What is appropriate levels of violence toward our enemy

[Manch]

as far as killing arab children, who they are growing up as? Why my children should suffer from the hands of these ghouls?


Now, Kahanism doesn't advocate killing of any arabs - rabbi Kahane famously said that when Kahane is a PM, no arabs will be killed, because there will be no arabs in Israel. This is the only sane policy!

[Manch]

What level of action or violence is appropriate against Islam???  The same level that was appropriate against the Nazis and Naziism.  Not to kill all that have been brainwashed by it, but to do all we can to destroy the institutions and people that spread the hate.  It has to be a process of de-Islamification.  This is a fight of good against evil, not one religion against another.

The probelm with your logic is that Islam is a way of life, nazism wasn't - islam have roots in human psyche of 1,300 years, nazism had only 12 years! Whereas enlightened German people where able relatively easy and, I must say, with a sense of relief to shrug off their nazi nightmare, primitive islamic savages will not be able to do so with their islamic death cult. How can you make such a superficial comparison!? Bones is 100% right - these are amalekites and should all be defeated in spirit and in the body. We should help their remnants to transform and leave their death cult.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

The probelm with your logic is that Islam is a way of life, nazism wasn't - islam have roots in human psyche of 1,300 years, nazism had only 12 years! Whereas enlightened German people where able relatively easy and, I must say, with a sense of relief to shrug off their nazi nightmare, primitive islamic savages will not be able to do so with their islamic death cult. How can you make such a superficial comparison!? Bones is 100% right - these are amalekites and should all be defeated in spirit and in the body. We should help their remnants to transform and leave their death cult.

First off--to all of those who say that Arabs are not Amalek, Amorites are not Amalek, etc.--remember that like Edom, Amalek is a spiritual concept with many possible constituent members depending on the era, not one singular race. ANY nation that devotes itself fully to the murder of Jewry at any given time is Amalek. G-d would not have told the Israelites to completely wipe out the Amorite Nazis (who were very similar to today's Fakestinians) if they weren't Amalekites.

As for helping the remnants of Islam to "transform and leave their death cult", I have mixed feelings about that. I'm all for trying, I'm just not sure if it will do any good. Jonah preached to the Ninevites and they did in fact repent, for a generation, but they were less fanatically evil than today's Muslims. There are Christian missionaries today who focus on the Islamic world (albeit not many). Obviously I wish them nothing but the very best of luck, and applaud them for their fearlessness in spreading the Gospel, but barring an enormous miracle, I don't see them having lots of success with these demons.

[Spectator]

G-d would not have told the Israelites to completely wipe out the Amorite Nazis (who were very similar to today's Fakestinians) if they weren't Amalekites.

No. It was necessary to wipe out Amorites because it was another special commandment. G-d told about it separately. The same thing with the commandment to destroy Canaanites.  It has nothing to do with Amalek except the fact all the three nations were extremely evil. But each one in its own way.

Therefore you cannot apply Amalek law on Arabs. G-d didn't say they all must be destroyed, so that's it. Neither you can't prove they all descend from Amalek.

Torah is the absolute truth so every idea, even a very good one, should be weighed against it, and not vice versa.

[IsraeliGovtAreKapos]

בס"ד
One after one.

I know we had an earlier thread where I was in the minority in not favoring the indiscriminate murder of Arabs such as in the cases of Baruch Goldstein and Ami Popper.  I considered it a good and spirited discussion.  However, now I would like to discuss cases where I feel we need much more force in defense of ourselves and our nation.

The case of Baruch Goldstein ZTVK"L HY"D was a self-defense action. The Arabs who were praying at this evil mosque were planning to capture a number of Jews from the so-called Ha'Rovah Ha'Yehudi of Hebro and maybe even murder them G-D forbid.
I find nothing morally wrong with mironic non-macro+civilian actions against Arabs and Muslims, after all, living them alive IS morally wrong. The thing is that such actions are not effective in the macro level.

If we know of a training camp where suicide bombers are being trained it should be attacked with air power.  Now just to be clear we know they have kids as young as 5 training in such places.  I don't mean to be callous but since they are heading to martyrdom, we can get them their wish (or their parents' wish) early.  In fact I would favor targeted assassinations of anyone who sends their children to such places.  If it discourages others from doing so and keeps these savages from breeding more martyrs so much the better.

