Ok let me set this straight i have nothing against jewish people, and i certainly dont support terrorist cells. But I do look at the points that terrorist make, just because thier radical, doesnt mean thier stupid (Although it ends up being the case 99% of the time.) And finally im not saying we should destroy the country of Isreal, but im just saying that things might of been better if isreal was formed somewhere else in the world.

First off.
Warangel: I am not talking about people here, but im talking about established countries, If there were jews in the holy land before Isreal, what makes you think there couldnt be jews living their in peace if the nation state of Isreal was never created. Also when i said 100B.C. i was talking about a jewish leader, not people. two significantly different concepts.

Im not saying the Jewish people are troublemakers, Im acctually blaming the allies who helped create the nation of Isreal. It was a case of giving somebodies elses land.

Once again i never said jews should not exist, but the nation of Isreal. theres A HUGE DIFFERENCE. My suggestion was simply dissolve the government of isreal and replace it with a psuedo Theocracy, with representatives from the three major religions from that area.

Ok maybe there still would be Radical terrorist, but im talking about what if Isreal was NEVER formed. for your own sake read the whole post.

Yes, that did occur to me, but did it also occur to you that attacking a significantly richer country with more nuclear weapons and powerful allies may be enough to blunt any attempt at a preemptive attack, and that any missle/bomber strike would be detected before a successful preempted attack could take place.

Now to Sasquatch:
Once again i never said that, i was talking about Jewish rule, although no one was pushed out of their land, there were people who were prevented from crossing the border, because the border was closed. This is very significant. And im saying that many jewish refugees who were fleeing communism, and thier homelands (afraid of the tyranny that had ruled the area) were sent to Isreal (probably due to thier own free will, but its still not like there was any choice, most countries didnt want these refugees after the war.)

Ok maybe California is not the most sane state, but it is very progressive, its acctually trying to do SOME good.

Acctually The holy land was (starting from 1AD) (roughly) Pagan (under the romans) Orthadox (under the byzantines) and Islamic (under the turkish).It was only christian for very short periods and even then it wasnt completely christian.

World War two was started with the Invasion of Poland, the state of the jews in Nazi Germany was unknown about or was ignored. , Any ways When was there a nation state of Isreal before the 1940's? before the 1000's, And had there been no Holocaust would there be a Nation state of Isreal today?

I was talking about radical right wing politicians in the west who believe bombing all the Islamic countries is a very good idea. And there are plenty of Isreali volunteers in thier armed forces which spend alot of time initiating preemptive strikes against mostly innocent targets. (Although the methods used by suicide bombers is by far worse, But either way KILLING IS WRONG)

Well think about it, did we do them a favour by surrounding them with resentful enemies? did we stop blood shed, or are we just purpetuating a cycle of genocide, Sure the jews were the ultimate victims, but now they are fighting for thier lives in hostile territory, and who put them their? wouldnt more lives of been spared if territory in a more hospitable country was given to them?

"A hostile Muslim country with nuclear weapons is a bad enough idea. A hostile Muslim country with nuclear weapons and the means, motive, and opportunity to provide terrorist organizations with nuclear weapons is a terrible idea." Now that sounds slightly racist you might want to watch what you say, whats the difference between a hostile Muslim country to us and A hostile christian country to them, look at the world from thier point of view. Those people are just people not crazies all you hear in the news today is propaganda, same as during the cold war with the "CRAZY COMMUNIST" who would start armageddon, But that never happened, you know why, those Crazy communist were not crazy after all.

Do you think the UN would be able to do something? The UN would be controlled by this super power, most other countries would be this superpowers pupets, and any opposition would be ruthlessly annihilated, and the crazy thing is, is that i could happen with out any body knowing.

And you havent thought the invading army idea through yet, If an invading agressor army attacked and was nuked, the families of those who were killed would be angry at both the invaders and at the defenders (at the defenders because they used the bomb to kill thier family, and at the invaders because they sent their family into this situation.) So then the Invading army has three options. A) If the Invading army then used its own nuclear weapons to destroy this defending nation, the Invading army would then be seen as an Aggresive force, and its leader could possibly be named a war criminal. The aggressor army has just eliminated all its allies, for what, bombing the crap out of another tiny nation, that they cant use due to the radiation, and the loss of life would be catastrophic. No Civil country would allow it. B) Continue the invasion with conventional weapons, allowing for greater loss of life, and dissention in the ranks (no soldier wants to even be near a nuclear blast, and nobody wants thier lives thrown away.) C) the Invading army admits defeat or decares truce and the region and the home front decend into chaos as protest, and activist come out.


So does this make sense now, are we clear? to sum up
1)I think Isreal should have been made in another area of the world
2)I believe that any type of killing is wrong
3)the middle east was distablized by the creation of Isreal
4)Nuclear arms are only a good deturent and anyone can see that even radicalist, as long as the radicalist have something worth having, if a radical has nothing left, then you give them no choice.
5)You cant base modern politics on 2000 year old history as history tends to be bended and once again its history and applies differently to todays world.
6)I hate organized religion because it just ends up leading to crap like this.