Is the Occupation of the West Bank Morally Justified?

[rylah]

Give back the land and let's find out.

Because Israel has no moral argument to continue their occupation. It's not their land.

Jews have no moral argument for occupying Judea?

The guy who brags about his logic...

 

[irosie91]

So it was a lie that Israel made a preemptive attack to defend themselves?

Are you saying their firing the first shot was all about taking back their land?

It is true that Israel's attack on the Egyptian airfields was a DEFENSE against Egypt's aggression and declaration of war against Israel. It was not an issue of taking back land. Taking back land was an issue between Jordan and Israel. Jordan continued to hold Israeli land since the 1948 armistice. You figured out when that "first shot" happened?

 

[irosie91]

The initial occupation isn't in question. The continued occupation is.

Occupation by whom on what?

 

[ding]

Jews have no moral argument for occupying Judea?

Correct.

I'm all ears if you want to make one. That's kind of the point of this thread.

 

[Indeependent]

The initial occupation isn't in question. The continued occupation is.

You start a war; you get your ass kicked; you don't get to pass Go and collect anything.

 

[irosie91]

The Palestinians will really appreciate being pushed into Gaza when Jordan is given the land and kicks them out.

good point-----Turkey does not want them

 

[Indeependent]

Occupation by whom on what?

Ding hates Jews so this Thread is not a shock to me.

 

[ding]

It is true that Israel's attack on the Egyptian airfields was a DEFENSE against Egypt's aggression and declaration of war against Israel. It was not an issue of taking back land. Taking back land was an issue between Jordan and Israel. Jordan continued to hold Israeli land since the 1948 armistice. You figured out when that "first shot" happened?

The first shot doesn't matter. I have absolved Israel for the initial occupation. It is the continued occupation that is being questioned.

 

[Indeependent]

good point-----Turkey does not want them

In fact, most of the Arab world wants Israel to officially take over Jordan's West Bank.

 

[ding]

Occupation by whom on what?

You can pretend there is no occupation but reality says otherwise.

It's you denial of an occupation which proves you know the continued occupation is immoral.

 

[ding]

In fact, most of the Arab world wants Israel to officially take over Jordan's West Bank.

Not their call.

But your statement proves there is an occupation.

 

[theHawk]

So rule of capture is moral?

Rule of capture is human history.

It’s ridiculous to hold Israel to some higher standard than isn’t held to any other nation on the planet.

 

[rylah]

Correct.

I'm all ears if you want to make one. That's kind of the point of this thread.

Is there a moral standard by which you measure?

 

[ding]

Ding hates Jews so this Thread is not a shock to me.

I don't.

I love God. So I speak truth that is uncomfortable to you to hear. If you loved God you would speak the truth too.

You have literally just born false witness against your neighbor. Me.

 

[ding]

Rule of capture is human history.

It’s ridiculous to hold Israel to some higher standard than isn’t held to any other nation on the planet.

Sure, so is that your moral argument? That taking from others because you can is moral?

 

[ding]

Is there a moral standard by which you measure?

Yes. Morals are effectively standards. For any given thing there exists a standard which is the highest possible standard. This standard exists independent of anything else. It is in effect a universal standard. It exists for a reason. When we deviate from this standard and normalize our deviance from the standard, eventually the reason the standard exists will be discovered. The reason this happens is because error cannot stand. Eventually error will fail and the truth will be discovered. Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man. Morals are given to us from God.

 

[ding]

You start a war; you get your ass kicked; you don't get to pass Go and collect anything.

So it was a land grab and nothing else?

 

[irosie91]

You can pretend there is no occupation but reality says otherwise.

It's you denial of an occupation which proves you know the continued occupation is immoral.

sheeeesh dingy----you have devolved into nonsense sentences-------along with the

Jabberwocky’.

’Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe

 

[rylah]

Yes. Morals are effectively standards. For any given thing there exists a standard which is the highest possible standard. This standard exists independent of anything else. It is in effect a universal standard. It exists for a reason. When we deviate from this standard and normalize our deviance from the standard, eventually the reason the standard exists will be discovered. The reason this happens is because error cannot stand. Eventually error will fail and the truth will be discovered. Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man. Morals are given to us from God.

No actually try saying something specific,
you were asked to set a moral standard for the discussion.

Let's see if you're not just another hypocrite.

 

[irosie91]

So it was a land grab and nothing else?

no----it was an escape from oppression and a reclamation of nation