Why does Obama allow Israel to steal Palestinian land and kill Palestinians?

Answer 1

Answer 1

Israel is an independent country and there is no country called/named Palestine. Palestine is a British invention. With that said, Pres. Obama is not allowing Israel to steal Palestinian land anymore than he is allowing Palestinians to shoot their rockets/ missiles into Israel.

Rather than stealing land, Israel has been giving land to a people who did not exist as a people only 100 years ago.

There are lots of Arab and Muslims nations in the Middle East, but only one democracy, that being Israel. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that guarantees the rule of law to all population - the chances of a poor Muslim becoming rich in Israel are far greater than in the Gaza Strip, in Tunisia (a very good country), in Morocco (another good country), in Egypt, certainly better than in Iran (a racist country - the name alone says it all: "Home of the Aryans"), and anywhere else in the Middle East.

Back to the point though, Pres. Obama is not allowing Israel to steal land from the Palestinians because: 1) it's not happening; and 2) Israel is an independent country with a responsibility to protect her inhabitants, something very few Middle Eastern countries do, and Israel protects both Israeli Jews and Muslims (can you imagine Iran providing gas masks to Jews if attacked with chemical weapons? Israel did provide gas masks to all her citizens, Jews, Muslims, Christian and so forth when Saddam Hussein bombed Israel during the first Gulf War - bombings which in the end harmed more Muslims than Jews).

Is Israel a perfect State? No. No country is. Israel is the most tolerant and moderate country in the Middle East though.

Answer 2

Israel is an independent country and although there is - and was - no sovereign country per se called/named Palestine, the land now known as Israel had previously been known as Palestine for centuries, and its inhabitants known as Palestinians. Prior to the self-establishment of Israel in 1948, the vast majority of people living in Palestine were not Jewish, but this majority was mostly ethnically-cleansed by Israel following the Arab/Israel war. According to the Jewish Virtual Library, in 1946 the total population of Israel was 1,810,037 with 30% being Jewish (up from 1882's total population of about 300,000, 8% of whom were Jewish), yet in 1948 the total population had gone down to 872,700, 82% of whom were Jewish. This ethnic cleansing was accomplished by a combination of the denial of the right to return home following the end of the war, forced evictions and massacres such as that which took place at Deir Yassin. It is not for no reason that nearly every single Israeli prime minister has previously been an officer in the Israeli army.

With that said, Pres. Obama is not 'allowing' Israel to steal Palestinian land any more than he is allowing Palestinians to shoot their rockets/ missiles into Israel. Despite Israel being by far the largest recipient of US Military aid, the US does not have a direct influence on Israeli military policy. However it is true that the US could, if it chose, express its disapproval of the illegal expropriation of Palestinian-inhabited land for the construction of racially-segregated Jewish-only settlements with the withdrawal of some or all of its military aid, and an examination of the available information about why that doesn't happen is a worthy journey all of its own.

Israel's position on its actions is that rather than stealing land, Israel has been giving land to a people who did not exist as a people only 100 years ago. However it must be borne in mind at all times when thinking of the conflict that Israel was established in 1948 as a Jewish state against the express wishes of that non-Jewish majority population who inhabited the land it claimed, and that the borders initially claimed by Israel were drawn up without the agreement of the majority of the people who lived there, and were manifestly unfair in that the majority of the land - and the majority of the best land - was given to the population with the smallest numbers, namely the Jewish population. The non-Jewish majority inhabitants of Palestine were not responsible for the horrors visited on Jews over the centuries leading up to WW2, but it is they who have borne the cost of the establishment a Jewish sovereign state and who continue to bear that cost as their lands are taken, their homes destroyed and 'security walls' built which separate them from the lands their families have worked for centuries in the name of protecting Jews from the repercussions of Israels long-running colonial project - the longest-running in the world today, and illegal under international law.