That's actually more ignorance in Islam than a good plan. While Judaism (I believe you're Jewish?) sanctifies life, Islam in its basic sanctifies death (wether the Muslim is a Shi'ite, Sunni, Su'ffi, Mallucki, etc). Look at Afghanistan. The Soviet bombed the weck outta the "Mujahideen" training camps and that didn't really help, the war is global and according to the most famous and acceptable preach of Hassan Al-Bannah, in a situation/time when the Islamic State ("Caliphate") is not avaliable/occupied by "Kuffars", the "commandament of Jihad" goes to every single Muslim, whether a boy, a girl, a camel, a kid, an old lady.

If we know of a factory where Kassams or suicide belts are being manufactured they shoudl be hit by the air force and not in the middle of the night when nobody is there.  Hit them during peak activity.  If the word gets out that these are very dangerous places to work, so much the better.

That's actually what we were trying to do in Lebanon 3 years ago, it was NOT effective since we didn't define our enemy, and it's not terrorist but Islam as its own.
The solution for the Gazan problem is a Dresden bombing number 2, I wanna see the Muslim version of this:

CEO TOUT.

Parades for Hamas, suicide bombers, etc. should be viewed as target rich environments.  Maybe not bombing with killing entire crowds (although I would not rule that out), but certainly snipers where available to take out the leaders of such groups.

Not only those but also Muslim houses, buildings, prayers, mosques, well u got the point didn't u?

No brainer, if terrorists hide behind civilians they do not get a free pass as a result.  Again I do not favor killing innocent civilians and would to some degree bend over backwards to avoid killing them, but if they allow terrorists to hide among them they need to know they are taking on risk and that it is their responsibility to avoid the risk, not ours to risk our children's lives so they can do so.

That's one of the problems the Western people have. They think of how "moral" you can get by avoiding killing "innocent civillians" no matter how and what, even at the cost of your own soldier's murder. That's more pathetic than moral, the ones who comes to slay you (a Muslim/Pan-Arabist in this case), slay him first, ceo tout, just the internet version of the so-called "Just war".
The point is, Islam is our enemy not only from the military side of view. It's our cultural and demographic enemy either.

Stop persecuting Jews for self defense.  A major apology for Daniel Pinner who might have shot an Arab who was coming after him with aggression.  A medal for Avri Ran who lives without a fence or gate among hostile Arabs but beats the snot out of those who endanger him.  That is the model of how Jews should live in Eretz Yisrael, make their enemies afraid, not hide behind gates and guards.

It'd be much easier to do so when we wouldn't be "morally afraid" of doing such "immoral" things like slaying mini-terrorists, that is not a cowardly act but a brave act, a brave spiritual act, overcoming our Alteroist brainwash that we have 24/7 non-stop from our mass-media, those children are as bad as their fathers and mothers.

[Yochai]

G-d would not have told the Israelites to completely wipe out the Amorite Nazis (who were very similar to today's Fakestinians) if they weren't Amalekites.

No. It was necessary to wipe out Amorites because it was another special commandment. G-d told about it separately. The same thing with the commandment to destroy Canaanites.  It has nothing to do with Amalek except the fact all the three nations were extremely evil. But each one in its own way.

Therefore you cannot apply Amalek law on Arabs. G-d didn't say they all must be destroyed, so that's it. Neither you can't prove they all descend from Amalek.

Torah is the absolute truth so every idea, even a very good one, should be weighed against it, and not vice versa.

I have been trying to explain this already.  In the Torah, there is a clear distinction made between the Amorites and the Amalekites.  In the Torah, the Amalekites were not an idea, but an actual tribe, an actual group of people.  The commandment to destroy the seven nations was a separate commandment, and the fighting between Israel and the Amorites and Israel and Amalek were two different occurrences, in different parts of ERetz Yisrael.

Whether or not there is a possibility that Arabs might descend from Amalek, I don't know how one can so surely talk about them with the absolute sureness that they are Amalek.

Furthermore, there is no reason to call Muslims idolatrous, as it goes against what any respected Rabbi has said, most of all the Rambam.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

I have been trying to explain this already.  In the Torah, there is a clear distinction made between the Amorites and the Amalekites.  In the Torah, the Amalekites were not an idea, but an actual tribe, an actual group of people.

