2007-12-31 10:27:54 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I agree that you seem to be the latest troll in the Jewish section of YA, not-so-cleverly hiding your anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli feelings behind thinly-veiled questions.
2008-01-03 09:40:25 · answer #1 · answered by Mark S, JPAA 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why not start first with ending the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza (even though the settlers are out Israel still controls the borders and airspace) and East Jerusalem, which is the root cause of problem. Then continue with giving equal rights to Palestinian-Arab citizens of Israel, who are widely discriminated against. Then let's talk about "assimilation"
2008-01-02 14:15:54 · answer #2 · answered by rossignolbleu 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think assimilation would be the only way you could have a lasting peace. This means to me that the Israeli and Palestinian citizens could live anywhere in the country they want. Their children would have equal economic and educational opportunities. And they would pay and equal share in the tax and defense burdens. They would have equal votes within a representative form of government. It doesn't mean that Jews suddenly have to start making trips to Mecca or Arab kids have to start wearing yamulkas. One does not have to give up their cultural identify to make peace with the other.
I have no idea if this is what Chomsky means by 'assimilate.' And I have no idea how the Israelis and Palestinians could ever come to such a happy state...just my opinion.
2007-12-31 19:16:38 · answer #3 · answered by krinkn 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He's probably a believer in yieldism. I.e if people disagree with you strongly, you should try and become like them in belief and behaviour. I don't think people should be forced to believe in any religion. The Arabs in the Middle East are not total innocents by any means, even if the Israeli regime has been harder than necessary perhaps in defending its existence - if Israel was assimilated they would probably be wanting to take back Spain into islamic control.
2007-12-31 19:13:38 · answer #4 · answered by Cader and Glyder scrambler 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Noam Chomsky is an anti-Semtic scumbag who has repeatedly slandered the nation of Israel and her people. The guy is also a left-wing nutcase. I wouldn't agree with a word he said, even if it was that the world was round.
2007-12-31 18:38:48 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I didn't know Chomsky advocated that.
It seems remarkably sensible. Much more likely to result in peace in the Middle East than other proposals.
However, to Americans and Europeans, I imagine a society comprising of Muslims and Jews working together would comprise a major threat, possibly one that could replace them as planetary rulers.
Hmmmm. A DIFFERENT variety of religious fanatics and capitalist stooges running things. Very original thought!
Not.
The only hope for humanity is a planet-wide DEMOCRATIC, SECULAR and SOCIALIST state.
If an Israeli/Arab amalgam can bring that end closer, than good.
If not, to the trash heap with them, along with the Christian-dominated U.S. and Europe.
2007-12-31 18:38:00 · answer #6 · answered by Dont Call Me Dude 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Who cares? Why don't you ask the Israelis about what they think of Noam Chomsky? No, I do not agree with Noam Chomsky.
2007-12-31 18:33:35 · answer #7 · answered by Paul Hxyz 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