I do find this Berlin Airlift view a little distasteful.

Israel is an awful little country that behaves abhorrantly. But it is not the USSR and Gaza is certainly not Berlin. Israel’s government has a democratic mandate granted to it by its people. Berlin, unlike the elected leaders of Gaza, didn’t fire occasional missiles over the border in the hope of killing a few more Jews.

So instead of stooping to the levels of ill-judged reactionary politics of the people of Palestine and Israel – should we not engourage a more civilised and perhaps calmer outlook.

For example, we could hold talks with Israel and Egypt about having a country they trust (The USA for example, or a joint US-EU mission) to enforce the blockade and in doing so sift out unnacceptable goods while allowing humanitarian goods through by the proper channels.

Come on, get it straight. You can’t just go and compare Israel to Stalinist Russia willy-nilly.

The correct historical analogy is Nazi Germany or, at a push, apartheid South Africa.

Tim

South Africa is a better analogy.

We couldn’t have talked to the Nazis in 1943 at the height of the holocaust. And we couldn’t by the time of the airlift hope to agree a deal with Stalin.

But we can talk to Israel and Egypt. Neither is militarilly hostile to the USA or Europe in general. So some sort of agreement should be plausible.

margin4error

Suggesting similar tactics could be used to get food to people hardly amounts to saying the situations are identical.

A bigger flotilla with hundreds of boats maybe? I would pay to be a part of that.

Would Israel really risk bringing down EU planes flying aid into Gaza, or board EU ships?

Yes.

‘Risk’ is the wrong term however, as there’d be absolutely no chance of any material repercussions.

Yeah, why don’t we turn Israel into post apartheid South Africa – thats really a paradise – you can’t beat the highest levels of murder, rape, xenophobia, corruption, poverty and disease – to name a few.

I don’t see any flotilla’s lining up to take life saving supplies to the heavenly post apartheid South Africa – I guess all those anti apartheid activists are getting their kicks on other flotillas!

Israel made a mistake in thinking these “peace activists” were really after peace. They asked them to bring in their boats to Ashdod where they would deliver the Aid by land – the peaceniks declined. They then sent a few soldiers to talk to them on the boat – the peaceniks then tried to beat the shit out of those soldiers – and the soldiers opened fire. The peaceniks were more interested in creating havoc then bringing the supplies to the people of Gaza. Just like the anti apartheid activists were more interested in bringing down apartheid rather then the wellbeing of the majority of South Africans.

Technically speaking, NO!
You obviously know naff all about the Israeli Air Force. Much better to beat a naval blockade. Besides, you clearly have no idea about the cost in money,material and pilots of the Berlin Air Lift, never mind that there isn’t a huge pool of war veteran transport pilots to draw on, or 4 major airports to land on, or…, or…., or….
Go read a book before talking b#llocks. Forgive the language, but 3 minutes on wikipedia, or talking to ANYONE in aviation, would have told Mr Tudor that this idea was rubbish. This isn’t journalism or debate, it’s just lazy pontificating.

Matt Heath

Not identical but similar. Which they are not. Nazi Germand and the USSR were an enermy. Israel and Egypt are not. As such we can pick up the phone and talk to them about changing the blockade. (Not ending it, they won’t let that happen and understandably so)

whatever
Shows the link with the Israeli right and it’s supporters here and the Apartheid regime.
1. Israel provided arms, military training, intelligence, biological racially based weapons to the apartheid regime.
2. Most of the supporters of the Apartheid regime , like whatever, are strong supporters of an Israeli apartheid system.
3. Many of the Israeli right and the pro Israeli blogs in this country have the same views on race as the South African apartheiders.
Israel was set up by secular socialist jews unfortunately the religious and racial right have taken over their countries direction. Ably supported by right wing site such as HP and many UK based journalists.
4. To help them, the MOSSAD set up HAMAS, an organisation with similar racist views to undermine the more secular FATAH.
Support to the moderate Israeli left and the Fatah soft left.
Racist extremists, like whatever, are real problem in the middle east

“But the bigger question is: what can the international community do about the Gaza blockade? I”

Pretty much nothing. And it has no intention of doing anything anyway.

How about a flotilla that sails to Ashdod and has its cargo sent through to Gaza by road, perhaps?