No, many respected Ravs have said Amalek is a greater concept that encompasses all Jew-haters. It is not just one specific race.

The commandment to destroy the seven nations was a separate commandment, and the fighting between Israel and the Amorites and Israel and Amalek were two different occurrences, in different parts of ERetz Yisrael.

"Amalek" is the same thing as "Nazi". There was a literal Amalek and literal Nazis, but today we recognize all Jew-hating anti-Semites as Nazis in addition to the original Germans. By your definition black Jew-haters like Farrakhan or for that matter Arab Muslim Jew-haters are not "Nazis" because they aren't Germans from between 1933 and 45.

Whether or not there is a possibility that Arabs might descend from Amalek, I don't know how one can so surely talk about them with the absolute sureness that they are Amalek.

Their religion is certainly descended from the Molech-worship of the original Amalekites, but that's besides the point. If the Germans, who were much farther removed from original Amalek, have been considered Amalek by many great Ravs, then how much more the Arabs, which are far more evil and are racially and religiously much more closely related?

Furthermore, there is no reason to call Muslims idolatrous, as it goes against what any respected Rabbi has said, most of all the Rambam.

This only applies to the case where a Jew's life is in danger, as "Allah" can be interpreted as the Arabic name for G-d, but Allah, who is actually Sin the Canaanite moon gd,  is clearly a false gd by any definition. You can't use later rabbinic interpretation where it suits you and ignore it where it doesn't (like when it comes to defining Amalek).

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

No. It was necessary to wipe out Amorites because it was another special commandment. G-d told about it separately. The same thing with the commandment to destroy Canaanites.  It has nothing to do with Amalek except the fact all the three nations were extremely evil. But each one in its own way.

Therefore you cannot apply Amalek law on Arabs. G-d didn't say they all must be destroyed, so that's it. Neither you can't prove they all descend from Amalek.

Torah is the absolute truth so every idea, even a very good one, should be weighed against it, and not vice versa.

The problem with your interpretation is that taken to its logical conclusion, it almost makes Torah obsolete. By your standard Jews shouldn't bother fighting Arabs at all because G-d didn't specifically tell the Jews to fight them, because they did not live in the Holy Land at that time. G-d's Word is inerrant, unchanging, inflexible, and permanently applicable to all situations. The Bible doesn't discuss German Nazis either; does that mean that they weren't Amalek or worth killing?

There are lots of Bible-hating leftists who believe that what Holy Scripture teaches on sexual morality should be tempered with our "modern" knowledge of the so-called "gay gene" and other such nonsense. I know you aren't saying that but you are treading dangerously close to that sort of mindset when you say that we can't treat Arabs as Amalek because G-d didn't give a specific command regarding them in that day and age. Scripture constantly must be applied to situations that did not literally exist when G-d revealed it, and changing times and situations are no excuse at all to discard it or arbitrarily decide it does not apply anymore.

[muman613]

No. It was necessary to wipe out Amorites because it was another special commandment. G-d told about it separately. The same thing with the commandment to destroy Canaanites.  It has nothing to do with Amalek except the fact all the three nations were extremely evil. But each one in its own way.

Therefore you cannot apply Amalek law on Arabs. G-d didn't say they all must be destroyed, so that's it. Neither you can't prove they all descend from Amalek.

Torah is the absolute truth so every idea, even a very good one, should be weighed against it, and not vice versa.

The problem with your interpretation is that taken to its logical conclusion, it almost makes Torah obsolete. By your standard Jews shouldn't bother fighting Arabs at all because G-d didn't specifically tell the Jews to fight them, because they did not live in the Holy Land at that time. G-d's Word is inerrant, unchanging, inflexible, and permanently applicable to all situations. The Bible doesn't discuss German Nazis either; does that mean that they weren't Amalek or worth killing?

There are lots of Bible-hating leftists who believe that what Holy Scripture teaches on sexual morality should be tempered with our "modern" knowledge of the so-called "gay gene" and other such nonsense. I know you aren't saying that but you are treading dangerously close to that sort of mindset when you say that we can't treat Arabs as Amalek because G-d didn't give a specific command regarding them in that day and age. Scripture constantly must be applied to situations that did not literally exist when G-d revealed it, and changing times and situations are no excuse at all to discard it or arbitrarily decide it does not apply anymore.

