NationStates Jolt Archive

Having been raised in a Jewish household, having relatives in Israel, and a great-grandmother who died in the Holocaust, I always assumed Israel was the best thing since sliced matzoh.

However, I came to question the justification of the forced resettlement of Palestinians to make room for the Jews.

I came across an anecdote from the FDR administration:

Having discussed the matter at great length with King Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia, FDR sent him a note telling him that no decision about the establishment of a jewish state in Palestine would take place, without the full consultation of the Arabs and the Jews. He died 8 days later, and his promise was not honored; the state of Israel was established and conflict ensued which has lasted to this day.

Did anyone have any right to do this? Do we need a right to do these sorts of things?

In light of several comments pointing out the large role that the Israelis tehmselves played in the creation of their state, I feel that the question for discussion should be changed to "Was the West's Role in the Creation of Israel a Mistake?"

Israel should not have been created simply because it has made the Jews think that every time they do something wrong, they are allowed to yell holocaust and get away with it. Plus, it has resulted in the Arab world hating the US, which fuels the neo-cons agenda.

Screw what FDR said. Trust me, he had no intention of honoring his word to a bunch of “savages”, the racist fuck.

I'm not sure about alot of things, but one thing I am sure about it that FDR did not like Jews, nor did he give a rats ass about Israel.

He was knew about the holocaust and the death camps first hand and did nothing to stop them. Didnt even anounce publicy what the Nazis were doing.

Israel should not have been created simply because it has made the Jews think that every time they do something wrong, they are allowed to yell holocaust and get away with it. Plus, it has resulted in the Arab world hating the US, which fuels the neo-cons agenda.

Screw what FDR said. Trust me, he had no intention of honoring his word to a bunch of “savages”, the racist fuck.

I agree with the second part and only the second part.

Plus FDR blows goats because he totally enlarged our government and made it more socialist than I could ever even have nightmares about, the bastard.

I don't think the US had a right to take Palestinian land and give it to the Jews. But on the other hand, it really was inevitable that they would get Isreale, or at least Jerusalem back. Some superpower would at least give them the city to make up for all the horrors done to them during the Holocaust. It just ended up being the US,and now the entire Arab world hate them. Not that i'm complaining...

I don't think the US had a right to take Palestinian land and give it to the Jews. But on the other hand, it really was inevitable that they would get Isreale, or at least Jerusalem back. Some superpower would at least give them the city to make up for all the horrors done to them during the Holocaust. It just ended up being the US,and now the entire Arab world hate them. Not that i'm complaining...
It was the UN, not the US.

It was the UN, not the US.

I fail to see the difference between the two, since the US practically runs the UN anyway.

I fail to see the difference between the two, since the US practically runs the UN anyway.

Not that they listen to us.

Isreal can exsists just because of thge 6 Day War. And they were led by a pirate!

http://www.jewlicious.com/wp-content/dayan_1.jpg

The holy pirates have blessed them! They can not lose!

You know I thought it was the British that ruled Palestine and gave part to the Jews, Israel, and the Palestinian's, which they lost when they invaded Israel. I was also under the impresion that there had been zionist's living in the region from at least the turn of the century. Frankly though I don't really see how it matters at this point in time they are their now and have been for a good fifty years and they aren't going to just up a give all Israel to the Palestinians. Perhaps they should, but I can see why they are a bit unwilling, honestly the whole thing is a mess that isn't going to be resolved until both sides are willing to compromise a little.

I fail to see the difference between the two, since the US practically runs the UN anyway.

In 1947? Soviet support was at least as crucial at the time.

It was the UN, not the US.
Ah, I thought it was odd the US giving away British colonial land.

Ah, I thought it was odd the US giving away British colonial land.

the British gave up the mandate to the UN (aka the US), who decided to make Isreal an independent country.

Ah, I thought it was odd the US giving away British colonial land.

UN land, technically (transferred from the League of Nations, which gave the British the mandate.) It was just effectively British colonial land.

I'm not sure about alot of things, but one thing I am sure about it that FDR did not like Jews, nor did he give a rats ass about Israel.

He was knew about the holocaust and the death camps first hand and did nothing to stop them. Didnt even anounce publicy what the Nazis were doing.
GOOD!!! f**K Israel! F**K the illegal occupation. LONG LIVE PALESTINE!

