).

For this reason, Christians support the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the rebuilding of the Jewish nation. Today, as throughout history, Israel's enemies seek to destroy the Jewish state and wipe it off the map. But we stand with Israel and will not be silent! (Isa 62:6).

In addition to the biblical reasons listed above, we also support Israel because we know the history of the modern state of Israel and know that the facts speak for themselves: Israel is a legitimate nation, established on legitimately acquired territory, and has the right to exist within secure borders.

Although Israel is a nation like any other, it is not perfect, and its policies are often mediocre, its establishment and existence are nevertheless legitimate and morally right. Surrounded by countries and organizations committed to Israel's destruction, we support Israel's right to exist within secure borders.

Lay off the heretical Scofield Reference Bible.

I’m calling out the neocons, Israel-first fanatics, and the warmongering dispensationalism heresy who wrap it in a bow and call it Christianity and claim to be speaking on behalf of Christians on matters of modern Israel. You don’t speak for historical orthodox Christianity and you most certainly don’t speak for the Christians in the Middle East!! The Christians in the Middle East won’t recognize your heterodox Christianity.

The Church is Israel—not the monstrosity created in 1948 that has led to endless war on Israel’s behalf or direct engagement by Israel and suffering for Christians in the Middle East.

You, as a German, have no skin in the game politically. It’s not your country that is propping up Israel financially and militarily. It’s not your country that has spent $2 trillion on wars on their behalf and send troops to dies for Israel. The audacity and arrogance one has to demand America to continue to artificially prop up 1948 Israel is breathtaking.

The geopolitical AIPAC Israel-first neocon warmongering policy is not the future of American conservatism, and it certainly has no place in the church (or at least historical orthodox Christianity).

 

[Benaiah468]

The fundamental problem of the conflict is that Israel resettled around 600,000 Jewish refugees from the Muslim world, while the Arab-Muslim nations that attacked it did not. Together with the UN, they insisted on keeping them under the false identity of "Palestinians" as an eternal occupying army and forming them into terrorist groups for an endless war with Israel.

One must learn from history. One cannot make the same mistake over and over again.

For over 30 years, every possible effort has been made to create a "Palestinian" state. After several peace proposals, land concessions, endless rounds of negotiations and taxpayer money (over $2 billion from USAID to the "Palestinians" since 7 Oct alone), nothing has worked.

When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, leaving behind greenhouses and plans for new industries as well as considerable international funds, Hamas turned it into a war zone.

Proponents of a two-state solution continue to argue that if Israel were to offer even more land and expel and resettle even more Jews, the Muslim terrorists would finally agree to a lasting peace.

But there has never been the slightest evidence that this would work. None of Israel's proposals and concessions since the late 1980s have led to any kind of peace.

The PLO and Hamas used terrorism at every turn to force further Israeli concessions without giving anything in return. Their leaders have repeatedly declared that they want to destroy Israel.

Diplomats insisted that there could be no peace without the expulsion and resettlement of Jews from Judea and Samaria. President Trump turned the tables and said that there could be no peace without the resettlement of Arab Muslims from Gaza.

Which makes more sense?

President Trump is a visionary, and his idea has reframed the entire view of the conflict. Even if it may only be an opening for a negotiating position, there is no doubt that it has shaken up all the conventional wisdom in the Middle East. His basic assumption that Gaza is a beautiful place but will be a source of conflict as long as it is populated by Islamic terrorists and their supporters is fundamentally correct.

The moral and practical objections to it are unfounded. Resettlement is feasible and moral. If the Kuwaitis and Jordanians could resettle the "Palestinians" from their countries for far less reason than the atrocities of 7 Oct, the Israelis certainly have the right to do so.

The politicians, diplomats and reporters who advocated the mass resettlement of more than a half a million Jews have no moral grounds for opposing the resettlement of Muslims from Gaza.

And after trying everything else, including decades of unsuccessful efforts to make peace with the terrorists or to coexist with them despite the lack of peace, it is time to do what makes the most sense for everyone and offers the only hope for peace in the region.

 

[Benaiah468]

The Church is Israel—not the monstrosity created in 1948 that has led to endless war on Israel’s behalf or direct engagement by Israel and suffering for Christians in the Middle East.

The future of a Jewish state did not look promising in the spring of 1948. Although the UN had decided on 29 Nov 1947 to partition the Mandate of "Palestine", war had been raging in the country ever since, as the Arabs wanted to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state by any means necessary.

Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Egypt had already announced that they would march in after the withdrawal of British troops to slaughter all Jews.

All reports reaching Tel Aviv were against the establishment of a state. Late in the evening, more bitter news arrived, this time from the United States. Secretary of State George Marshall strongly advised against the establishment of a state. A Jewish state would have no chance against the Arab armies, he said, and no support could be expected from the United States. Instead, the Americans were already working on another plan, for an undivided Palestine under the control of the UN.

The day after the state was founded, five Arab armies attacked Israel. But despite the enemy's superior strength, the young state won the war and all those that followed, the War of Independence in 1948–49, the Suez Crisis in 1956, the Six-Day War in 1967, the Yom Kippur War in 1973, and the Lebanon Wars in 1982 and 2006.

Israel has undergone remarkable development over the past 75 years, benefiting all nations. Innovations from Israel continue to open up new possibilities in medicine, climate protection, agriculture, communication, research and science. Israel has become a blessing for the world.

What does Israel’s return to the world stage mean for us as Christians today?

Israel’s national rebirth did involve birth pangs, as it is forever linked to the Holocaust.

The Apostle Paul declared long ago that Israel’s last-days ingathering would be like life from the dead Rom 11:15.

This means the rebirth of Israel is nothing less than the resurrection power of G-d still at work in the earth today!