And only Torah sages are able to determine what Hashem meant when he said Amalek. I agree that we don't know at this time exactly who is Amalek, though the signs are clear that the Muslims are possibly now combined Ishmaelite and Amelekite blood.

It is easy for a non-Jew to sit there and make pronouncements like this but they do not know what goes into deciding questions like this...

[Spectator]

I have been trying to explain this already.  In the Torah, there is a clear distinction made between the Amorites and the Amalekites.  In the Torah, the Amalekites were not an idea, but an actual tribe, an actual group of people.

No, many respected Ravs have said Amalek is a greater concept that encompasses all Jew-haters. It is not just one specific race.

They said that Amalek as nation no longer exists because it has assimilated with the other nations. That is why there are devoted Jew-haters in every nation. But because of the fact  there are also people in those nations who are NOT the descendants of Amalek, you are NOT allowed to exterminate them.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

That's actually what we were trying to do in Lebanon 3 years ago, it was NOT effective since we didn't define our enemy, and it's not terrorist but Islam as its own.
The solution for the Gazan problem is a Dresden bombing number 2, I wanna see the Muslim version of this:

CEO TOUT.

Excellent points, Ron, but there is a fundamental difference between the German Nazis and the Arab Muslim Nazis. The latter are worse. Yes, the German Nazis were fanatically evil and almost 99% of them did support their fuhrer, but they didn't have the same level of complete and utter "religious" programming as the Arab Muslim killbots. Germany by and large was a post-religious nation that was primarily secular/postmodernist/Nietschean in spirit, with quite a bit of Jew-hating so-called "Christianity" thrown in for good measure in pockets (but it was clearly waning) and, at least in the higher echelons of the NSDAP, some pretty extensive Asatru or Odinist paganism. Nazism was not unified by a singular religious conviction the way all of pan-Arabia is by Islam. Since most Germans did not have deep religious convictions to the bone for their National Socialism, they could have some sense bombed into them (and that is what incidents like Dresden did). They could be persuaded by force to quit their quest for Lebensraum and act like civilized human beings via the strategic application of force. Dresden took the fire out of them pretty thoroughly.

On the other hand, any solution that leaves any Arabs standing will not be sufficient. Their culture thrives on martyrdom and wholesale extermination, even if they are the ones getting wiped out. They have an orgasm at the romantic thought of themselves and their kids becoming shahids for Allah. This is why not a one must be left standing--or at a very minimum, within the land of Israel. They are much worse than the kamikaze Japanese--which was a restricted and limited phenomenon seen in certain parts of the Japanese air force--because the whole entire Arab population--women, children, the elderly--live, drink, breathe, and sleep "holy shahidism". There is no greater honor in Islamic culture than to be a shahid, whether that means being a suicide bomber or simply having being killed in battle by the "infidel". If an Israeli bomb kills 500 Arab devil-worshippers, those that remain standing will joyously celebrate their journey to Paradise. When an American bomb killed 500 German Nazis, the surviving Germans around them realized that they were losing the war. That's a pretty big distinction.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

It is easy for a non-Jew to sit there and make pronouncements like this but they do not know what goes into deciding questions like this...

Yes, Muman, I'm not Jewish and I acknowledged that--it's not my job to go out and kill Amalek, obviously--but I do have a literal faith in the Bible and I don't believe any of it can ever be obsolete. Whenever our Western upbringing conflicts with Scripture, the latter is always correct. Whenever our pathetic brainwashing tries to tell us that murderous animals have the same "rights" that you and I do, both my common sense and the Holy Word of G-d tell me that that is nonsense.

Most Jews in Israel are secular and don't even know what Amalek means, let alone why it must utterly be destroyed. Most average Israelis are like Secularbeliever (and he would be rather right-of-center even); they want the Israeli government to crush the terrorists, which it never will, but don't grasp either the reality of Islam or what Torah teaches about warfare against Nazis, because their Bolshevik establishment has deliberately hid this from them their entire lives.

[Yochai]

No, many respected Ravs have said Amalek is a greater concept that encompasses all Jew-haters. It is not just one specific race.

I did not deny that, I simply stated the original meaning in the Torah when referring to the Amorites. That is, that the Amalekites were a specific group and the Amorites were not Amalekites.  And for that, I have never heard a Rabbi say otherwise.  But maybe I am wrong, but I have never heard or read such a thing, seeing that the torah states that the two groups lived in completely different parts of EY.