Ah, I thought it was odd the US giving away British colonial land.
I also wonder why the word “eviction” appears in the poll. The Palestinians (understandably) left the area on their own free will. There are Arabs living in Israel even now. Not to defend Israel, the place disgusts me, but people should get their history right.

UN land, technically (transferred from the League of Nations, which gave the British the mandate.) It was just effectively British colonial land.
Yes I get that, I was refering to the earlier claim that it was the US that gave it away in an atempt at sarcasm that obviously failed.:( :p

GOOD!!! f**K Israel! F**K the illegal occupation. LONG LIVE PALESTINE!

Are you joking?

I feel like the Native Americans have a better claim to retake their ancestral lands than Jews actually have to Israel, since Native Americans were evicted only a few generations ago; the last time the Jews had claim to Israel was in the 2nd century, when they were expelled by the Romans in the second Diaspora.

Imagine if the world felt so sorry for the genocide and displacement of Native Americans that they decided to form a coalition to give America back to them (I know this isn't feasible, it's a "how would you like it?" exercise). Wouldn't you be pissed? I know I would. I would probably kill some mofos.

In retrospect, yes.

Are you joking?
Not even a little bit. seriously F*@% jews and F#*%K Israel.

The Palestinians (understandably) left the area on their own free will.

Um, not exactly. Hundreds of thousands were deliberately expelled by Israel; hundreds of thousands of others left to escape the war. Neither of those can fairly be considered to be "of their own free will."

And I am not proposing that the land be given back to the Palestinians, because the Jews have indeed been living there for generations, and the same problems arise again.

I just think it's a positive step toward less instability in the middle east to recognize that Israel was a mistake that is now irreversable, and people need to stop being angry about it and move forward.

Not even a little bit. seriously F*@% jews and F#*%K Israel.

hmm...hey, its your opinion and I guess I'm in no position to say anything because heres my opinion.

F**k the A-rabs and F**k the A-rab countries.

Looks like I cant really talk, huh?

The creation itself wasn't a mistake, but where we put it was.

Not even a little bit. seriously F*@% jews and F#*%K Israel.
I whole heartedly agree. Seriously, tying your ethnicity to your religion, what is up with that?

I whole heartedly agree. Seriously, tying your ethnicity to your religion, what is up with that?
Several hundred years of Christian oppression?

Several hundred years of Christian oppression?
Still, fuck them.

Still, fuck them.
*starts a slow clap
what a grand arguement :rolleyes:

Still, fuck them.
Hay I was just answering your question, you could be born in England, France or Germany, but you would still be a "damn" Jew first and foremost and subject to diferent rules.

*starts a slow clap
what a grand arguement :rolleyes:
Actually I think he speaks the truth, fuck them. *claps*

hmm...hey, its your opinion and I guess I'm in no position to say anything because heres my opinion.

F**k the A-rabs and F**k the A-rab countries.

Looks like I cant really talk, huh?
You can think what you want but it just shows your ignorance towards what really goes on there. Have you been there? Have you gone through the checkpoints? ever been shot at just because you speak Arabic? Do you know the brutuality the Israelis put Arabs through on a daily basis? Im guessing not.

You can think what you want but it just shows your ignorance towards what really goes on there. Have you been there? Have you gone through the checkpoints? ever been shot at just because you speak Arabic? Do you know the brutuality the Israelis put Arabs through on a daily basis? Im guessing not.
You can think what you want but it just shows your ignorance towards what really goes on there. Have you been there? Have you gone through the checkpoints? ever been shot at just because you speak Hebrew? Do you know the brutuality the Arabs put the Jews through on a daily basis? Im guessing not.

You can think what you want but it just shows your ignorance towards what really goes on there. Have you been there? Have you gone through the checkpoints? ever been shot at just because you speak Arabic? Do you know the brutuality the Israelis put Arabs through on a daily basis? Im guessing not.

Yup, been to Israel...seen how the Arabs act like animals...was not allowed to go certain places for fear of being shot at because I'm American, was not allowed to go in Dome of the Rock because I'm not muslim....basically my whole trip hardened my dislike of A-rabs.

And how the hell can you talk to me about ignorance after you openly say fuck the Jews.

