Gilad Shalit.

Yes, It's me the Israeli girl who obsesses about her Nationiality.  But this time Hopefully there will be no fights  =)

Did anyone here the news about this kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit who was captured right before the 2nd Lebanon war 2006 near the Gaza Strip by the Hamas (Political or Terrorist organization depending Who you are), anyways he's still in Gaza.  There were discussions on "getting" Gilad Shalit back by releasing 30 Terrorist prisoners who are themselves in Israeli Prisons, for the sake of Gilad Shalit.  I know its hard getting hold of captured soldiers especially for the trade off of numerous terrorists But Im kind of angry at the Israeli government for the case of the captured soldier, Ron Arad in 1981-1st Lebanon war, Who was sadly kind of forgotten for 22 years.  Still Imprisoned in Lebanon, I just hope Hope HOPE they will bring him back-Gilad Shalit at least.  Because last time they tried "getting Back" Ron Arad we trade about 1000 Terrorists with Lebanon and received the other stolen soldiers but never Ron Arad, He Still might be In Lebanon dead or Alive, Hopefully still alive.

What do you guys think about this situation?  Should Israel trade in 30 Terrorists for Our soldier?  Personally I think so.  But maybe its because I have an "Israeli Connection".  Anyways Post your opinions, Im interested.

Judging from the number of your posts in this thread vs. other people's, you surely don't need us to have a perfectly good discussion...

Anyways I didn't say that you should have pity on Israel.  It's your opinion, I can't change that.  I agree that some Palestinians are suffering, But this is what happens when {They}  set up Organizations in order to eliminate us.  HA WE ARENT THE ONES THAT SUFFER?  Are you kidding?  I really can't understrand this, I don't think you understand that the Israelis suffer as well.  I've lived in Israel, All my family lives in Israel (You've heard this plaenty) I Know many Individuals in which their homes are destroyed from Missiles from gaza, We are also suffering.

No one said that Israelis didn't suffer. The entire situation is a huge **** up mess. However, if Israel continues to employ this 'retaliation x10' military policy, it's not going to fix anything. You can't take land from Palestinians after WWII and give to Jews and not expect this kind of backlash. I would have to disagree with you and say that most Palestinians are suffering. And yes... you lived in Israel.... before the age of 3. That doesn't make you an expert on the situation.

How about Americans?  Why doesn't anyone scream at them for "TAKING" away land from Indians? 

I don't think you'd talk to many Americans who agree with what happened to the Native Americans. The colonists were brutal and set in motion the destruction of an entire people and their cultures... pinning tribes against each other by making false promises only to destroy them later. And who are we to "scream at" now? The people responsible for this have been dead for a hell of a long time. That's not to say that the US government is really doing much in attempts to rectify the situation either.


And you seem to be incapable of having a calm discussion about Israel. You are led simply by your emotions and end up getting super defensive. Not everyone supports Israel believe it or not... The US government's unwavering support of Israel is not representative of every American...

thebledx3, most of your "conversations" turn into one-sided flame fests. Firstly, you expect average C-C'ers to know whom some random Israeli Soldier or POW is. Then get offended when we don't.

I'm sorry, thebledx3, but seriously.. how many Americans are directly affected by the life and times of Gilad Shalit? There's a UNIVERSE of Information out there and there's simply no way to keep track of all of it, so, in general, we stick to the stuff that interests and affects us. In general, that means trying to keep up with what's going on in OUR own backyard, which many of us simply can't do.

Secondly, you are SERIOUSLY defensive about Israel. This destroys any attempts you try to have to actually HAVE a serious conversation about these things because they spiral out into another fight about if what Israel is doing is right or not?

Honestly, maybe you need to face facts that A) You don't seem to be ready to have this kind of conversation with an American (or anyone else who doesn't see things in the light you do) and B) Most average C-C'ers aren't capable of having an intelligent conversation with you about Israeli Foreign Policy.

I can't stop you if you want to keep posting stuff like this, but I question the wisdom of continued posts along this vein.

Original Post by p0nda:

Have you seen how undeveloped parts of South America are? Maybe I should go down there and claim sovereignty over their land too, because obviously they don't know how to manage it. Then, to placate the natives (who I'll kick out) I will arm myself to the teeth and throw a few dollars their way. If they complain and strike at me, I'll strike back, just 10 times harder so they will "learn their lesson". Surely that will justify me moving in to their territory - how could they complain?