Their religion is certainly descended from the Molech-worship of the original Amalekites, but that's besides the point. If the Germans, who were much farther removed from original Amalek, have been considered Amalek by many great Ravs, then how much more the Arabs, which are far more evil and are racially and religiously much more closely related?

Well, a perfect example of what you just said is Rav Kahane.  Rav Kahane referred to the Germans as Amalek on more than one occasion, but did not believe the Arabs to be so.  This is a perfect example of one who sees Germans as Amalek, but not Arabs.

This only applies to the case where a Jew's life is in danger, as "Allah" can be interpreted as the Arabic name for G-d, but Allah, who is actually Sin the Canaanite moon gd,  is clearly a false gd by any definition. You can't use later rabbinic interpretation where it suits you and ignore it where it doesn't (like when it comes to defining Amalek).

This is is in direct conflict with the rulings of the Rambam, the Rif, and the Ran.  They made no exceptions when they stated that Islam in NOT Avoda Zara, without exceptions.  When something is as putrid as Islam, there is no reason to attribute false beliefs to it, especially when they go against the decisions of some of the greatest poseks, especially ones who lived amongst Muslims and were able to make the right psak on their religion.

[Spectator]

No. It was necessary to wipe out Amorites because it was another special commandment. G-d told about it separately. The same thing with the commandment to destroy Canaanites.  It has nothing to do with Amalek except the fact all the three nations were extremely evil. But each one in its own way.

Therefore you cannot apply Amalek law on Arabs. G-d didn't say they all must be destroyed, so that's it. Neither you can't prove they all descend from Amalek.

Torah is the absolute truth so every idea, even a very good one, should be weighed against it, and not vice versa.

The problem with your interpretation is that taken to its logical conclusion, it almost makes Torah obsolete. By your standard Jews shouldn't bother fighting Arabs at all because G-d didn't specifically tell the Jews to fight them, because they did not live in the Holy Land at that time. G-d's Word is inerrant, unchanging, inflexible, and permanently applicable to all situations. The Bible doesn't discuss German Nazis either; does that mean that they weren't Amalek or worth killing?

No Bones, I didn't say that Jews shouldn't fight Arabs. Arabs have waged war to extreminate us or at least drive us out of the Land of Israel. That is why we are OBLIGED to fight them and we don't need to wait for a specific terror act or a provocation to start. As our Sages say, "if there's one who rose up to kill you, kill him FIRST". But this doesn't mean ALL OF THEM should be destroyed. On the other hand, we don't need to prove someone is Amalek to have war with him.

As Muman said, only Torah sages are able to determine what Hashem meant when he said Amalek. Not you or me.

We must be accurate in Torah definitions and judgments. It is LAW, not poetry or political agenda.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

I did not deny that, I simply stated the original meaning in the Torah when referring to the Amorites. That is, that the Amalekites were a specific group and the Amorites were not Amalekites.  And for that, I have never heard a Rabbi say otherwise.  But maybe I am wrong, but I have never heard or read such a thing, seeing that the torah states that the two groups lived in completely different parts of EY.

At this day and age this is a matter of semantics. Both were ancient Semitic peoples who had a very similar savage "religion" that they used as justification to embark on an ancient Shoah against the Jews as they left Egypt. The Amorites were Amalek in the spiritual sense and today's Arabs are even worse, as they are more organized and have more ability to carry out a Holocaust.

Well, a perfect example of what you just said is Rav Kahane.  Rav Kahane referred to the Germans as Amalek on more than one occasion, but did not believe the Arabs to be so.  This is a perfect example of one who sees Germans as Amalek, but not Arabs.

He didn't say they weren't Amalek. He couldn't actually say that the Arabs were Amalek--which would mean that they all should be killed--for legal reasons. He was blacklisted in Israel just for saying that they should be removed. He had to make some concessions to political reality. If he had said that they were Amalek and all should be killed, he would have been locked up forever.

This is is in direct conflict with the rulings of the Rambam, the Rif, and the Ran.  They made no exceptions when they stated that Islam in NOT Avoda Zara, without exceptions.  When something is as putrid as Islam, there is no reason to attribute false beliefs to it, especially when they go against the decisions of some of the greatest poseks, especially ones who lived amongst Muslims and were able to make the right psak on their religion.