I admit that I say bad shit about arabs, but I would never preach to someone not to be ignorant. Jesus, you look like an idiot doing that. :p

I whole heartedly agree. Seriously, tying your ethnicity to your religion, what is up with that?

Yeah, I dont agree with some Jews when they say that Jewish is your ethnicity. Those may have been Catholic stereotyps of the past, but they arent actually true and really dont stand today. I am an American, with a background/ethnicity as White (German, Austrian, Russian), my religion, which I choose to beleive in is Judaism.

You can think what you want but it just shows your ignorance towards what really goes on there. Have you been there? Have you gone through the checkpoints? ever been shot at just because you speak Hebrew? Do you know the brutuality the Arabs put the Jews through on a daily basis? Im guessing not.
Yep, both sides do crappy shit and the problem ain't going to go away until both sides are willing to work things out sensibly.:)

Yes it was a very botched job, along with the horrible mess of creation that is the rest of the post war colony-states.

Neither group has right to the land, it clearly belongs to the Caininites.

Yep, both sides do crappy shit and the problem ain't going to go away until both sides are willing to work things out sensibly.:)
Or Israel could just get annihilated. Problem solved.
It’s time to abort that retarded fetus of a country.

Yes it was a very botched job, along with the horrible mess of creation that is the former colonial empires.

Neither group has right to the land, it clearly belongs to the Caininites.

Some of the Caininites were slaughtered but the rest were all adopted into the Hebrew /tribe/culture/state.

This is simply a case of the stronger culture winning.

In case people dont know the Hebrews back then were a warrior race and very very aggressive.

As you can tell if you read the Bible (Old Testament).

I whole heartedly agree. Seriously, tying your ethnicity to your religion, what is up with that?

I think that's one of the unique things about Jews. The two are indeed tied together; all people of the Jewish religion share a degree of ethinic culture in common, because the bulk of ethnic Jewish culture is derived from the religion.

Or Israel could just get annihilated. Problem solved.
It’s time to abort that retarded fetus of a country.
Yeah cause thats reasonable. Why not just kill all the Palestinians, after all Israel is the one with nukes so thats the more likely event.:rolleyes:

You can think what you want but it just shows your ignorance towards what really goes on there. Have you been there? Have you gone through the checkpoints? ever been shot at just because you speak Hebrew? Do you know the brutuality the Arabs put the Jews through on a daily basis? Im guessing not.
Clever, saying exactly what I said, just with less accuracy, clever. :rolleyes: there are no Arab checkpoints for jews and how much brutuality can you do with rocks and few Ak's? A lot less then if you had tanks, choppers, M-16s and the rest of the god damn US army behind you. Go live in Rammallah for just two weeks and then come talk to me

This is simply a case of the stronger culture winning.

That is to say, genocide and ethnic cleansing, along the typical lines of ancient warfare.

Or Israel could just get annihilated. Problem solved.
It’s time to abort that retarded fetus of a country.

No, its not a problem solved. What about the arabs/muslims that are causing so many problems in Europe?

Its not the Jews that are rioting/living off welfare/chanting death to freedom and the West, its the arabs.

Killing Israel, not that you could, would only make things worse. As Israel is the only country left who does give a fuck what people think about it so it can actually get things done.

That is to say, genocide and ethnic cleansing, along the typical lines of ancient warfare.
Yeah, so whats your point?

Or Israel could just get annihilated. Problem solved.
It’s time to abort that retarded fetus of a country.
Thats actually a really good idea.

That is to say, genocide and ethnic cleansing, along the typical lines of ancient warfare.

No, not at all actually.

The Hebrews warred with the Canaanites, killing many, but most of the Canaanites simply just adopted the Hebrew culture and integrated.

Clever, saying exactly what I said, just with less accuracy, clever. :rolleyes: there are no Arab checkpoints for jews and how much brutuality can you do with rocks and few Ak's? A lot less then if you had tanks, choppers, M-16s and the rest of the god damn US army behind you. Go live in Rammallah for just two weeks and then come talk to me

And what do you think the A-rabs would do if they had weapons like Israel had?

I have an idea, why dont you go live in the Twin Towers for a week, oh...wait :eek:

I think that's one of the unique things about Jews. The two are indeed tied together; all people of the Jewish religion share a degree of ethinic culture in common, because the bulk of ethnic Jewish culture is derived from the religion.

