Was the expulsion of Jewish families in Gaza justified?

[shimon]

Gaza is part of the tribal territory of Judah. The only thing though is that Shemitah doesn't apply there because the area wasn't re-sanctified by Ezra and Nehemiah. But Israel south of Be'er Sheva never had the same kedushah of the rest of The Land of Israel so if you justify the expulsion from Gaza, why not justify expelling Eilat too which has the Halachic status of Sinai. Southern Israel is The Greater Land of Israel and belongs to us because it is between The Nile and The Euphrates. Gaza on the otherhand belongs to us because it is in the tribal territory of Judah.

im almost 100 percent sure that the tribe of Dan was alot more further up than tel aviv . probably modern day kiryat shemona or around there. the torah says from dan to beer sheba. dan being the farthest poin north and beer sheva being the most southern region in ancient israel
I think it was actually part of Dan's tribal territory.

i think Dan was up north

Dan moved up North because they couldn't stand The Phillistines. The Negev was part of Judah and it extended West to Gaza. Dan was the present day Tel Aviv area, maybe up to Ashdod and Ashkelon.

[Eliezer Ben Avraham]

The Gaza Strip used to be called Philistia during the biblical times. The Torah called the inhabitants of this place "uncircumcised" among other things. They weren't Israelites. The Kingdom of Israel along with Judah were outside of Philistia. The inhabitants of Philistia and the Israelites fought against each other. There were no Jews there.

So what I'm trying to say is wasn't the Gaza evacuation justified just on these principles alone? Atleast to those Kahanists who want a theocracy in Israel? Since the Kingdom of Israel can't have the ancient Philistia land on its borders since it never had it in the first place.

Any thoughts on this?

one of the possibilities for a Milchemet Mitzvah (commanded war) is if someone else attacks us, ex. Arab-Muslims. we are not allowed to give in because that would be a hillul hashem

[FULL METAL JACKET]

Your choice of words belies the filthy liar you are. "Settlers"? "Theocracy"? Gimme a break.  Nobody believes you. No Kahanists would call Israeli citizens "settlers".
I predict you will be allowed to make three more posts, and then will be banned.

Name calling is for children. Please add something intelligent to this thread or just don't add anything at all. So far, you've called me a muslim, arab, nazi, troll, maronite, anti-semite. Have any other names in your bag? I am far from anything you have called me. I support Israel 100% and against islamic terrorist scum 100% no can tell me otherwise.

Muslim Nazi troll? What? First of all I'm Catholic and far from a Nazi. How on earth could you have even thought I was either Muslim or Nazi just from my mere 4 posts in this thread? I have not said anything racist or even mentioned anything related to Islam. Let's have a proper debate here, (it was a proper debate before you jumped in) I am far from racist, muslim, or anti-semitic.

Oh yes, you're one of those Maronite "Catholics"... aha, one of those "Christians" whose priests dedicate entire sermons to Sheik Nasrallah and who, two summers ago, threw wild, drunken rallies in the streets of Beirut, with yellow- and green-spraypainted hair, for Hezbollah. 

No offense, but yet again you show your stupidity. How can you even come to the conclusion that I am a Maronite Catholic? I don't even come from the middle east. I am of a Dominican Catholic background.

Let me make my position clear. I do support Israel and I do support all settlers. I started this thread to ask the paticular group of Kahanists who would like to establish a theocracy in Israel about the Kingdom of Israel's true borders.

From my understanding the goal is to create a Sanhedrin (a group of 70 Rabbis experienced and wise beyond everything).  Chaim's goal is not to, over night, suddenly transform Israel into a relgious nation.  He is realistic that this action is impossible.  Rather, he wants to start with schools and encourage secular Israelis to return to Torah and Judaism. 

Judaism isn't just a religion. It is also an identity and culture of a group of people.  Our Torah is like the US Constitution.  These are the rules which we shoudl live by.  We are not meant to be secular people.  On the other hand, we are supposed to live the Jewish way of life.  being that so many of us, including me, are relatively less observant, the goal is to gradually reach the point of having a religious identity throughout our nation.

Thanks for the info. Was looking for a post like this. The reason I'm interested in this whole theocracy topic was because of a Kahane interview I read last week called Israel's Ayatollah. Here is the link: http://www.kahane.org/meir/interview.htm

I've grown a strong admiration for Kahane over the last few months. I liked his message regarding the Arabs, his solution is really the only one for peace. But do all Kahanist support a theocracy? I can see you are a secular Jew trying to come closer to Judaism, Kahane mentioned in the interview that the majority of people who voted for him were people like you, mostly secular. So what it basically comes down to is, are the majority of Kahanists with expel the Arabs and create a kingdom or just expel the arabs? Obviously I understand the most important at the moment being the latter.