This is getting very technical and nitpicky. I think I understand what you mean--they said that Islam couldn't be Avodah Zarah because it is a monotheism. That doesn't mean that it is idolatrous. The penalty for any Jew that converts to idolatry is death, either in this life or the world to come. No Torah posek would ever argue that a Jew who converts to the abominable false religion of Islam is still to be counted within the Jewish assembly or has any place in the World to Come.

[muman613]

I did not deny that, I simply stated the original meaning in the Torah when referring to the Amorites. That is, that the Amalekites were a specific group and the Amorites were not Amalekites.  And for that, I have never heard a Rabbi say otherwise.  But maybe I am wrong, but I have never heard or read such a thing, seeing that the torah states that the two groups lived in completely different parts of EY.

At this day and age this is a matter of semantics. Both were ancient Semitic peoples who had a very similar savage "religion" that they used as justification to embark on an ancient Shoah against the Jews as they left Egypt. The Amorites were Amalek in the spiritual sense and today's Arabs are even worse, as they are more organized and have more ability to carry out a Holocaust.

Well, a perfect example of what you just said is Rav Kahane.  Rav Kahane referred to the Germans as Amalek on more than one occasion, but did not believe the Arabs to be so.  This is a perfect example of one who sees Germans as Amalek, but not Arabs.

He didn't say they weren't Amalek. He couldn't actually say that the Arabs were Amalek--which would mean that they all should be killed--for legal reasons. He was blacklisted in Israel just for saying that they should be removed. He had to make some concessions to political reality. If he had said that they were Amalek and all should be killed, he would have been locked up forever.

This is is in direct conflict with the rulings of the Rambam, the Rif, and the Ran.  They made no exceptions when they stated that Islam in NOT Avoda Zara, without exceptions.  When something is as putrid as Islam, there is no reason to attribute false beliefs to it, especially when they go against the decisions of some of the greatest poseks, especially ones who lived amongst Muslims and were able to make the right psak on their religion.

This is getting very technical and nitpicky. I think I understand what you mean--they said that Islam couldn't be Avodah Zarah because it is a monotheism. That doesn't mean that it is idolatrous. The penalty for any Jew that converts to idolatry is death, either in this life or the world to come. No Torah posek would ever argue that a Jew who converts to the abominable false religion of Islam is still to be counted within the Jewish assembly or has any place in the World to Come.

Actually any Jew who converts to Christianity or Islam is still a Jew and can, upon Teshuva, be considered Jewish... The Jewish soul is Jewish even when it is sinning...

[Spectator]

It is easy for a non-Jew to sit there and make pronouncements like this but they do not know what goes into deciding questions like this...

Yes, Muman, I'm not Jewish and I acknowledged that--it's not my job to go out and kill Amalek, obviously--but I do have a literal faith in the Bible and I don't believe any of it can ever be obsolete. Whenever our Western upbringing conflicts with Scripture, the latter is always correct. Whenever our pathetic brainwashing tries to tell us that murderous animals have the same "rights" that you and I do, both my common sense and the Holy Word of G-d tell me that that is nonsense.

Here I agree with you 100%! Holy Word of G-d will never be obsolete! I don't give a damn what leftists or "humanists" say about this or that Torah rule.

Our disagreement with you is about the correct and accurate understanding of G-d' will, not about appeasing Bolshevik establishment.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

No Bones, I didn't say that Jews shouldn't fight Arabs. Arabs have waged war to extreminate us or at least drive us out of the Land of Israel. That is why we are OBLIGED to fight them and we don't need to wait for a specific terror act or a provocation to start. As our Sages say, "if there's one who rose up to kill you, kill him FIRST". But this doesn't mean ALL OF THEM should be destroyed. On the other hand, we don't need to prove someone is Amalek to have war with him.

As Muman said, only Torah sages are able to determine what Hashem meant when he said Amalek. Not you or me.

We must be accurate in Torah definitions and judgments. It is LAW, not poetry or political agenda.

To begin with, 99% of Israeli Jews have not ever been privy to this debate we are now having. They have never had it presented to them, because this very discussion is illegal in Israel. It's against the law to suggest that Arabs should be killed in Israel, but Muslim Nazi sheiks and imams can say that Jews are pigs and rats and apes that deserve death from the minarets of their filthy mosques right in the heart of Jerusalem...