Its not really related though. It just seems like it cuz theres so few Jews and so few different sects of Judaism.

Some of the Caininites were slaughtered but the rest were all adopted into the Hebrew /tribe/culture/state.

This is simply a case of the stronger culture winning. Details, Details if it gets me a nice villa on the Med. and solves the Isreal-Palistine debate, I will reclaim my Caininite heritage.

No, not at all actually.

The Hebrews warred with the Canaanites, killing many, but most of the Canaanites simply just adopted the Hebrew culture and integrated.

Some did, yes. The figure referred to in Jewish myth as "Joshua" may have been a convert; Uriah the Hittite certainly was.

But it simply cannot be denied that what the Hebrews did when they invaded Canaan involved, according to the Bible, mass slaughter - and mass slaughter by decree of God, no less.

Clever, saying exactly what I said, just with less accuracy, clever. :rolleyes: there are no Arab checkpoints for jews and how much brutuality can you do with rocks and few Ak's? A lot less then if you had tanks, choppers, M-16s and the rest of the god damn US army behind you. Go live in Rammallah for just two weeks and then come talk to me
Since you are talking like this I can correctly assume you have, right?

And what do you think the A-rabs would do if they had weapons like Israel had?

End the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza a lot faster, probably; that is, assuming you are talking about the Palestinians, not about the servile imperial stooges ruling many of the Arab countries, who would merely bow with more enthusiasm and use it to more properly repress dissent.

Some did, yes. The figure referred to in Jewish myth as "Joshua" may have been a convert; Uriah the Hittite certainly was.

But it simply cannot be denied that what the Hebrews did when they invaded Canaan involved, according to the Bible, mass slaughter - and mass slaughter by decree of God, no less.
Again I ask, your point?

Some did, yes. The figure referred to in Jewish myth as "Joshua" may have been a convert; Uriah the Hittite certainly was.

But it simply cannot be denied that what the Hebrews did when they invaded Canaan involved, according to the Bible, mass slaughter - and mass slaughter by decree of God, no less.

Yes, I have read what the Bible says, but lets be honest...the Bible was written at a way later date and it tends to greatly exaggerate.

The facts are these.

Hebrews were a warlike race

fought with Canaanites over promised land by God

took over land

Just like with any other war, you do not totally kill every person, you fight and then take over that land.

Its just unrealistic to say otherwise.

And what do you think the A-rabs would do if they had weapons like Israel had?

There are many quotes that accuratley back this up. I think I shall list some.
"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." (by Abdul Rahman Hassan Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League, in anticipation of victory over the new Jewish state)

"I declare a holy war, my Muslim brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!" (Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, and head of the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee)

They pretty much prove the Arabs were more interested in murdering Jews than regaining their territory.

Details, Details if it gets me a nice villa on the Med. and solves the Isreal-Palistine debate, I will reclaim my Caininite heritage.

Well your canaanite "heritage" is either Jewish-arab or muslim-arab now as there are no more canaanites and no more canaan.

Again I ask, your point?

Chiefly, that to the extent that private ownership of land has legitimacy at all, a contention I deny, it belongs to the Canaanites, and the Hebrews stole it - with massive brutality and force, too, if you believe the Bible.

Thus, there is no real claim to the land on the part of the Jews, and by the same logic, there is no real claim to the land on the part of the Palestinians.

There are many quotes that accuratley back this up. I think I shall list some.
"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." (by Abdul Rahman Hassan Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League, in anticipation of victory over the new Jewish state)

"I declare a holy war, my Muslim brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!" (Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, and head of the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee)

They pretty much prove the Arabs were more interested in murdering Jews than regaining their territory.

Yes, but wait, theres more!

Look up quotes from the President of Iran and the former PLO leader Arafat to see what kind things they have to say about Israel.

Animals, all of them.

Chiefly, that to the extent that private ownership of land has legitimacy at all, a contention I deny, it belongs to the Canaanites, and the Hebrews stole it - with massive brutality and force, too, if you believe the Bible.

Thus, there is no real claim to the land on the part of the Jews, and by the same logic, there is no real claim to the land on the part of the Palestinians.

There are no more canaanites those people are either dead, Jewish, or Muslim.