The Gaza Strip used to be called Philistia during the biblical times. The Torah called the inhabitants of this place "uncircumcised" among other things. They weren't Israelites. The Kingdom of Israel along with Judah were outside of Philistia. The inhabitants of Philistia and the Israelites fought against each other. There were no Jews there.

So what I'm trying to say is wasn't the Gaza evacuation justified just on these principles alone? Atleast to those Kahanists who want a theocracy in Israel? Since the Kingdom of Israel can't have the ancient Philistia land on its borders since it never had it in the first place.

Any thoughts on this?

one of the possibilities for a Milchemet Mitzvah (commanded war) is if someone else attacks us, ex. Arab-Muslims. we are not allowed to give in because that would be a hillul hashem

So let's say there is a Kingdom in Israel today. Could this land have been annexed into the kingdom? Or does the Torah say this part of the land can not be in the Kingdom of Israel? That's pretty much what my original question leads to.

[Lisa]

1986, a little advice. 

I don't think it was a good idea to come here and start by impugning the Jewish claim to Gaza.  If you are indeed 100% pro-Israel, then this is not the place to make such assertions. 

Now whether or not a Kahanist Israel would be a kingdom, I don't know. 

Regarding your last question, Chaim does an audio show every week where he answers the questions of members.  So click on the General tab, and you'll see a sticky for "Ask JTF."  You can post your question there. 

[Dr. Dan]

Your choice of words belies the filthy liar you are. "Settlers"? "Theocracy"? Gimme a break.  Nobody believes you. No Kahanists would call Israeli citizens "settlers".
I predict you will be allowed to make three more posts, and then will be banned.

Name calling is for children. Please add something intelligent to this thread or just don't add anything at all. So far, you've called me a muslim, arab, nazi, troll, maronite, anti-semite. Have any other names in your bag? I am far from anything you have called me. I support Israel 100% and against islamic terrorist scum 100% no can tell me otherwise.

Muslim Nazi troll? What? First of all I'm Catholic and far from a Nazi. How on earth could you have even thought I was either Muslim or Nazi just from my mere 4 posts in this thread? I have not said anything racist or even mentioned anything related to Islam. Let's have a proper debate here, (it was a proper debate before you jumped in) I am far from racist, muslim, or anti-semitic.

Oh yes, you're one of those Maronite "Catholics"... aha, one of those "Christians" whose priests dedicate entire sermons to Sheik Nasrallah and who, two summers ago, threw wild, drunken rallies in the streets of Beirut, with yellow- and green-spraypainted hair, for Hezbollah. 

No offense, but yet again you show your stupidity. How can you even come to the conclusion that I am a Maronite Catholic? I don't even come from the middle east. I am of a Dominican Catholic background.

Let me make my position clear. I do support Israel and I do support all settlers. I started this thread to ask the paticular group of Kahanists who would like to establish a theocracy in Israel about the Kingdom of Israel's true borders.

From my understanding the goal is to create a Sanhedrin (a group of 70 Rabbis experienced and wise beyond everything).  Chaim's goal is not to, over night, suddenly transform Israel into a relgious nation.  He is realistic that this action is impossible.  Rather, he wants to start with schools and encourage secular Israelis to return to Torah and Judaism. 

Judaism isn't just a religion. It is also an identity and culture of a group of people.  Our Torah is like the US Constitution.  These are the rules which we shoudl live by.  We are not meant to be secular people.  On the other hand, we are supposed to live the Jewish way of life.  being that so many of us, including me, are relatively less observant, the goal is to gradually reach the point of having a religious identity throughout our nation.

Thanks for the info. Was looking for a post like this. The reason I'm interested in this whole theocracy topic was because of a Kahane interview I read last week called Israel's Ayatollah. Here is the link: http://www.kahane.org/meir/interview.htm

I've grown a strong admiration for Kahane over the last few months. I liked his message regarding the Arabs, his solution is really the only one for peace. But do all Kahanist support a theocracy? I can see you are a secular Jew trying to come closer to Judaism, Kahane mentioned in the interview that the majority of people who voted for him were people like you, mostly secular. So what it basically comes down to is, are the majority of Kahanists with expel the Arabs and create a kingdom or just expel the arabs? Obviously I understand the most important at the moment being the latter.