Israelis are very fond of saying that although there are lots of Arab and Muslims nations in the Middle East, but only one democracy, that being Israel, however this is incorrect, as Tunisia, Lebanon, Turkey and Morocco are also democratic states. Whilst Israel claims that is the only country in the Middle East that guarantees the rule of law to all population, this claim must be contrasted with the reality of life for Palestinians living in the West Bank: they live under Israeli military law that is not applied to Jews who live amongst them in the ethnically-segregated settlements built on land illegally expropriated from non-Jewish Palestinian communities. It is also uncertain which law allows, for example, the collective punishment of Gaza's civilian population during Israel's ground and air attacks on Gaza in response to Gazan rocket fire. Some Israelis give the fact that the chances of a poor Muslim becoming rich in Israel are far greater than in the Gaza Strip as an example of the superiority of Israeli tolerance but it is clear that this difference is due more to the decades-long siege which Israel continues to inflict on the Gaza Strip following the withdrawal of its illegal Jewish-only settlements there. Whilst this withdrawal is proudly touted as evidence that the territory is no longer 'occupied', the degree of control Israel exerts on Gaza's borders, fishing fleet, airspace, imports, exports, power, water and even the calorie intake of its residents has not changed its status as an occupied territory in the eyes of the world.

Answer 2

Short answer: It's called self-defense, which is legal under international law.

Israel finds itself in the untenable situation of having its civilians constantly under threat and under lethal attack, while at the same time remaining under unequaled and unbalanced scrutiny by the media and by foreign governments. Israel contorts itself in its efforts to avoid killing Arab civilians, but is viciously denounced internationally when there are collateral deaths.

And why does your Question mention only one side of events?

Like some of the media, the U.N. and others, you may be biased.

What about the thousands of Israelis that have been killed by Palestinian terrorists?

What about the fact that Palestinians walk in Jewish neighborhoods without fear, while no Israeli dares enter many Palestinian areas, for fear of car-theft and lynching?

What about the fact that in forming the State of Israel as permitted by the U.N., the nascent State was attacked by seven foreign armies and survived only by the grace of God? Was Israel fighting a one-sided war?

Israel's enemies could lay down their weapons, and ask us directly: "Why hasn't Israel returned to its pre-1967 borders"? Then we could carry on a serious debate. And that issue is not one-sided.

• When Israel's neighbors have pursued a policy of discussion and debate, solutions have been implemented, not only argued over. Israel pulled out of Sinai and gained a peace treaty with Egypt. A very cold peace, but a strategic and useful one.
  
• Israel made border-adjustments and water concessions to Jordan, and gained another cold but useful peace.
  
• The same process brought a treaty in May 17, 1983 with Lebanon but it was blocked by Syria.
  
• The same process was almost completed by Rabin and Arafat in 2000. They were at the treaty-signing table, having hammered out all the details. Then Yasser Arafat pulled out of the ceremony, and initiated the Second Intifada, loading the "Karin A" ship with tons of weapons for terror-use.

Israel acknowledges that its existence is viewed as a problem by some, and certainly many of its actions are seen as such. Why not negotiate? Why doesn't Hamas, or Hizbollah, agree to hold talks?

Answer: Because then they'd be called upon to change their official stance (as Egypt did), which does not recognize Israel at all. They don't want to do that, so negotiations are scuttled before they can begin.

More information:

Israel is portrayed as an evil country by some of the media, by many U.N. and E.U. statements, and by a significant portion of the Arab and Muslim world.This despite the fact that Israel has better human-rights than any other country in the region (click on the blue text for details).

Israel has been boycotted for decades, and its citizens have suffered from the conflict, yet it continues to be optimistic and it enjoys God's protection.

The presence of the Jews in Israel is questioned by some, despite the Jews' history in and from Israel, and despite God's clear words bestowing Israel to them. Words which are recognized by Islam as well.

Those who condemn Israel for its side in the conflict, fail to condemn the actions of Israel's enemies, no matter how heinous.

See also:

Why did Israel bomb Gaza?

How is Israel different than the rest of the Middle East?

More about Israel

Answer 3

Regardless of how you may see Israeli policy, and I strongly object to the characterization that Israel is "stealing Palestinian land and killing Palestinians", Obama is not responsible for what Israel does as an independent and sovereign nation. It is really just that simple. As it happens Obama has actually objected to Israeli Settlements in the West Bank here and here. As for whether Israel actually does what the question claims that it does, please see the Related Question: Does Israel steal Palestinian land and kill Palestinians?

You could make the same argument, like "Why does Obama allow Sudan to butcher over 300,000 Darfurians?" or "Why does Obama allow Turkey to occupy Cyprus and brutally repress its Kurdish population to the tune of 40,000+ deaths and 2.2 million people displaced?" In each case, the response is the same; Obama is not responsible for the acts of other independent and sovereign nations. The US has no requirement or responsibility to "fix the world".