Historically, the area now occupied by the State of Israel was the location of a Jewish state long before it was ever a Palestinian state. The Diaspora ultimately scattered the Jewish people all over the Middle East, Russia and Europe. What are now referred to as Palestinians moved into the land formerly occupied by the Jews.

For centuries the persecuted Jews of the Diaspora maintained the dream of returning to the lands they formerly held. The phrase, "Next year, in Jerusalem" became almost a mantra of the dispossessed Jewish people. Near the end of World War II, thousands of Jews landed on the coast of what is now Israel and fought for several years to establish the State of Israel, largely without help from anyone, save other Jews of the Diaspora.

IMHO, they had the right to re-establish their claim and a right to establish their own State.

Yes, I have read what the Bible says, but lets be honest...the Bible was written at a way later date and it tends to greatly exaggerate.

The facts are these.

Hebrews were a warlike race

fought with Canaanites over promised land by God

took over land

Just like with any other war, you do not totally kill every person, you fight and then take over that land.

Its just unrealistic to say otherwise.

That contradicts absolutely nothing that I said.

Chiefly, that to the extent that private ownership of land has legitimacy at all, a contention I deny, it belongs to the Canaanites, and the Hebrews stole it - with massive brutality and force, too, if you believe the Bible.

Thus, there is no real claim to the land on the part of the Jews, and by the same logic, there is no real claim to the land on the part of the Palestinians.
I can accept that.:)

Historically, the area now occupied by the State of Israel was the location of a Jewish state long before it was ever a Palestinian state. The Diaspora ultimately scattered the Jewish people all over the Middle East, Russia and Europe. What are now referred to as Palestinians moved into the land formerly occupied by the Jews.

For centuries the persecuted Jews of the Diaspora maintained the dream of returning to the lands they formerly held. The phrase, "Next year, in Jerusalem" became almost a mantra of the dispossessed Jewish people. Near the end of World War II, thousands of Jews landed on the coast of what is now Israel and fought for several years to establish the State of Israel, largely without help from anyone, save other Jews of the Diaspora.

IMHO, they had the right to re-establish their claim and a right to establish their own State.

Agreed.

Many Jews think of Israel as their home and somewhere they can always go to should they be persucated in their current country.

I personally dont think this way, as I am an American first and a Jew second...that, plus I've been to Israel and its not my favorite country, but I totally back the idea of Israel.

Not too mention its one kick ass ally and the only one who had the hairy testicles to stand up against arab oppression and aggression.

That contradicts absolutely nothing that I said.

Yes it does, I'm saying it wanst an ethnic cleansing or genocide or anything like you said.

Historically, the area now occupied by the State of Israel was the location of a Jewish state long before it was ever a Palestinian state. The Diaspora ultimately scattered the Jewish people all over the Middle East, Russia and Europe. What are now referred to as Palestinians moved into the land formerly occupied by the Jews.

For centuries the persecuted Jews of the Diaspora maintained the dream of returning to the lands they formerly held. The phrase, "Next year, in Jerusalem" became almost a mantra of the dispossessed Jewish people. Near the end of World War II, thousands of Jews landed on the coast of what is now Israel and fought for several years to establish the State of Israel, largely without help from anyone, save other Jews of the Diaspora.

IMHO, they had the right to re-establish their claim and a right to establish their own State.
Just wanted to add that zionists, the actual zionists not the ones you hear weird conspiracies about, had been settling in the region since at least the turn of the century.

Well your canaanite "heritage" is either Jewish-arab or muslim-arab now as there are no more canaanites and no more canaan.
Meh, there never was a Palistine, and their hasn't been an independent Jewish state in two millinea, the sons of Shem can go squat on someone else's land.

For centuries the persecuted Jews of the Diaspora maintained the dream of returning to the lands they formerly held. The phrase, "Next year, in Jerusalem" became almost a mantra of the dispossessed Jewish people. Near the end of World War II, thousands of Jews landed on the coast of what is now Israel and fought for several years to establish the State of Israel, largely without help from anyone, save other Jews of the Diaspora.

"Next year in Jerusalem" is a Messianic hope, of eventual redemption and return, not a secular one of solely re-establishing a Jewish presence. The Talmud explicitly rejects doing such a thing, in fact; God took it away from us, and we are forbidden to take it back until God changes His mind.

