israel justification?

Question

This isnt a biased question. Can anyone justify the existence of Israel without using religious reasons? It would be good to get a response from non-muslims and non-arabs since their answer will naturally be against Israel.

Answer 1

Israel was legally created out of the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I. The area was desolate – desert and swamp – with some small towns and a few inhabitants, many of them nomads.
The inhabitants, if they thought about it at all, considered themselves Syrians. The legitimacy of Israel arises from the Balfour Declaration issued by the British, who were given the mandate over the area by the League of Nations. Jews have lived in the country since Biblical times. The Arabs from the surrounding areas were lured to “Palestine” by the industry and prosperity that the Jews brought to the region. Envy, hatred, and religious fanaticism turned the Arabs against the Jews. In bloody outrages, horrible massacres, killings and rapes, the Arabs tried to dislodge the Jews, but were unable to do so.

In 1947, the British, having tired of the trouble and the bloodshed, resigned their mandate. That same year, the United Nations mandated partitioning of the territory. The Jews, though disappointed, accepted the partition. The Arabs rejected it out of hand and launched war against Israel. The armies of five Arab countries invaded the nascent state. Following the exhortations of the invaders, the Arab residents got out of the way hoping to return after victory was attained. They could then reclaim their property and that of the Jews, all of whom would have been killed or would have fled. That and that alone is the source of the Arab “refugee problem.”

Had the Arabs accepted the UN partition plan, there would now have been a state of “Palestine” for the last 58 years. They might have attained a similar level of prosperity, advancement, and development as Israel, which, small though it is, is today in almost every regard one of the world’s most advanced countries.

They might even had deserved the right to be called "palestinian".


It is instructive to read the Palestine National Charter of 1964. Here are some excerpts:

Article 16: ...the people of Palestine, desiring to befriend all nations
which love freedom, justice, and peace, look forward to their support in
restoring the legitimate situation to Palestine, ... and [in] enabling its
people to exercise national sovereignty and freedom.

Article 24: This Organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty
over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, [or] on the Gaza Strip

The founding document of the PLO says that they are not entitled to the West Bank or Gaza! Yet now much of the West believes that the cause of the conflict is the Israeli presence in parts of the West Bank! When the PLO wrote their charter Jordan was in control of the West Bank and they wanted Jordanian support. Their goal was to annihilate Israel not a state in the West Bank. Zuheir Mohsein, a member of the supreme council of the PLO said, in an interview with the Dutch Daily Trouw (3/31/1977):

There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity, because it is in the interest of the Arabs to encourage a separate Palestinian identity in contrast to Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity is there only for tactical reasons. The establishment of a Palestinian state is a new expedient to continue the fight against Zionism and for Arab unity.

The wars in the Middle East are about fighting Zionism, the right of the Jews to Israel, not about creating a terrorist Palestinian State. That is just a brilliant and very successful tactic.

In 2001, when Israel’s PM Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat East Jerusalem, 97% of the ‘West Bank’ and 3% compensation from Israel’s territory, in addition to all of Gaza (the Taba Negotiation), and Arafat turned it down without so much as a counteroffer.

I am not jewish..

Answer 2

Not really. Israel exists on land essentially taken from Palestine and given to the Jews, in fulfillment of a deal initially struck between the Britsh government and a wealthy Jewish banker/ English lord, back in 1917.

Since it was done by the UN, without the approval or consent of the Arabs, and actually also done over their violent protests, it's not difficult to see why the violence has continued unabated ever since. When you factor in the fact that the majority landowners/population at the time was Arab Muslims, that the land was inequally divided with over half of it going to form Israel, that it is considered 'holy land' by both Jews and Muslims, and therefore is highly prized territory, it's a complete no-brainer, and everyone involved in the decision must have known it.

Certainly it's unfair that a powerful third party takes over half of another country and gives it to someone else; not many people are very happy when that happens to them on a personal property level. The idea that religion can make such a thing right is unacceptable to most reasonable people in any case. Plainly there are many, many Arabs who will never accept it.