Pretty much nothing. And it has no intention of doing anything anyway.

Egypt has opened their side, how long for, who knows.

Easiest way to stop the blockade (and by the way Egypt is blockading Gaza just as tightly as Israel – and for the same reasons) is for Hamas to stop firing missles over the border.

Simples.

I don’t suppose it would be technically possible for NGOs to do it, and even if it were I don’t think Israel would think twice about shooting down such planes. As far as Israel is concerned it has given up lots of land for “peace” (it claimes Sinai, the whole of Jordan and much if not all of Lebanon as well as some of Syria I think) – many people in Israeli government circles feel that they have got a poor bargain, that world opinion is increasingly hostile, and that they have to “go it alone” at least until Republican Rapturists capture the White House.

They are almost certainly resigned to being isolated diplomatically, in whole or in part, by the EU and if they do not yet have NBC weapons inside Israeli embassies in Western capitals then Mossad probably has the capacity to install them at short notice. Remember that, increasingly, the Israeli establishment feels no connection with western Europe – I would expect that leftish Israelis will increasingly come under pressure to emigrate.

I don’t condone their actions in any way – I am merely suggesting that this episode, together with passport forgeries, provides evidence that Israel no longer cares about persuading people beyond its borders of the value of its case. Either you accept the Israeli government’s right to do whatever it considers necessary to secure the nation’s survival, or you are its enemy and will be treated as such.

@14 John RS

Please stop using that “Simples” thing!

Easiest way to stop the blockade (and by the way Egypt is blockading Gaza just as tightly as Israel – and for the same reasons) is for Hamas to stop firing missles over the border.

Been tried, doesn’t work.

margin4error: “For example, we could hold talks with Israel and Egypt about having a country they trust (The USA for example, or a joint US-EU mission) to enforce the blockade and in doing so sift out unnacceptable goods while allowing humanitarian goods through by the proper channels.”

Those talks would obviously fail. The Israeli government does not want Gaza to receive more food, since it would wreck their leverage over the Gazan population. Working mechanisms previously exist to get sufficient food into Gaza. The unacceptable goods ARE the food.

JohnRS: “Easiest way to stop the blockade is for Hamas to stop firing missles over the border.”

I don’t think Palestinians believe this. Neither do I, really. Were Israel’s belief in the power of starving Gazans into compliance confirmed, they would at best increase rations a few % while demanding something else further, i.e. the total overthrow of Hamas…

14: “Easiest way to stop the blockade (and by the way Egypt is blockading Gaza just as tightly as Israel – and for the same reasons)”

News media are reporting this on Tuesday afternoon BST:

“Egypt Opens Border With Gaza Strip to Allow Humanitarian Aid”
http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Egypt-Opens-Border-with-Gaza-Strip-Following-Israeli-Assault-on-Aid-Flotilla-95311269.html

Seriously, why does Israel persist in the blockade of Gaza and occupation of the West Bank? Palestinians suffer and Israelis don’t benefit, so what on earth is the point?

The previously mentioned Professor Shlaim is quoted saying that:

“Britain should propose EU sanctions to force Israel to end the occupation of the Palestinian territories – the most prolonged and brutal military occupation of modern times.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/06/01/prof-avi-shlaim-i-m-sickened-by-israel-s-insane-massacre-on-gaza-convoy-115875-22300455/

@20 – A mixture of paranoia and bad experiences. Israel has genuine reasons to be concerned, having been at attacked by more or less every single other country in the region at some point or the other, and faces a violent insurgency dedicated to it’s destruction. It’s relationship with Fatah and the West Bank are much better than it’s relationship with Hamas and the Gaza Strip, though obviously not perfect. It doesn’t run an embargo on it though.

The problem is that Hamas has the stated intention of the destruction of Israel, and continues to attempt to achieve it’s aim, hence the regular mortar and rocket attacks. I suspect we’d probably blockade Cornwall if it did the same. Israel will lift the blockade once Hamas stop’s shelling them, and actually engages in the peace process.

@1: Israel is an awful little country that behaves abhorrantly. But it is not the USSR

Indeed not; the USSR was an awful big country that behaved abhorrantly.

Israel’s government has a democratic mandate granted to it by its people.

Um, you do realise that’s not actually a point in Israel’s favour? It just means that as well as the Israeli government being evil, many of Israel’s people are too.

we could hold talks with Israel and Egypt about having a country they trust (The USA for example, or a joint US-EU mission) to enforce the blockade and in doing so sift out unnacceptable goods

Israel has already demonstrated its total lack of good faith, therefore anyone they trust could not be trusted to act in good faith.

@5: A bigger flotilla with hundreds of boats maybe?

Yes, and escorted by as many warships from as many NATO countries as possible.

I note that the Israeli aggression counts as an armed attack within the context of articles 5 and 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty. I suspect Turkey is using the threat of invoking this treaty to get a favourable response from the USA.

It may come down to the USA having to choose between Israel and NATO. If they have any sense, they would choose NATO; if they choose Israel instead they are not in any case a worthwhile ally for Britain. Why? Because at the moment Britain is the USA’s largest ally (it has the largest non-US force in Afghanistan, for example), and Israel is currently behaving as an enemy of the UK, by attacking and abducting 40 British people on the high seas. Israel has also forged British passports. If the USA won’t back Britain in these circumstances, we can’t rely on it backing us ever.

@15: if they do not yet have NBC weapons inside Israeli embassies in Western capitals then Mossad probably has the capacity to install them at short notice.

I suspect they probably don’t. if they do, and it came out, they would instantly make 500 million people controlling a quarter of the world’s wealth their enemy, which would not be in their interests. (Having said that, their heavy-handed attack on the flottila wasn’t in their interests either.)

Not that I said they might not do it because wouldn’t be in their interests, not that they might not do it because it would be morally wrong. The Israeli government regards people who aren’t Israeli Jews as not counting morally and views them in a purely instrumental sense. In that sense, their worldview is quite similar to that of Nazi Germany, which also conceptually divided people into an ingroup and an outgroup, and treated outgroup people instrumentally or worse.

Remember that, increasingly, the Israeli establishment feels no connection with western Europe – I would expect that leftish Israelis will increasingly come under pressure to emigrate.

This is entirely possible. There are significant numbers of Israelis who are decent civilised people (as opposed to evil murderous bigots). If the EU had a trade embargo against Israel, and also allowed all Israelis to live and seek work in the EU, it’s likely that many liberal Israelis would leave. This would be a positive feedback loop, because then the political climate in Israel would move rightward, they’d become more extremist, causing more revulsion, and more decent people wanting to leave. Eventually, Israel would either haemorrhage enough people to seriously harm its economy, or the hard-liners would do something so outrageous that the USA would no longer support them, then the game would be up.

[23-25] Thanks for your comments, Cabalamat. The Democrats would prefer NATO and the Republicans Israel IMO.

God knows why I’m sticking my head up, really. But some things need to be said.

First of all, let me set out my stand. I think the blockade, and the occupation, are absolutely and monstrously unacceptable. They need to end, now. I don’t think Netanyahu gives a shit about the peace process; I don’t think the current Israeli government are acting in good faith. And while I don’t think the troops went to the flotilla expressedly to kill people (if so, why the stun-gun injuries?), it barely matters. The enforcement of as inhumane a policy as the blockade meant that this was always going to happen at some point. I quite like the airlift idea, for all that it presumably has serious practical difficulties – I think the Israeli government’s hand needs to be forced. That is all criticism of Israel, and I am making it, not branding it anti-semitic.

That said, once again I see a thread cease to criticise Israel on the known facts, and run away into supposition and fantasy, all painting a picture of Israel, or at least the Israeli government, as a creature of uniform, total malice. Heaven knows they’ve committed enough real misdeeds that we needn’t reach for hypothetical or imaginary ones.

See what we have:

1: “the MOSSAD set up HAMAS” This has the trappings of a conspiracy theory. It must be pointed out that the Jews being behind the scenes controlling everything for their own malign ends is a classic anti-semitic charge. I’m not making an accusation of actual conscious anti-semitism, and I don’t believe it is present. But if you were to loudly and repeatedly accuse a group of women of being emotionally unstable, or a group of blacks of being lazy, or a group of gay men of being sexually promiscious, then the charge of sexism, racism or homophobia would not be far behind; surely people see that? That’s why defenders of Israel see anti-semitism in the other camp – it’s not simply dishonesty. If you want to avoid the charge, you need to check that your words don’t fall into anti-semitic patterns.

