Disinvestment from Israel...?

Show all answers

John E

My dear Harvest, that's a very interesting question!
I too believe that the Average American Citizen pays too much for supporting a country that has all the elements of a South American Fascist Junta.
All of this could be avoided by simply turning off those money-faucets and force those war-mongering Jews to deal with the problem that they, themselves have created in Palestine or Israel.
Since we all know that the sweet-spot of a Jew is always his pocket.
For once let the Jews earn some of those Billions of Dollars, instead of begging the American Tax Payer each and every year for that.
Maybe this way they will be forced to find real jobs for once in their lives, and try and build a better country because Israel is not a good country.
Their leaders can do anything for a couple of hundred thousand dollars, like Mr. Olmert did a few months ago.
Greetings

Shyster Rich ex-Jew

Yes, yes, yes, I support economic and political sanctions against Israel.
Maybe these people will start learning the value of money at last.
Let them see how hard it is to "earn" instead of "get".
I admire the patience of the American sponsors.
Shalom

peace lover

well, first of all israel disengaged from gaza. they are out. gaza runs itself now, that's why it's in a civil war, that's why it's such a mess.
as far as the west bank goes, israel is making plans to leave parts of it.

but yes, such a campaign is absurd. it's like boycotting the US for not letting al-qaeda attack it again.

this is not like south africa. in south africa, citizens were treated poorly. in israel, all citizens have full rights, whether arab or jew. this is a war, israel is under attack, and until the other side ends the war, israel has the right to defend itself.
and claiming that it doesn't is, indeed, antisemitism.

Brynn

It is a step in the right direction but insufficient. A complete trade embargo is both justified and needed to bring down this bestial regime.

Cool Breeze

it is the moral thing to do,and perhaps effective over a long period of time.

icabod

Perhaps one should ask "why Israel needs to do all the giving?"

Has Hamas agreed to the existence of Israel?
"the Hamas-Fatah document did not in any way recognise the state of Israel... You will not find one word in the document clearly stating the recognition of Israel as a state. Nobody has agreed to this. This was not on the table. This was not in the dialogue," he said."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5122822.stm

" In the first test of a five-day-old Gaza cease-fire, Palestinian militants fired rockets into southern Israel just hours after Israeli and Egyptian leaders met at this Red Sea resort to discuss possibly deepening the truce"
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0625/p25s04-wome.html

Even a return to the Pre-1967 borders won't end the issue. During the 1948 war many Palestinians fled and were housed in refugee camps. These camps still exist and Palestinians demand return of their lands from 1948.

As we're on the 1967 Six Day War, does anyone remember the cause of the war?

"Specifically, the war stemmed from Egypt's decision to expel United Nations troops from the Sinai peninsula and blockade Israel's port of Eilat, under international law a casus belli, or act of war, in addition to belligerent Arab threats to destroy Israel."
http://www.sixdaywar.org/precursors.asp

The remarks of the time:

"Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight . . . The mining of Sharm el Sheikh is a confrontation with Israel. Adopting this measure obligates us to be ready to embark on a general war with Israel." â€“ Nasser, May 27, 1967

"We shall destroy Israel and its inhabitants and as for the survivors â€“ if there are any â€“ the boats are ready to deport them." â€“ Shukairy, June 1, 1967, speaking at a Friday sermon in Jerusalem

"We want war. War is the only way to settle the problem of Israel. The Arabs are ready." â€“ Yemeni Foreign Minister Salam

Sounds a lot like the rhetoric after 9/11

general3535

Well, at least for one point of view, they are right
B/c, in the past and maybe in the future, there were and will be a lot going on that region. There were/will be a lot of hatred, confusion, conflicts etc. and who wants to be there and why would you invest in a such region, when you can go to other very well developing countries.

kalas_dirion

Like Israel needs foreign investment! Israel is the wealthiest nation in the Middle East and the third largest food Exporter in the world. There is much debate regarding the alleged "Palestinian" territories, but Israel captured them fairly in 1967 when the Arab nations rose against Israel. That's what happens when people wage a war and lose; they lose. If Israel returned the lands to the so called "Palestinians," Israel would be a nation of spotted settlements rather than one autonomous nation. Since the formation of Israel, the former land of Palestine has been transformed from the poorest to the most wealthy nation in the Middle East--and that's a nation of earned wealth, not of discovered wealth like the oil rich nations. The bottom line is that of all the nations in the world, Israel will not suffer from lack of investment. It is among the most self-sustaining in the world.