The early Zionist movement got around this by rejecting religion, which was probably the proper course of action, but it does delegitimize the argument that because the Jewish religion has a tie to the land, the Jewish people should be allowed to seize it.

Chiefly, that to the extent that private ownership of land has legitimacy at all, a contention I deny, it belongs to the Canaanites, and the Hebrews stole it - with massive brutality and force, too, if you believe the Bible.

Thus, there is no real claim to the land on the part of the Jews, and by the same logic, there is no real claim to the land on the part of the Palestinians.

If you believe the Bible, then the Hebrews had a far greater right than the Canaanites to the land, being the Chosen People and whatnot. (I'm shaky on my bible, though; did this conquest occur before they received the Commandments?)

Yes it does, I'm saying it wanst an ethnic cleansing or genocide or anything like you said.

Neither requires complete extermination.

If you believe the Bible, then the Hebrews had a far greater right than the Canaanites to the land, being the Chosen People and whatnot. (I'm shaky on my bible, though; did this conquest occur before they received the Commandments?)
Right after if I remember correctly it was the land of milk and honey, which Moses wasn't allowed to enter.

"Next year in Jerusalem" is a Messianic hope, of eventual redemption and return, not a secular one of solely re-establishing a Jewish presence. The Talmud explicitly rejects doing such a thing, in fact; God took it away from us, and we are forbidden to take it back until God changes His mind.

The early Zionist movement got around this by rejecting religion, which was probably the proper course of action, but it does delegitimize the argument that because the Jewish religion has a tie to the land, the Jewish people should be allowed to seize it.
I see it more as a "retaking" rather than a "seizure," but you have a point.

If you believe the Bible, then the Hebrews had a far greater right than the Canaanites to the land, being the Chosen People and whatnot.

Ethnic cleansing does not somehow become "right" simply because God says it is. Even if the Bible is completely true, God's opinion as to what is right and wrong is no more valid than mine.

Meh, there never was a Palistine, and their hasn't been an independent Jewish state in two millinea, the sons of Shem can go squat on someone else's land.

Maybe so, but the fact is...the British did run shit in the middle east, and in doing some decided (U.N.) to give the land to the Jews, the A-rabs couldnt deal with this so they invaded and tried to kill the Jews. The Jews won, end of story. Seems to me they have a right to be there.

Ethnic cleansing does not somehow become "right" simply because God says it is. Even if the Bible is completely true, God's opinion as to what is right and wrong is no more valid than mine.

First of all, it wasnt ethnic cleansing...and it had nothing to do with ethnic cleansing

Second of all, God opinion IS more valid than yours...thats the whole point of God, jesus.

Neither requires complete extermination.

It doesnt matter, it had nothing to do with the people. It was the promised land. The war was for the land, not to eliminate the people. What dont you understand about that?

Maybe so, but the fact is...the British did run shit in the middle east, and in doing some decided (U.N.) to give the land to the Jews, the A-rabs couldnt deal with this so they invaded and tried to kill the Jews. The Jews won, end of story. Seems to me they have a right to be there.

I replied in some detail to this point explicitly in the other thread dealing with this topic; I have received no reply.

I will repost it here:

The Arab intervention against Israel in 1948 was disorganized and half-hearted; Jordan ended up betraying its allies and cooperating with Israel to annihilate the Palestinian state, for example. The reason the Arab nations intervened was due to domestic pressure from the Arab nationalists, chiefly focusing on the plight of the Palestinians - which was very real even before Israel's Declaration of Independence. During the year between the (non-binding) General Assembly resolution to partition Israel and the date at which it was supposed to occur, the Zionist militias were essentially fighting a war against the Palestinian militias, one which, by May 13, 1948, they were very clearly winning. The Israeli Declaration of Independence quite deliberately made no explicit mention of borders, and the stated intention of the Zionist leadership was to use the territory guaranteed under Partition as a basis to seize the rest of Palestine.

I will not claim the Arab intervention to have been justified, it most certainly wasn't, but it also wasn't a barbaric aggressive attack by savage Arabs against an innocent infant state only seeking peace.

The Arab nations and the Palestinian leadership rejected Partition because from their perspective Partition was glaringly unfair. It gave the new immigrants more than half the land, though they were a minority of the population and actually owned only a small fraction of the territory (9% I believe.) It granted official legitimacy to an enterprise they had opposed, for reasons good and bad, from the start.