2: “I don’t think Israel would think twice about shooting down such planes.” They’ve no history of doing something as blatant as that, at least during peacetime, and plenty of established history suggests they would pursue other approaches (diplomacy, maybe sabotage) to attempt to ensure the planes never got off the ground. Stick to the established facts.

3: “…and if they do not yet have NBC weapons inside Israeli embassies in Western capitals then Mossad probably has the capacity to install them at short notice.” This is James Bond-style fantasy for which there is no evidence. It also implies that Israeli diplomatic staff can be replied upon to be so depraved that they’d happily be accessory to mass murder, including mass murder of large parts of the Jewish diaspora.

4: “The Israeli government regards people who aren’t Israeli Jews as not counting morally and views them in a purely instrumental sense.” This isn’t provable unless you’re telepathic, and also, improbably, attributes a single mindset to a large group of people. It ia also, again, a classic racist statement about how Jews view the world; see point 1. To re-iterate, my point is not that you are actually anti-semitic, and I don’t think you are, but you are using language that sets people’s anti-semitism alarms off, and that you need to be very, very careful in doing that.

[27] I don’t know any Israeli diplomats, so I can’t comment on what they’re like.

This however I do know. Every single member of the Jewish diaspora who lives in western Europe or America is a Jew who’s chosen not to live in Israel. So why should an Israeli government, particularly one which relies for its electoral support upon Jews of eastern European and middle Eastern origin – who, I believe, now account for a solid majority of the Israeli electorate – feel any loyalty towards the western diaspora?

I don’t know any Israeli diplomats, so I can’t comment on what they’re like.

Is the position that they’re all incredibly black-hearted really credible? I don’t think diplomatic service is a career path that particularly attracts sociopaths.

This however I do know. Every single member of the Jewish diaspora who lives in western Europe or America is a Jew who’s chosen not to live in Israel. So why should an Israeli government, particularly one which relies for its electoral support upon Jews of eastern European and middle Eastern origin – who, I believe, now account for a solid majority of the Israeli electorate – feel any loyalty towards the western diaspora?

There’s a difference between lack of loyalty and indifference to indiscriminate mass murder. Part of the rationale for Israel existing is as a safe haven for all Jews; I’d suggest that antagonising the diaspora to the extent of setting off a dirty bomb under their feet is something that not would pass through the Israeli cabinet without so much as a murmur of dissent.

[29] I’d like to think you’re right. Truly I would.

The reality is, however, that Israel has crossed so many humanitarian Rubicons that it is no longer paranoid fantasy to suppose that if push came to shove it wouldn’t cross the ones I and others here have been speculating about…

Wouldn’t they have to rebuild the airport first? Which might be a little difficult without construction materials.

An airport destroyed by the Israelis when Fatah was in control of Gaza,so let’s not have this pretence that missiles fired by Hamas (they’ve stopped firing them, try to stop them being fired, and during all the time they’ve been fired only three Israelis have been killed by them, more slightworryism than terrorism) are what causes Israeli intransigence.

“the MOSSAD set up HAMAS”
Sorry there is considerable evidence , from Israeli newspapers.

Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, “Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)”. Ahmed Yassin, the spiritual leader of the Islamist movement in Palestine, returning from Cairo in the seventies, established an Islamic charity association. Prime Minister Golda Meir, saw this as a an opportunity to counterbalance the rise of Arafat’s Fatah movement. According to the Israeli weekly Koteret Rashit (October 1987), “The Islamic associations as well as the university had been supported and encouraged by the Israeli military authority” in charge of the (civilian) administration of the West Bank and Gaza. “They [the Islamic associations and the university] were authorized to receive money payments from abroad.” The Islamists set up orphanages and health clinics, as well as a network of schools, workshops which created employment for women as well as system of financial aid to the poor. And in 1978, they created an “Islamic University” in Gaza. “The military authority was convinced that these activities would weaken both the PLO and the leftist organizations in Gaza.”

@30: Could you link to those sources? And it’s certainly a leap from saying that Israeli policy encouraged the growth of Islamist groups at some points in the past to saying that Mossad (ever the universal bogeyman) actually set Hamas up.

