Talk:Israel/Archive 3

message: This page is now PROTECTED -- at JTD's request. --Uncle Ed 15:31, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Page protected

message: Quick question.
I recall that someone, perhaps not even on this page, stated that "of course Israel has a right to exist as a nation". I'm not sure what that statement means. I'm not disagreeing that Israel should exist, but I'm not sure how to define the "right" for any nation to exist. Does Israel have more or less of a right to  exist than, say, Kenya or Tuvalu? Does this concept of "right to exist" (exclusive of the I/P conflict) have any bearing on those states that are not recognized at present but seek such recognition? It seems that this question of "right to exist" as a nation state could impact our discussions of various topics (I/P conflict, Tibet/China conflict, UK/Ireland conflict, and many other land disputes). Anyone care to weigh in without starting any kind of unpleasantness? --Dante Alighieri 20:45, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Dante, I think you totally are correct. In the proper sense of this term, I doubt that any nation has a right to exist. I think when people say that Israel (or nation X, Y or Z) has a right to exist, they might intend a lesser claim, such as "Israel has the same level of a right to exist as other nations, such as nations X, Y and Z." If they don't mean this (and this is my POV), then maybe they should mean this. Otherwise we get into religious disputes about how "my nation was given this right by God!", which is then always followed by "But God took that right from your nation, and gave it to our nation!", which usually is followed by "But then we who worship the true God all along were given this land before either of you!" And that's always fun... RK 20:53, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Israeli nation

message: I see no reason to keep this page protected. --Uncle Ed 14:35, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just unprotected it. The user in question did come back to wiki to change other articles but seem to have gone now. Fearï¿½IREANN 18:40, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Page unprotected

message: It just occured to me the irony: That Israel, the state, and Israel the Wikpedia article, both have to be artificially protected. -戴眩sv</Strong> 21:15, Aug 22, 2003 (UTC)
: They are not artificially protected. They are quite naturally protected by the very same people who created them. Cema 03:47, 23 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the joke was that neither Israel the state nor Israel the article can defend itself. Israel the state receives much support from the U.S., and Israel the article receives much support from interested Wikipedians. --Dante Alighieri 03:53, 23 Aug 2003 (UTC)

text: I think I understand the joke, but I also understand the reality: Israelis can and do defend the state of Israel, and so do wikipedians defend the integrity of the article. Cema 04:56, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irony of protection 

message: I'm reverting Martin's deleting of the obscenities of the anonymous user. Normally I would support such an act, but this user's abuse is the subject of debate on the wiki-list. As such, for evidence it is important that it be left in situ for people to read. Censoring the comments simply ensures that people do not realise the nature of the user's conduct and hinders everyone's ability to form fully informed judgments as to the nature and agenda of the user in question. Fearï¿½IREANN 21:23, 23 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: That's cool. I'll probably reinstate my obscenity-edits in a month's time, once everyone has had a chance to make an informed judgement. OK? Martin 21:41, 23 Aug 2003 (UTC)

text: Reinstated. Martin 13:41, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refactor notes 

message: Efghij, you have stated that "There are some cases, however, in which the rights extended to Jews are not extended to Arabs".
This is simply untrue. The only right which is extended exclusively to Jews under Israeli law is the right to obtain Israeli citizenship (the Law of Return). This, naturally, applies only to Jews which are not Israeli citizens, and thus does not consistute discrimination of Arab citizens vs. Jewish citizens.
In fact, the only other issue in which there is a (semi-)official discrimination is that Israeli Jews must serve a 3-year military service (2 years for women) whereas Arabs are generally exempt from this duty.
The claims in the article you linked to either:
* do not amount to denial of rights (such as the education budget issue - which is simply a factor of political power - not all Jewish groups get equal funding either)
* do not consist of any kind of nationality-based discrimination (the civil marriage issue)
* are unsubstantiated, and rely on misleading "evidence" (The passage quoted from the human rights violation report referrs to the situation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, not in Israel).
* are simply false (non-Jews being unable to buy property in Jerusalem, "laws" which give special privileges to Jews - implying there is more than one).
Given this, I see no justification for leaving the sentence I quoted at the beginning in the article. uriber 20:06, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rights of Israeli Arabs/Jews 

message: I think the Crusades deserve a mention in here between the Roman occupation section and 1947. Given the hotbed around this article, though, I figured I'd bring it up in talk before adding it. --ObscureAuthor 19:38, 30 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Crusades?

message: On the Israel wikipage it states that Israel is located in Asia, Is this correct? I was always under the impression they were in Africa since they are in close proximity to Egypt and Jordan which according to the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency's World Factbook 2003 and their Wikipedia pages both of those countries are part of the African continent. I would appreciate some clarification on this entry. Misterrick 08:30, 06 January 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: (Please note that new items on Talk pages go at the bottom of the page.)  Israel and Jordan are always considered to be in Asia as far as I know.  Egypt is in Africa.  I can't see your claim about Jordan either on the wikipedia page for Jordan or in the CIA factbook. --Zero 09:14, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

text: Politically, Israel is in the Middle East. In pure geographical terms, of course it is in Asia while Egypt is in Africa -- the Asia thing only matters if you're considering continents. Most discussion of Egypt, Israel, Jordan etc. focuses on cultural, political and historical aspects. --Uncle Ed 16:49, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Israel's Geographic Location

message: I think Golan_Heights should be listed in the line: 
"In 1967, the Six-Day War resulted in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and Sinai becoming occupied by Israel."
I won't add anything here because this is a controversial page.
Martijn (usurped) 20:17, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added it, as well as a one-sentence description of what's happened to the various territories since then, and a pointer to the Geography section where more details can be found. --Delirium 20:49, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)
----
In a Haaretz interview (Jan. '04) historian Benny Morris states:
"Without the uprooting of the Palestinians, a Jewish state would not have arisen here."
Searching for this sentence on Google (web, news and groups) turns up some discussion of the interview but nobody seems to have a problem with this particular statement.
Keith from Calgary 23:00, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: 6 day war: why is golan not listed?