Bosco

It's not enough; the zionist regime needs to be removed by military force. These are band-aid responses.

Bahira

I approve but only as a first step to complete global disengagement.

Pretty (smart) lady

No supporting economic and political sanctions will solve nothing.

dandyl

The Arab League declared a boycott against the Jews before Israel was established, and most of its members have pursued a diplomatic and economic embargo against the Jewish State since its establishment. The boycott's influence waned after Egypt and Jordan made peace with Israel, the Palestinians became engaged in peace negotiations, and several Gulf states started ignoring the blacklist, but it was never abandoned, and several nations, most notably Saudi Arabia, have energetically enforced it for decades.

To give an indication of how entrenched the boycott is within the Arab world, the Bureau for Boycotting Israel held its 72nd conference in April 2004. Representatives from 19 Arab countries met in Syria to discuss tightening the boycott, and blacklisting new companies that do business with the Jewish state.69

To their credit, Mauritania, Egypt and Jordan, which have diplomatic ties with Israel, stayed away from the meeting. The Palestinians, however, did participate, and the head of their delegation, Ali Abo al-Hawa, asked the conference to respond to the Arab public's call for boycotting Israel, particularly in commercial relations. This was a violation of the PLO promise to oppose the boycott made in the September 28, 1995, Joint Declaration of the Washington Summit. It also contradicts the commitment made by Ahmed Korei (now the Palestinian Authority's Prime Minister) in an October 17, 1996, letter to then U.S. Trade. Representative Mickey Kantor: â€œThe PLO and the Palestinian Authority and its successors will support all efforts to end the boycott of Israel and will not enforce any elements of the boycott within the West Bank and Gaza Strip.â€

Delegates to the conference also wanted to take measures to prevent Israeli companies from trying to penetrate the Iraqi market, but removed the issue from the agenda after the Iraqi delegate, Sabah al-Imam, assured the group, "there is no Israeli activity in Iraq" approved by Iraqi authorities.

Syria subsequently banned a Greek, a Danish and two Maltese ships from its ports because they'd made stops in Israeli ports, and has placed nine Israeli companies on a black list. And Libya, which had pledged to provide entry visas to all qualified participants, announced that it would not allow any Israelis to participate in the World Chess Championships scheduled for Tripoli in June 2004.70

The continued effort by most of the Arab world to isolate Israel economically and diplomatically demonstrates that most Arab states are still unwilling to recognize Israel. Until the boycott is terminated, and the Arab League members accept the existence of Israel, the prospects for regional peace will remain dim.

Michael J

Imposing sanctions specifically against Israel would be a wholly one-sided move. The UN has declared that the territories should be given back in a framework of a peace deal, NOT in a unilateral move by Israel, especially considering that doing so would most likely create another tyranical terrorist state. For some foreign entity to demand this unilateral action is totally inappropriate and certainly outside their mandate.

Jurgen

I support it,and I think the Presbyterian Church for one made the right decision. The next trend should be severe trade sanctions. This is the worst government since the Third Reich. I greatly admire the Palestinians for their resilance under hostile occupation.

larry_lime

Investing in Israel has been a good investment.

DANIEL W

This is not anti-Israel this is purely anti-semitic:

Criticizing Israel is not anti-Semitic. But singling out Israel for vilification and international sanction - out of proportion to any other party in the Middle East - is anti-Semitic.

Passage Numbers 23:8:

8How shall I curse, whom God hath not cursed? or how shall I defy, whom the LORD hath not defied?

I hate wiki.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: