Comments on: Moving Israel to Europe

Moving Israel to Europe

dov3 — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:04:45 -0800

In what part of Europe would Israel fit?

By: HTuttle

HTuttle — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:06:22 -0800

Won't make any difference since Europe will be Islamist in a few decades anyway.

By: selfnoise

selfnoise — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:08:56 -0800

All crazy rulers of middle eastern countries look vaguely like my Dad. Except for Bashir Assad.

By: caddis

caddis — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:12:50 -0800

He denied the Holocaust in the same speech. Nice.

By: dov3

dov3 — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:14:37 -0800

HTuttle, Well, if Europe will be Islamist in a few decades then lt's move Israel to South America

By: dov3

dov3 — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:15:10 -0800

I meant "let's move..."

By: shoepal

shoepal — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:16:23 -0800

Can't move Israel to South America, it is full of Nazis!

By: dov3

dov3 — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:19:41 -0800

Darn shoepal, I did not think about it. I guess then is Australia or Africa.

By: loquax

loquax — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:22:58 -0800

I say we ask for a trade. Move Israel to Germany, but only if Iran moves to Siberia.

By: _sirmissalot_

_sirmissalot_ — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:31:33 -0800

Wasn't Alaska proposed once? They still have a lot of room up there.

By: Postroad

Postroad — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:35:45 -0800

Why not move Israel to IRAN? Iran is muslim--a problem, perhaps,--but it is not ARAB, and thus the Arabs will not have Israel , that tiny little nation, to have in their face. Then they can turn their attention to their internal problems and enemies instead. If Iran worries so much about the Palestinians and other Arabs, this is how they can show how thoughtful they are.

By: MasonDixon

MasonDixon — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:36:27 -0800

Wasn't Alaska proposed once? They still have a lot of room up there. I know Uganda was.

By: Protocols of the Elders of Awesome

Protocols of the Elders of Awesome — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:46:51 -0800

Ahmadinejad is so comically inflammatory that I half suspect his surprising election victory was engineered by the USA, to facilitate the forthcoming invasion.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:48:55 -0800

Actualy, there is a Jewish psudo-nation up in russia near china. Obviously the soviets couldn't let there be a jewish autonomus state gap during the cold war.

By: Atreides

Atreides — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:56:05 -0800

I'd love to call his diatribe childish and ignorant, but somehow, someway, Bush will pull off the same stunt and I'll get pie in the face.

By: Jart

Jart — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 13:56:23 -0800

There's plenty of space left in the United States. We can always kick the indians off of their reservations to make room.

By: gigawhat?

gigawhat? — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:00:33 -0800

Perhaps they should all go live (I heard some of their neighbors have even offered to drive them there!)

By: unixrat

unixrat — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:00:46 -0800

Give them Montana. Plenty of empty silos that they can put their nukes in.

By: kickingtheground

kickingtheground — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:02:24 -0800

Wasn't Alaska proposed once? They still have a lot of room up there. I know Uganda was.

The Nazis liked Madagascar at one point.

Actualy, there is a Jewish psudo-nation up in russia near china. Obviously the soviets couldn't let there be a jewish autonomus state gap during the cold war.

Predated the cold war.

By: infowar

infowar — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:03:54 -0800

I'm with Jart. Let's give the Israelis a chunk of N Dakota and let them "make the desert bloom". At least the billions in US subsidies would be more likely to be spent on productive endeavors over building fences and sending missles into apartment buildings.

By: swerdloff

swerdloff — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:04:38 -0800

Damn, that dude sounds like the people who accosted me at Union Square in Manhattan last weekend. You know your cause is awesome when you're on the same page as the crazy president of Iran.

By: Heywood Mogroot

Heywood Mogroot — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:04:53 -0800

Cyprus might work. They'll probably end up there anyway, the way things are going.

By: Heywood Mogroot

Heywood Mogroot — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:12:06 -0800

bart of bartcop sez he can't understand why Israelis are so attached to their asscrack of a country. For the amount of capital they've put into it, they could have made another Utah in (his eg.) Oklahoma. Israel's the size of New Jersey, but that's counting the Negev Desert. They've got 2000km² of irrigated land... 500,000 acres ... good land is going for what, $5,000/acre so for $2.5B we could buy up enough farmland to feed the new relocated Israeli nation here in the states, which, oddly enough, is just about how much cash aid we're giving to Israel every year...

By: swerdloff

swerdloff — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:26:31 -0800

It's where the temple is and all of Jewish heritage started. So much Jewish history is there. As you can see from the current state of the Temple Mount and subsequent conquest and planting of the Dome of the Rock, there's a historical move afoot to destroy any indication that the Jews were ever there. See also the Cave of the Patriarchs. There is a belief, and I don't think it's an unreasonable one, that if the Jews are removed, the entire archaeological history of the Jews in Israel will be destroyed and supplanted with suggestions that it was a Muslim area all along. There's an attempt to kill the narrative that is "the Jews" in that. This says nothing of the spiritual link to the patrimonial land that many Jews feel to Israel. It's a battle that's been fought for 3,000 years. Yes, the Jews were not in Israel for a very long time between various bootings by various conquerers, but it's been the prayer for years to go back. Next Year in Jerusalem. But then, this is a question I've asked and it regularly gets ignored - if the Palestinians get the Right of Return, presumably the Jews chased out of Iran, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Russia, and everywhere else do too, right? I mean, except the ones that were slaughtered in real live (not like Jenin) genocides and pogroms?