Anyhow, enough with that. The bottom line is that Jews need to learn what the Torah teaches about warfare with Nazis rather than what castrated Western philosophy does. Israeli Jews do not understand that Islam is 100% evil to the core and that anyone who believes in it must, by definition, seek the murder of all non-Muslims, and especially Jews. They have never been taught that and barring us, they never will be.

As a Gentile, I don't have the same concept of rabbinic authority that Jews do, but I do take Scripture literally, and many great Ravs do state what is plainly obvious from Scripture--that Arabs are Amalek. HaRav Meir Kahane zt"l said that the Germans were Amalek; the Arabs are much worse--therefore, by product of simple inference and deduction, they must also be Amalek. G-d said that every last Amalekite must be destroyed and not pitied lest they continue to pose a mortal threat to Israel. If ten Arabs, let's say "harmless" ones like a mother and her nine hideous children, are left standing and allowed to stay in Israel, as soon as they are old enough their mother will strap C4 to them, dress them like Jewish children, and send them out into a kindergarten or hospital to carry on Allah's work. If they are completely disarmed so that there is absolutely no way that they can kill a single Jew, they will still do their best to murder Jews spiritually through dawa (proselytizing for Islam) or moral degeneracy like gambling (i.e. the Jericho casino), drugs, prostitution/pornography, or through intermarriage (Muslims are allowed to take Jewish and Christian spouses). All of the above are seen in Israel today all the time.

[The One and Only Mo]

Wipe out all enemies.

[muman613]

Wipe out all enemies.

What is your definition of enemy?

Torah does not teach this "Wipe out all enemies", quite the opposite...

We are supposed to unload the donkey of our enemy when we see them struggling under their load... In this definition of enemy is someone who we don't like because of our own personal reasons... Maybe our enemy is someone who cuts us off on the freeway, or takes the last cookie from the cookie jar...

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Actually any Jew who converts to Christianity or Islam is still a Jew and can, upon Teshuva, be considered Jewish... The Jewish soul is Jewish even when it is sinning...

Yeah, I know what you are saying. They are still halachically Jewish even if they have completely abandoned Judaism for another religion and can still repent.

[The One and Only Mo]

Wipe out all enemies.

What is your definition of enemy?

Torah does not teach this "Wipe out all enemies", quite the opposite...

We are supposed to unload the donkey of our enemy when we see them struggling under their load... In this definition of enemy is someone who we don't like because of our own personal reasons... Maybe our enemy is someone who cuts us off on the freeway, or takes the last cookie from the cookie jar...

You know who the enemy is. THAT enemy.

[muman613]

Wipe out all enemies.

What is your definition of enemy?

Torah does not teach this "Wipe out all enemies", quite the opposite...

We are supposed to unload the donkey of our enemy when we see them struggling under their load... In this definition of enemy is someone who we don't like because of our own personal reasons... Maybe our enemy is someone who cuts us off on the freeway, or takes the last cookie from the cookie jar...

You know who the enemy is. THAT enemy.

You mean THAT enemy? Well, we should work hard to eliminate him... But I have heard that he will only be truly wiped out on judgement day. We need a little enemy to keep us motivated... He will be wiped out...

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

What is your definition of enemy?

Torah does not teach this "Wipe out all enemies", quite the opposite...

We are supposed to unload the donkey of our enemy when we see them struggling under their load...

I know completely what you refer to, but there are enemies and there are Enemies. Christianity teaches the same thing regarding enemies (lowercase E)--that we are to turn the other cheek and not seek revenge. What is meant here is people that we have personal quarrels and feuds with in our daily lives, not Nazi nations that are seeking our murder.

In this definition of enemy is someone who we don't like because of our own personal reasons... Maybe our enemy is someone who cuts us off on the freeway, or takes the last cookie from the cookie jar...

Yes, that's exactly what I meant.

[Spectator]

Anyhow, enough with that. The bottom line is that Jews need to learn what the Torah teaches about warfare with Nazis rather than what castrated Western philosophy does. Israeli Jews do not understand that Islam is 100% evil to the core and that anyone who believes in it must, by definition, seek the murder of all non-Muslims, and especially Jews. They have never been taught that and barring us, they never will be.

This is a very good conclusion. I wish every Jew in Israel (and not only in Israel) read it. Only Torah can give the right advice.