That should be @32. Oops.

@30. WMD attacks from within embassies of allied countries wouldn’t just be something Israel has yet to do, it would be something nobody has ever done or suggested they might. The Cold War showed the extreme reluctance of superpowers in using them when both sides are so armed; I believe the logic still applies. I’m afraid I really do see this as spy-novel stuff.

@23

I fear you you are too inclined to take sides, and so perhaps missed my point.

Hence you imagined my pointing out that Israel is a democracy was me casting Israel as goodies, when in fact I was emphasising that unlike the USSR, who were a hostile threat to the west and couldn’t be talked to, Israel are not hotile to the west and should thus be talked to.

But then perhaps that’s why I should go back to my not engaging about the middele east. Both sides of that war are abhorrent, innefective, and murderous. And yet not taking sides is all too often pounced upon by those who think in simplistic and indignant terms.

In truth I don’t much care about the Middle East. It is a long way away and there is nothing I can do to change the mentality of populations who elect murderers on both sides.

Could you link to those sources? And it’s certainly a leap from saying that Israeli policy encouraged the growth of Islamist groups at some points in the past to saying that Mossad (ever the universal bogeyman) actually set Hamas up.

Read the work of Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem,
Google if you want, or you don’t want to buy his book. This socialist zionist was attacked by a pipe bomb by a right wing extemist. A Florida born religious settler Jew ,
At the end of 1992, there were six hundred mosques in Gaza. Thanks to Israel’s Mossad, the Islamists were allowed to reinforce their presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, the members of Fatah and the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression.
The Hamas had built its strength through its various acts of sabotage of the peace process, in a way which was compatible with the interests of the Israeli government. In turn, the latter sought in a number of ways, to prevent the application of the Oslo accords. In other words, Hamas was fulfilling the functions for which it was originally created: to prevent the creation of a Palestinian State. And in this regard, Hamas and Ariel Sharon, see eye to eye; they are exactly on the same wave length.
Hamas it would not have been the organisation it is without the help and support of MOSSAD. So in a way it did set up a minor oraganisation into major one by allowing it to be resourced and more imnportantly getting rid of the leftist palestinian opposition.
The trouble is with rightist s like your self is that you never look at the history of far right Islamists. They were created and backed by the right in the eighties as buffers against communism. They are now coming back to haunt us and those decisions in the eighties.

To recap: at the end of the UN debate on the partition of Palestine on 29 November 1947, the UK representative at the UN abstained in the vote saying that partition of Palestine would lead to continuing conflict, a prediction that has proved to be remarkably prescient through to the present.

Another recap: try this on the “Stern gang” – or Lehi group:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(group)

“Israel granted a general amnesty to Lehi members on 14 February 1949. In 1980 the group was honored by the institution of the Lehi ribbon, a military decoration awarded ‘for military service towards the establishment of the State of Israel’. Future Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir was among its leaders.”

Avraham Stern initiated contact with Nazi authorities in December 1940, “in order to enlist their aid in establishing the Jewish state in Palestine open to Jewish refugees from Nazism. He proposed to recruit some 40,000 Jews from occupied Europe with the intention of invading Palestine to oust the British. The Nazis did not take this proposal seriously, however, and nothing was to come of it.”

An article titled “Terror” in He Khazit (The Front, a Lehi underground newspaper) argued as follows: Neither Jewish ethics nor Jewish tradition can disqualify terrorism as a means of combat.

The trouble is with rightist s like your self is that you never look at the history of far right Islamists.

I’m a rightist based on contributions I’ve made to this thread?

@29: There’s a difference between lack of loyalty and indifference to indiscriminate mass murder. Part of the rationale for Israel existing is as a safe haven for all Jews; I’d suggest that antagonising the diaspora to the extent of setting off a dirty bomb under their feet is something that not would pass through the Israeli cabinet without so much as a murmur of dissent.

Did you know that Israel has in the past campaigned to reduce the civil rights of non-Israeli Jews? In the 1990s they asked Germany not to give Jews from the former Soviet Union the right to live in Germany, because more of them wanted to live their than Israel.

The hardline Zionists currently running Israel have a name for Jews who don’t support their hardline policies. That name is “self-hating Jew”.