By: Justinian

Justinian — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:32:16 -0800

I say we move Israel to the greater West Palm Beach area. We've already got a big head start, after all.

By: Heywood Mogroot

Heywood Mogroot — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:51:50 -0800

if the Palestinians get the Right of Return, presumably the Jews chased out of Iran, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Russia, and everywhere else do too, right? sure, one big happy home-coming party for everyone. snark aside, the Kuwaiti emirate held onto its nationhood by craftily currying support from stronger imperial powers, the Turks, Brits, and most recently the US. I'm a strong believer that a nation is entitled to the lands it can defend against all comers, no less and no more. (As an American born in a town called "Sacramento" and having lived in "El Cerrito", "Salinas", "Fresno", "Los Angeles", and "Santa Cruz" how could I not hold this position???). If Israel can keep its lands, more power to them. It's up to them how they do it, and up to the US how much we support them with this.

By: Meatbomb

Meatbomb — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 14:59:40 -0800

How fitting: on my shitty dialup, when I clicked the main link I got the message "www.themoderatevoice.com could not be found"...

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 15:19:44 -0800

No, no, no. Israel gets Quebec. France gets the displaced Quebecois. Texas cedes the union and Florida joins it. Iraq moves to Israel, the US Administration moves to Iraq, and Taiwan takes that little unwanted nubby piece of Australia.

By: -harlequin-

-harlequin- — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 15:29:19 -0800

I have a vague memory that at the time of Israel's formation, one of the potential locations was a section in Turkey, and that that area was not as "contested" shall we say, as the current location. I have no idea where I got this idea. Anyone else know? ^{(Turkey isn't part of the EU yet, but is working hard at changing that :-)}

By: -harlequin-

-harlequin- — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 15:32:24 -0800

^{The "current location" being, y'know, the heart of the holy lands, the one area on earth that has never stopped changing hands every hundred years or so for thousands of years. Ouch :-(}

By: languagehat

languagehat — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 15:38:19 -0800

I'm not going near the I/P debate, but I am compelled to say that Protocols of the Elders of Awesome is a fantastic username.

By: QuietDesperation

QuietDesperation — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 15:38:56 -0800

Reminds me of a Mondo Cane-like film I saw on SNL decades ago, a newsreel item in which Israel switched places with, I think, Georgia USA. One got security, the other got heat without humidity.

By: Richard Daly

Richard Daly — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 15:46:49 -0800

Somehow the Jews found the only piece of the middle east without oil.

By: thirteen

thirteen — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 16:01:39 -0800

England’s green and pleasant land?

By: nofundy

nofundy — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 16:09:47 -0800

Utah gets my vote. Mormons have no real claim there anyway. :-)

By: funambulist

funambulist — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 16:11:21 -0800

"Israel, give me all your young, your rich, your healthy and handsome, your dj's and your clubbers, your love paraders and your trance chillouters, your bohemians and your rockers, the partying masses on your teeming shores, send them all to me!" There's a statue in Ibiza with that inscription.

By: mr_roboto

mr_roboto — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 16:32:13 -0800

What's Ahmadinejad's game? Why be so inflammatory?

By: Tryptophan-5ht

Tryptophan-5ht — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 16:41:32 -0800

i think the VHEM have the best answer.

By: Civil_Disobedient

Civil_Disobedient — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 17:04:00 -0800

In what part of Europe would Israel fit? Bavaria. Since most are from Germany originally, I think it's only fitting they get the nicest tracts of land in the country.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 17:19:40 -0800

Ahmadinejad's just out to prove that every country has ignorant rednecks.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 17:20:45 -0800

...or that many countries have rabid religion-addled nutcases for Presidents...

By: amberglow

amberglow — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 17:31:56 -0800

Is this the same time as David Duke's speech there? (if it had to be moved--but it won't be--i'd take a large chunk of Germany--say, from Munich up to Berlin.)

By: meehawl

meehawl — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 17:33:57 -0800

Locating Israel in Uganda might have been even more sadly amusing and tragic than its current location. I mean, look how Rhodesia turned out. When I consider the current choice of location for Israel, I often remember the words of Ronald Storrs (British pro-consul of Jerusalem during WW1 and its aftermath) regarding a key aspect of erecting Israel in the Middle East: such a creation would be a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism. Storrs later went on to be governer of Northern Rhodesia. That turned out nicely as well.

By: caddis

caddis — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 17:43:24 -0800

Israel is just fine where it is. However, they could use some more space. I propose we move the Iranians to Antarctica and let Israel expand into Iran. Unfortunately, Syria and Iraq appear to be in between so they will have to move to Antarctica as well. Makes as much sense to me.