The Hebrew prophets describe Israel’s final restoration as a two-phase process, starting with the physical ingathering of the Jews back to the Land of Israel in unbelief, and then their spiritual ingathering back to G-d by a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

Return unto me, and I will return unto you, the Lord states quite plainly in Zec 1:3 and Mal 3:7. But perhaps the clearest prophetic passages on how Israel’s promised restoration would play out can be found in Ezekiel chapters 36 and 37.

In Ezekiel, G-d declares:

For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your G-d. Ezek 36:24-28

So, what is the message from G-d in resurrecting Israel from the grave in our day?

First, it is that the world is about to be judged. Just as the building of the ark by Noah was the greatest sign to the ancient world they were about to be judged, the building up of Zion is the clearest sign we are about to be judged (Ps 102:16; Isa 54:9). And this judgement includes how we have treated the Jewish nation and people. Ps 2, Joel 3, Jer 30:11, Zeph 3:8ff and other passages speak clearly of this. Secondly, the message is that we can no longer be ignorant or indifferent towards Israel.

For 75 years now, the Christian world has witnessed Israel emerging from the grave of the Shoah and placed back in their Land, a process that is still unfolding and awaits its culmination in Israel’s national salvation. When Israel was scattered and in disfavor with G-d, you might have gotten away with ignoring them or viewing them as being punished by the Lord. But not anymore. Once He restored Israel in their Land, this is a new day! And we will be held responsible for our reaction.

Some Christians want to put Israel back in the grave. They are working with antisemites to undermine Israel’s legitimacy and dismantle the Jewish state. They should fear G-d!

Having a love and concern for Israel is not a litmus test of whether one is saved. But I believe it does indicate whether you are flowing with the Holy Spirit today. After 75 years of a revived Israel, if we keep clinging to the old negative views and attitudes towards the Jewish people, or still think Israel does not matter, you risk getting cut off from the move of the Holy Spirit in our day (Rom 11:20-21). And neither will G-d overlook this when we all stand in judgment before Him.

 

[PK_VDMA]

The fundamental problem of the conflict is that Israel resettled around 600,000 Jewish refugees from the Muslim world, while the Arab-Muslim nations that attacked it did not. Together with the UN, they insisted on keeping them under the false identity of "Palestinians" as an eternal occupying army and forming them into terrorist groups for an endless war with Israel.

One must learn from history. One cannot make the same mistake over and over again.

For over 30 years, every possible effort has been made to create a "Palestinian" state. After several peace proposals, land concessions, endless rounds of negotiations and taxpayer money (over $2 billion from USAID to the "Palestinians" since 7 Oct alone), nothing has worked.

When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, leaving behind greenhouses and plans for new industries as well as considerable international funds, Hamas turned it into a war zone.

Proponents of a two-state solution continue to argue that if Israel were to offer even more land and expel and resettle even more Jews, the Muslim terrorists would finally agree to a lasting peace.

But there has never been the slightest evidence that this would work. None of Israel's proposals and concessions since the late 1980s have led to any kind of peace.

The PLO and Hamas used terrorism at every turn to force further Israeli concessions without giving anything in return. Their leaders have repeatedly declared that they want to destroy Israel.

Diplomats insisted that there could be no peace without the expulsion and resettlement of Jews from Judea and Samaria. President Trump turned the tables and said that there could be no peace without the resettlement of Arab Muslims from Gaza.

Which makes more sense?

President Trump is a visionary, and his idea has reframed the entire view of the conflict. Even if it may only be an opening for a negotiating position, there is no doubt that it has shaken up all the conventional wisdom in the Middle East. His basic assumption that Gaza is a beautiful place but will be a source of conflict as long as it is populated by Islamic terrorists and their supporters is fundamentally correct.

The moral and practical objections to it are unfounded. Resettlement is feasible and moral. If the Kuwaitis and Jordanians could resettle the "Palestinians" from their countries for far less reason than the atrocities of 7 Oct, the Israelis certainly have the right to do so.

The politicians, diplomats and reporters who advocated the mass resettlement of more than a half a million Jews have no moral grounds for opposing the resettlement of Muslims from Gaza.

And after trying everything else, including decades of unsuccessful efforts to make peace with the terrorists or to coexist with them despite the lack of peace, it is time to do what makes the most sense for everyone and offers the only hope for peace in the region.

Sticking to the script; Hamas, Hamas, Hamas, October 7th, October 7th, October 7th, antisemitism, antisemitism, antisemitism—ad nauseam. The evangelical’s Pope Netanyahu is a liar, much like Hamas.

Let’s be intellectually honest. The Israel delusion: modern Israel, propped up by the USA taxpayer and military, has never wanted a two-state solution. They want the “Greater Israel plan”. Stop lying to yourself or others.

There is a growing rift with American first coalition. Even President Trump is seeing the divide growing, especially among young conservatives that don’t care about Israel and are not buying into the AIPAC Israel propaganda. Once the bomber generation dies out, so will this blind unchecked support for Israel—it’s a dying relic in American politics.

All your Israel worshippers demand that other countries absorb these displaced populations, while supporting the seizure of their land. Then, if you question it, you get called an antisemite. Peak arrogance.

Let’s be crystal clear: there is no theological reason why one needs to support modern Israel. Repent! BIBLICAL ISRAEL ≠ MODERN STATE OF ISRAEL CONFUSING THE TWO HAS CAUSED IMMENSE HARM.

Like I said: Israel as one giant example of breaking the first, second and third commandment. It’s a piece of blasphemy that is readily visible, with the increasing constriction and hostility towards Christians by first the various Zionist agencies and then by the modern state of Israel.