Kinda like what we did to the Native Americans.

I don't believe in trading 30 terrorists for one soldier's life.  What happens if those 30 terrorists kill one person each over the next 10 years.  Trading the lives of 30 for one soldier... not a good bargain.  It sucks that he is imprisoned, but he is a soldier and he knew this was a risk.  Plus, giving into the demands of a terrorist organization in my opinion will only lead to further P.O.W.s and/or kidnappings and demands.

@ the OP, if you weren't there in the first place, you wouldn't be suffering under their "tyranny".

@dcy - while I don't profess to know more than the basics of American history, the time frame was a little different. One happened 400 some odd years ago when we didn't know that what they were doing was wrong. The other happened within the last hundred years and was only supported by the rest of the world because of the attrocities commited against the Jewish people in WW2. It's ridiculous to compare the two.

The Palestinian people were sacrificed by their rich neighbors - they had no real organized government and were widely derided by most Arab countries.

Just another example of the rich and powerful manipulating the population because of their religious beliefs to create strife and deflect attention from the real problem. Greed and complicity.

Original Post by p0nda:

@dcy - while I don't profess to know more than the basics of American history, the time frame was a little different. One happened 400 some odd years ago when we didn't know that what they were doing was wrong. The other happened within the last hundred years and was only supported by the rest of the world because of the attrocities commited against the Jewish people in WW2. It's ridiculous to compare the two.

First, to thebledx3  why don't you just help us understand and educate us.

P0nda, you are right in some ways and I agree in some ways, but I would like to clarify a few points.  

The English may not have cared, so as far as specific nations go, you are correct.  But, other nations did care and did know that what they were doing was probably morally wrong.  They just murdered, raped and pillaged anyway. 

Look up the phrase "Black Legend." Yeah, it's a trope, but still other colonial nations, especially Spain, had debates about whether the Indians were human and had a soul.  It was a huge debate 400 years ago.  That debate is the reason, among others, why the Roman Catholic church sent missionaries with the Conquistadores.  That is, in the event that Indians had a soul and could be brought to Christ, the missionaries would be there to "save" them. Not saying the Roman Catholic Church was not corrupt or greedy, but it's important to know that not everyone thought it was right (even 400 years ago) and society struggled with this question even then. 

Now, the US gives money and federal land rights to the Indians and allows them to operate kind of like independent nations within the US borders, in order to give some retribution for years of torture and suffering. Some Americans resent it and now there are some "casino Indians" and "oil Indians" many times richer than 95% of the US population, but we would never bomb each other.  I think that the US does not have that violent type of internal conflict, culture or values for the most part. 

Live and let live is more like the mindset of most Americans, in my opinion.  That is probably why it is so shocking to us that people just cannot let the problem go and move on with life.  It's interesting that the same solution is used over and over again in different places, but the events and reactions are so different, probably due to cultural differences.  I wish that people would see that murdering each other is just not the answer.

Original Post by p0nda:

@ the OP, if you weren't there in the first place, you wouldn't be suffering under their "tyranny".

@dcy - while I don't profess to know more than the basics of American history, the time frame was a little different. One happened 400 some odd years ago when we didn't know that what they were doing was wrong. The other happened within the last hundred years and was only supported by the rest of the world because of the attrocities commited against the Jewish people in WW2. It's ridiculous to compare the two.

400 years ago?  The Trail of Tears was 1831-1838.  The Potawatomi Trail of Death was in 1838.  The Miami tribe was removed in 1846.  That is 162 years.

Both the colonists and the Jews arrived at their destination, although by different means, as a result of religious persecution.

It is silly for you to say nobody knew that killing, torturing, and annihilating the native americans was wrong.  It wasn't a matter of right and wrong... it was a matter of "we want your land for economic reasons such as gold and we're going to take it."  Might I remind you of the dates above.  This all took place some 60 years after we were an independent nation... post George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, War of 1812, etc.  We were a pretty developed nation at this point.

Original Post by bettypage4:

Now, the US gives money and federal land rights to the Indians and allows them to operate kind of like independent nations within the US borders, in order to give some retribution for years of torture and suffering. Some Americans resent it and now there are some "casino Indians" and "oil Indians" many times richer than 95% of the US population, but we would never bomb each other.  I think that the US does not have that violent type of internal conflict, culture or values for the most part. 

