Responses to “To Israel, Or Not To Israel”

Posted: December 9, 2010 in Before Deployment
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

I realized that with the numerous comments on the prior post and the split between old blog and new – it made the most sense to create a new post with my responses.

These responses are to the post as well as to

Mike: You are correct in saying that the Arab-Israeli conflict started long before most people believe – therefore it is even more complicated than the majority of people think. The modern incarnation of the conflict (post 1920) is only the most recent uprising. It is ingrained in the way each society is brought up, and only grows stronger as time goes on. The longer peace talks go on without a solid negotiation, the harder a compromise will be to achieve.

Nick: Many of those reasons you listed ARE the reasons, all enveloped by a desire to protect the beauty of a country only recently founded (1948) and just as recently trying to be destroyed. A country which before the Jews/Israelis came was mostly arid lands and after which were transformed over time. It’s a desire to serve and preserve the hard work put into changing these lands for the better.

FormerLS: I agree that I will assuredly have a changed outlook after my service. I hope to never lose my morals and ideals however. As much as Gaza is an example, what about the Sinai peninsula? Israel gained peace with Egypt only after giving up that LARGE piece of land and withdrawing all troops and civilians from the land. I think giving up land can potentially work, but only if a stringent plan for both sides is set in place prior. I’m not saying to give up more land than Israel already has, but at some point the settlements will go too far and infuriate the Palestinian government and people. Clearly this is a debate that could go on for ages – and it has. I don’t have the answer and obviously there isn’t one yet, otherwise there would be peace. Please continue to comment as I would love to hear more from an informed veteran as time goes on!

Connie: Thanks for your continued support! A positive attitude is the only way to go through life, climb and strive for more; there’s no point in wallowing in a pit of sorrow when you can be basking in the light of day. Peace is attainable, but only when both sides come to the realization that compromises must be made…

P.S. I never ending up drinking at the airport… was far too exhausted from the travel time. I slept on a bench for 3 hours though!

Hansel: Firstly, let me thank you for your well thought out and well written response. Luckily I saw it in time before I published this response post. As much as the settlements are “meant to be” part of Israel, and many of them may well be included, many of them will also be dissolved into Arab land. I should have phrased that sentence to say that “not all would be included as Israeli lands”. The outliers will likely be turned over, and only those closest to East Jerusalem and other predominantly Jewish settlements/towns will remain in Israeli hands. It’s similar to when Israel was founded, with all the kibbutzim which set the general territorial lines.

I agree with you when you say that the Arab negotiators are using the settlements as a point to delay the talks, but they have the right to. They are trying to get what they want. Regardless of whether Israeli’s withdrew from Gaza as well as the Sinai peninsula, the West Bank and Jerusalem is a much more delicate area with more being at stake. Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, but according to Palestinians it’s also their capital. Even though many of their main operations are out of Ramallah, how is that different from Israel and Tel Aviv?

I know that there have been plenty of peace treaties that should have been accepted (like the one with Jordan concerning the West Bank), but the fact is that they weren’t. Unfortunate, but the current talks need to start from square one and IMO shouldn’t bring up old talks – it’s just like bringing up old beef with someone you have a new problem with, it never ends well.

As for how many Arabs choose to fight, I obviously do not condone their actions and methods. I can understand how people think of them as “dogs”, but I also realize that it’s not all of them; which is why I specifically labeled terrorists as dogs, and Arabs as people. I believe that most stereotypes and generalizations come from some sort of truth,  but they can also lead to hate which is not deserved by all. It’s because of this that I thank you for your strength in holding your tongue, even against such adversity. Be better than those you don’t respect, otherwise you’re only lowering yourself to their level – but from reading your response, it doesn’t seem like I need to tell you that.

EVERYONE: I’m not sure If I responded to every point you all made, but I tried. Please keep reading and responding, as I love the debating and correspondence. I know I’m not always right, and I would love to learn from others that know more than myself. In the future I may not have as much time to respond, but rest assured I am definitely reading your responses.

Remember: for the latest updates, be sure to become a fan on The Lone Soldier Facebook Page.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s