PeacefulSolutions

Fun fact for you: England has a state religion. It's Anglican.

Does that mean any Jews, Muslims, or others in England aren't a part of the democracy?

Non-Jewish Israelis aren't suddenly overpopulating and decreasing the percentage of Jewish Israelis, although this is commonly peddled, it is not a phenomena, therefore I don't see the point in addressing "what ifs."

Personally, I see the existence of Israel as the greatest protection. As a Jew, people try to kill us. A lot. They did it then, some still want to today. I can study how, I can study why, what I will never be able to stop it. This is a reality that Jews have faced. You might say "but that was 70 years ago, that would never happen today." That's what Jews thought then. They thought they would be fine, they thought the hatred would blow over, that their contribution and citizenship to their respective states would be honored. It wasn't. With Israel, We can all fight and defend our homeland and our people, or we all die honorably, without being led blindly to our deaths as our ancestors were. This is no longer a choice. The lack of a jewish state is not an option. Can and do minorities have rights? Yes, I have nothing but the best feelings towards them, ancient Israel itself had notable minorities that existed within the framework of a Jewish (religious) state.

Modern Israel is secular, however it's purpose is clear cut: A homeland for the Jewish People. It's purpose is still relevant: Jewish Immigration from France to Israel has spiked quite a bit recently due to increasing anti-semitism. You find the same thing recently with the situation in the Ukraine.

As an Israeli, I second this opinion.

Requesting Jonathan Pollard's release fucks up the Israeli image. Granted, Pollard sort of screwed himself over when he went to the press, violating his plea deal. Otherwise, he would've been out by now.

If Israel wants Pollard released, of which I'm honestly indifferent towards, they should be private about it. Perhaps they're trying to get American Jewry to rally behind him, but the fact of the matter he wasn't unjustly imprisoned. Was he imprisoned for too long? Probably. But he shouldn't be the darling of Israeli activism.

With that being said, the NSA has done worse. Doesn't justify Pollard, but sure as hell gives the entire thing a better context.

Practically all countries try and spy on eachother, at least a little bit. The biggest mistake Pollard did, other than going to the press, was getting caught.

Oh we got in a Jew up in here!

(He's Jewish so he obviously is more reliable about Israel).

Bennet is sorta kinda racist, but not in the sense that they want Palestinians as second class citizens. in the sense that they'd probably like to annex Area C and make the Palestinian Part of the West Bank look like a hanging testicle.

Dude, you can criticize Israel without being BDS. I think there's actually more left wing seats than right wing, but coalitions are easier with bigger parties. Likud is sort of soft on the whole settlement thing IMO, as in, if there was a coalition of Likud, meretz, Labor, Hatnuah, and other parties, Likud would follow the left side, not the right. They're sort of centrist in that way. Sharon was very controversial for the fact that he was so involved in Likud but came out with kadima. That says a whole lot if you think about it.

BDS is not the way to go. Israel has it's problems, but it's hardly boycott worthy. It has some legitimate security concerns. It deals with terrorism, legit terrorism. It deals with frankly, a negotiating partner that barely recognizes it's legitimate existence. a partner that doesn't want one Palestinian State, it wants two: One for only muslims and christians, the other known as Israel, however now flooded with the descendants of Palestinian Refugees.

It's a two way street. You can criticize Israel sure. But you don't have to be an asshole about it, and if you do it you should do it constructively and see that there are legitimate faults on BOTH sides. You can't say Israel hasn't negotiated for peace in the past. The Palestinians didn't even respond with a counteroffer in 2000, and their first proposed landswap was only offered in 2009...They don't restrict themselves from Israelis. They don't want any Jews in their future state. Half of them live under a terrorist government. peace as you see it puts Israel under a lot of risks, and you have to recognize that it's not something that Israel can't do easily. Israel will not put its citizens under risk just because some extremist left wing activists want Israel to destroy itself and will stop eating at Max brenner's to do so.

The faults of BDS have been shown. The founder freakin' attended Tel Aviv University for Christ's sake...Will he boycott himself then?

If you could vote for an Israeli Political Party, which one would you vote for?

Also, if you weren't American, do you think you would live in Israel?

Do you think that Palestinian incitement (I.e. rhetoric in the media, asking for the release of murderers, throwing stones at cars), is part of the problem or do you blame Israel for being in the interest of its own citizens?

Do you recognize the hypocrisy, and well, in general, the Kookiness of BDS (founder attended Tel Aviv University, violent protests in the past, using buzzwords "nazi apartheid babykilling organharvesting etc etc etc " )?

Which peace plan do you think is the best? Geneva?

How do you think recent peace talks will go?

Do you think israel has a right to blockade Gaza? Do you think the action against the flotilla (which, may I remind you, explicitly was to run through the blockade, NOT to deliver aid)?

Do you think Israel has been unfairly targetted by the U.N.? See UN Watch.

Finally, will you send me a PM? You're exactly the type of guy I want to talk to about the conflict. A good conversation is hard to find.

Can any Anglican automatically get British citizenship?

I don't believe so. My analogy was not perfect, however it is relevant in the context in which it was expressed.

England may not say it is the homeland of the Anglicans, however it is the homeland of the Anglicans. It is the seat and the orgin of the Anglican Church. If England said "If one of your grandparents was English, or if your spouse is English, you qualify for English Citizenship," no one would bat an eyelash.

Do people still justify English settlements citing biblical prophecy?

No, but Israel doesn't do this either. Certain Israeli individuals may do so, most probably not. Under either case, it is irrelevant to the topic at hand.