Live and let live is more like the mindset of most Americans, in my opinion.  That is probably why it is so shocking to us that people just cannot let the problem go and move on with life.  It's interesting that the same solution is used over and over again in different places, but the events and reactions are so different, probably due to cultural differences.  I wish that people would see that murdering each other is just not the answer.

I agree for the most part.  However, it is important to point out that although there are some wealthy native americans who benefit from casinos and other businesses, overall the poverty rate for native americans is enormously greater than US citizens.  Likewise, the rates of drug addiction and suicide are extremely high too.

Americans are like the guy who gets in a fight but doesn't want to get dirt on his shoes.  We think if there is no fighting in our own backyard, the we have a clean slate regardless of our affairs in the rest of the world.

Original Post by dcyounts:

I agree for the most part.  However, it is important to point out that although there are some wealthy native americans who benefit from casinos and other businesses, but overall the poverty rate for native americans is enormously greater than US citizens.  Likewise, the rates of drug addiction and suicide extremely high too.

Americans are like the guy who gets in a fight but doesn't want to get dirt on his shoes.  We think if there is no fighting in our own backyard, the we have a clean slate regardless of our affairs in the rest of the world.

 Good point, but in my mind, our shoes are not entirely clean, anyway.

edit: Also, this wealth for the Indians creates huge internal conflicts between different tribes.  So, one group is very poor and resentful towards the "casino Indians."  I heard these phrases sometimes when I worked with poor Indians and they would make nasty remarks about what they called "casino Indians." It was very eye-opening for me.

Original Post by bettypage4:

edit: Also, this wealth for the Indians creates huge internal conflicts between different tribes.  So, one group is very poor and resentful towards the "casino Indians."  I heard these phrases sometimes when I worked with poor Indians and they would make nasty remarks about what they called "casino Indians." It was very eye-opening for me.

Yes... one of the major differences between the two instances is that their are many nations united against the Israelis because they share a common religion: Islam.  The native american tribes hated eachother and never presented a strong united opposition against the US and therefore were easily defeatable small targets that could be taken out one-by-one.

@DCY you're not "reminding" me. I'm not American. I'm not familiar with the specific details of your history. I have recently (read: within the last month) become Canadian, so I wasn't even taught your history within the realm of Canadian history. Don't talk down to me because I'm not a history buff. I bet you $100 that you don't know when Waitangi day is, nor what it means. Heck, I bet you don't even know when Canadian Thanksgiving or Canada Day is (without the everpresent google of course) and we're your neighbours.

But from what I understand, you're saying that two wrongs do make a right, and past atrocities are justification for future ones. Ok then, we'll agree to disagree on that one.

@bettypage: I'm sorry, I'm not familiar enough with the history of the US to debate it with anyone. I will say though, you say that we should live and let live. If Canada had taken Montana and kicked the vast majority of the Americans out, you would be ok with that? If then the rest of the world said "oh that's ok" and took the Canadian's side, declaring Montana part of Canada you would "live and let live"? I find that very difficult to believe.

I am aware that I am being flippant on this subject but that is only because I have had this debate so many times before and I know it is pointless.

Original Post by p0nda:

@bettypage: I'm sorry, I'm not familiar enough with the history of the US to debate it with anyone. I will say though, you say that we should live and let live. If Canada had taken Montana and kicked the vast majority of the Americans out, you would be ok with that? If then the rest of the world said "oh that's ok" and took the Canadian's side, declaring Montana part of Canada you would "live and let live"? I find that very difficult to believe.

I am aware that I am being flippant on this subject but that is only because I have had this debate so many times before and I know it is pointless.

 p0nda, thanks for that.  It made me think.  I don't expect you to be a history buff for US history.  However, interest in the colonization of the Americas is useful for Canadian citizens, since your history is/was tied to those events. 

To your question about Montana, I do not advocate theft.  However, I believe the point I was trying to make (which I must not have articulated well) was that there must be some diplomatic way to resolve the problem.  Murder should never be the first response.

Finally, I think it's funny that you are now invalidating the entire discussion.  Others are merely clarifying and expanding it.  