@27 twoseventwo: “The Israeli government regards people who aren’t Israeli Jews as not counting morally and views them in a purely instrumental sense.” This isn’t provable unless you’re telepathic,

Formally, you’re correct. However, it’s often possible to get a fairly accurate idea about how people think from their deeds and words.

What level of evidence would you accept as proof? If I produced a quote from Israel’s head of government agreeing with what I said, would that be sufficient to persuade you that I’m right on this?

and also, improbably, attributes a single mindset to a large group of people.

The Israeli cabinet contains 39 people. This is not a large number. And they are all self-selected; they wouldn’t be in the government if they didn’t basically agree with the government’s policies.

The truth is that there are some very nasty people, with very nasty views, in the Israeli government.

It ia also, again, a classic racist statement about how Jews view the world

I didn’t say all Jews think like that, and I don’t believe it to be the case (certainly none of my Jewish friends think like that). If any Zionist hardliners want to pretend that that’s what I said, it’s a classic case of intellectual dishonesty from them.

But maybe my ideas need starting more clearly. I feel a blog post coming on…

@41 As I said, the established facts certainly don’t paint Israel in a positive light, and I’m not much of a defender. I do, however, raise my eyebrows at the suuggestion that they’d consider mass murder amongst the diaspora a moral or politically sensible thing to do. I think that’s leaping a long way over the line, and there’s no need to do so in order to argue against Israeli policy.

@43; I do, however, raise my eyebrows at the suuggestion that they’d consider mass murder amongst the diaspora a moral or politically sensible thing to do.

I don’t think they would do it either.

@42 What level of evidence would you accept as proof? If I produced a quote from Israel’s head of government agreeing with what I said, would that be sufficient to persuade you that I’m right on this?

I think it’s a statement whose truth is basically impossible to prove; the minimum I’d be prepared to accept would be stated policy – which, in this case, we certainly don’t have. A government doesn’t actually think anything; it’s not a person. Its positions as an entity are determined by what it says officially. Lieberman may well believe the statement you made; if you have a quote of Bibi saying it, then I’d believe he thinks it too (presumably he hasn’t said it while in office, however). But the individual beliefs of politicians aren’t the same as the government (it’s not like Cameron is going to legislate every political view he holds). It is, nevertheless, very disturbing to have people with these beliefs in government in the first place.

Semantics? Maybe. But semantic minefields are perhaps best avoided when we’re dealing with an issue as charged as this.

The Israeli cabinet contains 39 people. This is not a large number. And they are all self-selected; they wouldn’t be in the government if they didn’t basically agree with the government’s policies.

As above, this is an oversimplification of how politics works; certainly there’s disagreement in the ranks of the current British government. There are racist reasons to support current Israeli policy, but there are non-racist ones too; I don’t think that the security argument is a good one or a humane one, but I don’t think it’s absolutely intellectually dishonest, or that holding it must be a mask for complete disregard for non-Israelis. I would imagine that plenty of the Israeli cabinet hold those views; certainly most of them would make those arguments, and we can’t know what they really believe in their hearts of hearts.

I didn’t say all Jews think like that, and I don’t believe it to be the case (certainly none of my Jewish friends think like that). If any Zionist hardliners want to pretend that that’s what I said, it’s a classic case of intellectual dishonesty from them.

But if your critiques of the Israeli government make accusations that look a lot like classic anti-semitic slurs, you are providing them with an open goal. Especially if the accusation you’re making isn’t easily supported (if it is, then my objection basically disappears). If, without solid evidence, a group of Jews are accused of secretly manipulating history to their own ends, not valuing the life of anyone who wasn’t a Jew, killing children and stealing their organs, or just basically being plain evil, the accusations of anti-semitism aren’t remotely surprising. People who are subject to a certain type of racism are sensitive to things that look like it. If you want to shut off that line of criticism (well, OK, someone like Melanie Phillips will make it anyway, but there are some defenders of Israel who can argue in good faith), then a careful choice of words is advisible.

To clarify, the “you” in the last paragraph was more of a hypothetical one than a personal one.

@46: To clarify, the “you” in the last paragraph was more of a hypothetical one than a personal one.

Sure, that’s how I took it.

Some Israelis evidently believe that Israel has a divine right to occupy all Palestine because God gave it to them. Try this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irIXIy6hNc8