By: insomnia_lj

insomnia_lj — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:22:39 -0800

Personally, I think they should move the entirety of Israel to Rome and its suburbs, while keeping the Vatican City right where it is. Just seems kinda fitting, really...

By: caddis

caddis — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:31:02 -0800

No, Rome should move to Israel as well so that Christianity, Judaism and Islam can all share in the Holy Lands in peace and harmony. Peace on Earth and goodwill to all mankind.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:40:56 -0800

Yup--Rome totally should. And while we're at it, move Mecca there. (it would be Thunderdome) ; >

By: Justinian

Justinian — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 19:31:23 -0800

Three religions enter, one religion leaves!

By: jeffburdges

jeffburdges — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 20:06:01 -0800

I love the idea of moving Israel! But obviously not just the people. You need to move all the buildings, dirt, rocks, mountians, deserts, etc. too. Or if you wan't to be cheap about it, you could just move Jerusalem'd old city and holy places to Montana.

By: jeffburdges

jeffburdges — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 20:08:37 -0800

Yes, why not just move all the world's holy sites to Montana. Montana is already known for being good at that sort of thing.

By: whiteoak

whiteoak — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 20:28:08 -0800

Isreal should move to Europe at the same time Iran moves out of Iraq

By: Heywood Mogroot

Heywood Mogroot — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 20:56:06 -0800

By: b_thinky

b_thinky — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 23:15:11 -0800

Nevada would make more sense than Montana or Utah. 85% of the state is already owned by the federal government anyways so nobody's gonna get pissed off about losing land. Plus, couldn't casino mogols (and Jews) Steve Wynn and Sheldon Adelson just build the Jews a mega-resort with all the trappings of Jerusalem, only with more shopping and slots??

By: Devils Slide

Devils Slide — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:12:49 -0800

Chomsky half seriously suggested moving all the Palestinians to America. They'd honestly prefer living here to living in their homeland under apartheid.

By: Heywood Mogroot

Heywood Mogroot — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:29:47 -0800

Hey, we could move the PA *and* the Israelis to Nevada. That way they could work out their differences without 3rd parties like the Saudis and Syrians exerting undue influences...

By: jeffburdges

jeffburdges — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 02:53:46 -0800

Yes, yes, lets move the Palestinians to Utah! Its cheaper than moving buildings and Utah needs some balance. Anyway, Chomsky is right, the Palestinians probably would be happier in the U.S.

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 03:27:51 -0800

You are all fools. Any good risk player knows you start with australia.

By: Dormant Gorilla

Dormant Gorilla — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 07:43:58 -0800

No way. You can never hold on to the purples. Irkutsk, man, it's all about Irkutsk.

By: Cyrano

Cyrano — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 09:10:04 -0800

No, no, no, You take Australia and then you just...wait. Watch everyone else smack each other around trying to keep someone from holding a whole continent while you slowly build your kangaroo armies, then by the time Asia realizes it's been bleeding itself dry hopping over to Alaska every other turn, you hop forth to victory! (or at least a good bit of friendly chaos.)

By: Scoo

Scoo — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 09:48:17 -0800

See, the last three posters truly understand geopolitics. Sure, invading Iraq seems like a bad idea now, but Bush had 5 RISK cards, was he supposed to just sit on them?

By: loquax

loquax — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 11:07:38 -0800

No way he had five unless Clinton and Bush Sr. passed them on to him. Bush Sr: -Panama -Kuwait Clinton: -Haiti -Kosovo Bush Jr. -Afghanistan Makes sense, as Reagan probably cashed in all of his cards before 1988.

By: Civil_Disobedient

Civil_Disobedient — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 11:35:05 -0800

then by the time Asia realizes it's been bleeding itself dry hopping over to Alaska every other turn No, no. Everyone goes after Australia first, but if you're dealing with good players they'll simply start amassing an army to hold you to one continent. Eventually you have one giant duke-'em-out fest with the Australia-holder trying valiantly to hold out 150 invaders out with 40. The best country to grab is America, for the reson you point out. You get more armies per turn (6 IIRC) and there's only 3 points of entry. Make a treaty with one border and you only have to defend 2 points strongly. Slowly scatter 5 to 10 armies in each territory, then when your "partner" least suspects it, throw them all on the "friendly" border territory leaving 1 holding army in each to hold the middle. They'll never see it coming. Asia has way too many points of entry; you can't ever hold on to it long enough to amass any armies. The power of Asia comes when you've at the end and some Australian asshat is holding out with 50 armies on the border. Just wait a few turns and you'll easily overpower him.

By: Civil_Disobedient

Civil_Disobedient — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 11:36:12 -0800

Sorry. /risk nerd

By: sour cream

sour cream — Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:29:10 -0800

That's the same president who, in October, called for Isreal to be "wiped off the map", right? And now he says "never mind, just move them to all to Europe"? Looks to me like the guy's actually making some progress. Just give him some time and maybe he'll come around to "aaallright, they can stay where they are if they promise not to nuke us."