The Gaza Strip used to be called Philistia during the biblical times. The Torah called the inhabitants of this place "uncircumcised" among other things. They weren't Israelites. The Kingdom of Israel along with Judah were outside of Philistia. The inhabitants of Philistia and the Israelites fought against each other. There were no Jews there.

So what I'm trying to say is wasn't the Gaza evacuation justified just on these principles alone? Atleast to those Kahanists who want a theocracy in Israel? Since the Kingdom of Israel can't have the ancient Philistia land on its borders since it never had it in the first place.

Any thoughts on this?

one of the possibilities for a Milchemet Mitzvah (commanded war) is if someone else attacks us, ex. Arab-Muslims. we are not allowed to give in because that would be a hillul hashem

So let's say there is a Kingdom in Israel today. Could this land have been annexed into the kingdom? Or does the Torah say this part of the land can not be in the Kingdom of Israel? That's pretty much what my original question leads to.

This movement is not interested in forcing Torah done all Jews' throats.  To do this isn't Judaism. And this isn't what a Kahanist government woudl ever do. However, it will slowly transform the secular state into a more religious one little by little.  This is a righteous thing.  If it eventually becomes a theocracy to the point that all of its citizens accept, so what?  Isn't that a good thing?

[Merkava]

Initially i think it was a good idea to get rid of the settlers.

They were a burden to Israeli security and most of them are complete whack jobs.

However I was wrong - It was a HUGE mistake. Now Gaza  turned into a launching pad for P@lestinan rockets and attacks.

On a positve note this will go down as the finest example as to why land for peace IS NOT POSSIBLE

[judeanoncapta]

1986, your argument falls on it's face.

Regardless of whether Gaza was ever conquered by Israelites in the past, it was promised to Israel by God and therefore Modern Israelites have every right to conquer Gaza and annex it.

[kahaneloyalist]

Thanks for the info. Was looking for a post like this. The reason I'm interested in this whole theocracy topic was because of a Kahane interview I read last week called Israel's Ayatollah. Here is the link: http://www.kahane.org/meir/interview.htm

I've grown a strong admiration for Kahane over the last few months. I liked his message regarding the Arabs, his solution is really the only one for peace. But do all Kahanist support a theocracy? I can see you are a secular Jew trying to come closer to Judaism, Kahane mentioned in the interview that the majority of people who voted for him were people like you, mostly secular. So what it basically comes down to is, are the majority of Kahanists with expel the Arabs and create a kingdom or just expel the arabs? Obviously I understand the most important at the moment being the latter.

While most Kahanists are probably attracted by the message of expelling the Arabs and making Jews be in power in Israel, Rabbi Kahane zt'l always believed(with good reason) that once he had Jews listening to his message of dealing with the Arabs they would also listen to his message about Shabbat, though he did not believe in forcing private observance.

So let's say there is a Kingdom in Israel today. Could this land have been annexed into the kingdom? Or does the Torah say this part of the land can not be in the Kingdom of Israel? That's pretty much what my original question leads to.

2 points, the first is that the House of David conquered and eventually wiped out the pilishtim, and Gaza had a Jewish population until 1929. The second is that any land conquered by a Jewish State can and must be annexed to the nation proper.

[Tzvi Ben Roshel1]

Gaza is part of the tribal territory of Judah. The only thing though is that Shemitah doesn't apply there because the area wasn't re-sanctified by Ezra and Nehemiah. But Israel south of Be'er Sheva never had the same kedushah of the rest of The Land of Israel so if you justify the expulsion from Gaza, why not justify expelling Eilat too which has the Halachic status of Sinai. Southern Israel is The Greater Land of Israel and belongs to us because it is between The Nile and The Euphrates. Gaza on the otherhand belongs to us because it is in the tribal territory of Judah.

I think it was actually part of Dan's tribal territory.

I thought it was part of Shimons territy, but then the tribe of Shimon got sucked (or assimilated, dont have the right word right now), by the larger Tribe of Judea. But it doesn't matter, either way it was Israelite.

[דוד בן זאב אריה]

Your choice of words belies the filthy liar you are. "Settlers"? "Theocracy"? Gimme a break.  Nobody believes you. No Kahanists would call Israeli citizens "settlers".
I predict you will be allowed to make three more posts, and then will be banned.

Like it or not that is what they are Settlers. G-d commanded us to settle the land and that is what all People in Israel. You are really ignorant