I guess it all comes down to whether or not you subscribe to the notion that might makes right, or not. Historically that has been true more often than not; there must be very few, if any, countries existing still with no hostile takeovers in their past. If you don't have a problem with that, then no justification for the manner in which Israel was re-created is necessary. Likewise, you should have no problem with those attempting to take it back. Wars can be fought in many ways, as history also shows us.

Answer 3

"This isnt a biased question."

Declaring that a question is free of bias is not the same as it actually being free of bias.

I would argue that it is a biased question because the question is ONLY posed in relation to Israel and not for any other country.
To ask "what is the justification for Canada existing as a country?" would be considered downright bizarre. Yet, such a question is considered "normal" when asked about Israel?
Thus, the very nature of the question is informed by bias.

Answer 4

The first historical record of the word "Israel" comes from an Egyptian stele documenting military campaigns in Canaan. Although this stele which referred to a people (the determinative for 'country' was absent) is dated to approximately 1211 BCE, [3] Jewish tradition holds that the Land of Israel has been a Jewish Holy Land and Promised land for 3,000 years. The land of Israel holds a special place in Jewish religious obligations, encompassing Judaism's most important sites — including the remains of the First and Second Temples of the Jewish King, Solomon. Connected with these two versions of the temple are religiously significant rites which stand as the origin for many aspects of modern Judaism. [4] Starting around the 11th century BCE the first of a series of Jewish kingdoms and states established intermittent rule over the region that lasted more than a millennium.
The holy Menorah sacked from Jerusalem
Enlarge
The holy Menorah sacked from Jerusalem

Under Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Byzantine, and (briefly) Sassanian rule, Jewish presence in the region dwindled because of mass expulsions. In particular, the failure of the Bar Kochba Revolt against the Roman Empire in 132 CE resulted in a large-scale expulsion of Jews. It was during this time that the Romans gave the name Syria Palaestina to the geographic area, in an attempt to erase Jewish ties to the land.[5] The Mishnah and Jerusalem Talmud, two of Judaism's most important religious texts, were composed in the region during this period. The Muslims conquered the land from the Byzantine Empire in 638 CE. The area was ruled by various Muslim states (interrupted by the rule of the Crusaders) before becoming part of the Ottoman Empire in 1517.

Answer 5

They exist for the same reason ANY country exists: they have enough weapons and friends to kill anyone who says otherwise. If they Palestinians could use America as a puppet instead of the jews doing so, it would be Palestine which existed and Isreal which was wiped off the map. Isn't that obvious?

Answer 6

the only justification grew to become into to offer up the bloodshed . unlawful jewish immigrants from Europe had shaped terrorist gangs and attacked the christian and muslim Palestinians and performed murderous atrocities against the British administration. The British introduced they have been going to circulate away in could 1948 and the UN desperate that the final answer may well be to divide Palestine into jewish and arab sectors. The jews have been pleased with this because it gave them the numerous ultimate land. The arabs disagreed because of the fact they observed their land being stolen. while the British left in could 1948 the jews attacked the christians and muslims and grabbed greater land massacring any who insisted on staying. The UN decision grew to become into supported with the aid of the Soviet Union who thought they have been getting a delightful socialist regime interior the middle East because of the fact the jewish terrorists have been armed with the aid of communist Czechoslovakia, and with the aid of the u . s . the place a presidential election grew to become into impending and the jewish vote is amazingly substantial. It grew to become into the worst determination the UN has ever made

Answer 7

The public outcry from the Holocaust led to the establishment of Israel.

Answer 8

Easy To justify..... Israel and Jordan were created side by side...one for Arabs one for Jews. GB owned the land fair and square....so they had every right to do with it as they wish.

Answer 9

Archeaology, science, and history all prove that Israel was there before Arabs.

Answer 10

I believe the people of Israel desire to be a peaceful people. If Islamic militants would let them live in peace there would be peace in Israel. Therefore they have the same right to exist as any other country.