Original Post by p0nda:

@DCY you're not "reminding" me. I'm not American. I'm not familiar with the specific details of your history. I have recently (read: within the last month) become Canadian, so I wasn't even taught your history within the realm of Canadian history. Don't talk down to me because I'm not a history buff. I bet you $100 that you don't know when Waitangi day is, nor what it means. Heck, I bet you don't even know when Canadian Thanksgiving or Canada Day is (without the everpresent google of course) and we're your neighbours.

But from what I understand, you're saying that two wrongs do make a right, and past atrocities are justification for future ones. Ok then, we'll agree to disagree on that one.

@bettypage: I'm sorry, I'm not familiar enough with the history of the US to debate it with anyone. I will say though, you say that we should live and let live. If Canada had taken Montana and kicked the vast majority of the Americans out, you would be ok with that? If then the rest of the world said "oh that's ok" and took the Canadian's side, declaring Montana part of Canada you would "live and let live"? I find that very difficult to believe.

I am aware that I am being flippant on this subject but that is only because I have had this debate so many times before and I know it is pointless.

I didn't mean to talk down to you, but when someone says "that is rediculous to compare the two," I'm going to state reasons justifying it.  Why would you even make a comment like that when you're admitting now you know very little about it.

No, I don't know anything about Canada Day, but I do know Jamaica's Independence Day.

And NO WHERE did I say it was right.  My post made no such statement that it was ok that the Jews were living on land formerly owned by arabs.  All I am saying is who are we (American citizens) to pass judgement on the Jews for taking land from the arabs when we've done 10x worse in our past.  If you aren't an American citizen, it didn't apply to you.

To the OP, one soldiers life is not worth the number of civilian/soldiers lives that those 30 terrorists can/will potentially take.

in regards to the original post, it wouldn't seem to me that Israel would be willing to trade 30 terrorists for one soldier. That would be "negotiating with terrorists" perhaps, so no. Better to let Gilad Shalit go the way of Ron Arad.

Interesting that you think Israel should do the trade, thebledx3. He's a soldier and willing to give his life for Israel, yes??

It's nice to see you are so passionate and supportive of Israel. People born in the US tend to be passionate and supportive of the USA and its "policies." Nationalism I think it's called.

Canada Day is July 1st! haha I only know this because I know some Canadians who celebrate Canada Day and then cross the border to drink and watch more fireworks for the 4th. haha

All I am saying is who are we (American citizens) to pass judgement on the Jews for taking land from the arabs when we've done 10x worse in our past.

I disagree. Just because people in this country did **** things doesn't mean that I should in some way be held responsible for it. I can have an opinion on whatever I want. Canada did the same thing with the First Nation's people. Everyone did this... it's still happening. Disagreeing with it and doing something is the only way to make things change.


People born in the US tend to be passionate and supportive of the USA and its "policies." Nationalism I think it's called.

Since when? I know way more people who aren't supportive of the States' policies... and they're American. If most Americans had unwavering support of policies George Bush wouldn't have a 29% approval rating... You can be nationalistic and not support every little thing the government does...

My apologies, I got a bit distracted.  Soldiers know the sacrifices they must make if they pursue that profession.  That is why soldiers are respected, awed and honored when they return and when they don't.  The trade should not be made. 

Original Post by alibuch:

People born in the US tend to be passionate and supportive of the USA and its "policies." Nationalism I think it's called.

Since when? I know way more people who aren't supportive of the States' policies... and they're American. If most Americans had unwavering support of policies George Bush wouldn't have a 29% approval rating... You can be nationalistic and not support every little thing the government does...

Nationalism is more than liking your President.  Nationalism is about pride in our government and active participation of its citizens.  It is about working towards a government that represents the "will of the people."

edit: Obviously, the recent actions of our government have not been representative of our will.  A nationalist is a citizen who seeks to change that.

@betty, I'm not invalidating the argument, honestly, and sorry if it seems like I am. I've just had this debate so many times and I feel like it is banging my head against a brick wall. There is no amount of reason, no level of articulation that will ever convince the OP that what Israel has done is wrong. And no argument that she comes up with will ever convince me that she is right.

Sadly, I also don't think there is a peaceful solution to the situation. I don't know that there is a solution at all short of the Israelis leaving the region - which will never happen - so I think what we see now will be the status quo for some time to come.

P.S. I actually do know all the bits that tie Canadian and American history because they make us learn it for the citizenship test. :)