It doesnt matter, it had nothing to do with the people. It was the promised land. The war was for the land, not to eliminate the people. What dont you understand about that?

It was for conquest, and not conquest in the imperialist sense of just replacing the rulers. The Hebrews intended to take the land and build their own nation upon it, which meant, naturally, getting rid of the indigenous inhabitants, one way or another. And that is what they proceeded to do.

Maybe so, but the fact is...the British did run shit in the middle east, and in doing some decided (U.N.) to give the land to the Jews, the A-rabs couldnt deal with this so they invaded and tried to kill the Jews. The Jews won, end of story. Seems to me they have a right to be there.
It would like be giving all the land US won in the war with Mexico back. We won and it would be a huge mess to do such an absurd thing. As much as hate to bring in this quote, to the victor does go the spoils.

I replied in some detail to this point explicitly in the other thread dealing with this topic; I have received no reply.

I will repost it here:

It was a fair partition plan, I have seen the drawings for it. Its half and half and Jerusalem is the U.N. nuetral zone.

It would like be giving all the land US won in the war with Mexico back. We won and it would be a huge mess to do such an absurd thing. As much as hate to bring in this quote, to the victor does go the spoils.

totally agreed.

Second of all, God opinion IS more valid than yours...thats the whole point of God, jesus.

No, allegedly He's omniscient, so He definitely knows more than me, but His ethical perspective is not worth any more than mine. Why should I pay any attention to it? I have my own views.

It was for conquest, and not conquest in the imperialist sense of just replacing the rulers. The Hebrews intended to take the land and build their own nation upon it, which meant, naturally, getting rid of the indigenous inhabitants, one way or another. And that is what they proceeded to do.

No, the Hebrews would have been fine to just let all of them integrate into Hebrew culture without killing one Canaanite. It had nothing to do with klling them, there for its not genocide or ethnic cleansing.

Would you call the American revolution genocide or ethnic cleansing.

Its the same concept, the Americans saw the land that British had and wanted it for their own. It had nothing to do with the British people.

Ethnic cleansing does not somehow become "right" simply because God says it is. Even if the Bible is completely true, God's opinion as to what is right and wrong is no more valid than mine.

I have to take exception to that. I'm pretty sure the Bible states that God's "opinion" is the final word on anything. Which would make His opinion, should the Bible be true, infinitely more valid than yours, or mine.

No, they got the Commandments while they were still wandering around the Negev (or was it the Sinai?) for 40 years.

As for "Arab brutality," MODERN Arabs do not advocate the death of all Jews, or want to "push the Jews into the sea," that is Israeli propaganda. Even Hamas says that they have no problem with Jews.

“I would fight my own brother if he took over my home. I don’t fight Jews because they are Jews. I fight them because they have stolen and arrogated my land, home and orchards and condemned my people to everlasting misery.” - Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (1937-2004), spiritual leader of Hamas


"The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine, for under the wing of Islam followers of all religions can coexist in security and safety where their lives, possessions and rights are concerned. In the absence of Islam, strife will be rife, oppression spreads, evil prevails and schisms and wars will break out.

How excellent was the Moslem poet, Mohamed Ikbal, when he wrote:

'If faith is lost, there is no security and there is no life for him who does not adhere to religion. He who accepts life without religion, has taken annihilation as his companion for life.'" - Article Six of the Hamas Covenant. Doesn't sound like "pushing the Jews into the sea" now, does it?

It was a fair partition plan, I have seen the drawings for it. Its half and half and Jerusalem is the U.N. nuetral zone.

Yes, I have seen drawings too. The Jews, with a minority of the population and an even smaller minority of land ownership, received a majority of the land. We can argue over whether or not it was justified, but regardless, it doesn't change my basic points:

1. The Zionists were hardly content with that portion, and said as much;
2. Whether or not it was justified, the Arab perspective that it was not is perfectly understandable.

I have to take exception to that. I'm pretty sure the Bible states that God's "opinion" is the final word on anything. Which would make His opinion, should the Bible be true, infinitely more valid than yours, or mine.

God can say He likes red hair, but "final word" or not, that doesn't mean I have to like red hair. Similarly, God can say He likes ethnic cleansing when His Chosen People perform it, but I still don't have to like it.

- Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (1937-2004), spiritual leader of Hamas- Article Six of the Hamas Covenant. Doesn't sound like "pushing the Jews into the sea" now, does it?
However, the Hamas busbombs did. Also, the Palestinians had dozens of homes to choose from, why did they need that space of Jewish land?

No, the Hebrews would have been fine to just let all of them integrate into Hebrew culture without killing one Canaanite.

Outrageous speculative statements like that one are irrelevant. The Canaanites would never have behaved in that manner, and the Hebrews would not have expected them to.

The Canaanite people - I'm lumping together all the indigenous peoples, including those not really Canaanites - owned the land, worked the land, etc. They had their own systems and their own rulers. The Hebrews wanted to build their state on land the Canaanites controlled. The Canaanites were no more eager to go along with this than the current Europeans would be if the immigrant Arabs demanded that they be allowed to turn Europe into an Islamic state based on Sharia, with them having complete control and the right to seize whatever land they choose to.

Yes, but wait, theres more!

Look up quotes from the President of Iran and the former PLO leader Arafat to see what kind things they have to say about Israel.

Animals, all of them.
the only animals are jews, much like rats. But lets not flame

the only animals are jews, much like rats. But lets not flame
This from the man who goes f##k the Jews?

And what do you think the A-rabs would do if they had weapons like Israel had?

I have an idea, why dont you go live in the Twin Towers for a week, oh...wait :eek:
You do realize a main reason the US was attacked was for its unjust support of Israel, making your post ironic at best, uninformed and childish at worst.

Since you are talking like this I can correctly assume you have, right?
right.

the only animals are jews, much like rats. But lets not flame
See shit like this is the whole reason the issue is a problem. If both sides would just stop trying to kill each other and sit down and try and work out a compromise this might not last several hundred years like arab resentment over the crusades.

the only animals are jews, much like rats. But lets not flame

I'm not going to try to dissuade you from your opinions, but could you explain to me why you hate Jews? I'm not even asking to be convinced you have good reasons, and I don't mean that I can't imagine why anyone would hate them. I just want to know what your reasons are.

See shit like this is the whole reason the issue is a problem. If both sides would just stop trying to kill each other and sit down and try and work out a compromise this might not last several hundred years like arab resentment over the crusades.

The whole affair really seems like Crusades: Redux.

On a basic level, it's just another "Chosen People" trying to return to the Holy Land, just like the Franks thought they were back in the 11th century.

No, they got the Commandments while they were still wandering around the Negev (or was it the Sinai?) for 40 years.

As for "Arab brutality," MODERN Arabs do not advocate the death of all Jews, or want to "push the Jews into the sea," that is Israeli propaganda. Even Hamas says that they have no problem with Jews.

“I would fight my own brother if he took over my home. I don’t fight Jews because they are Jews. I fight them because they have stolen and arrogated my land, home and orchards and condemned my people to everlasting misery.” - Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (1937-2004), spiritual leader of Hamas


"The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine, for under the wing of Islam followers of all religions can coexist in security and safety where their lives, possessions and rights are concerned. In the absence of Islam, strife will be rife, oppression spreads, evil prevails and schisms and wars will break out.

How excellent was the Moslem poet, Mohamed Ikbal, when he wrote:

'If faith is lost, there is no security and there is no life for him who does not adhere to religion. He who accepts life without religion, has taken annihilation as his companion for life.'" - Article Six of the Hamas Covenant. Doesn't sound like "pushing the Jews into the sea" now, does it?

Wow, I can post quotes too.

Heres a "modern" man whos job it was to speak on behalf of the "modern" arabs. Heres the "modern" statement he gave, "We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. . . . We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO (in front of an Arab audience in Stockholm in 1996)

Heres one of my favorites.

The Palestinian flag "will fly over the walls of Jerusalem, the churches of Jerusalem and the mosques of Jerusalem." -- Yasser Arafat, Former Chairman of the PLO (Jordanian TV, 13 September 1993)

Notice...no Temples..wonder why???:eek:

However, the Hamas busbombs did. Also, the Palestinians had dozens of homes to choose from, why did they need that space of Jewish land?

What "dozens of homes"?

You do realize a main reason the US was attacked was for its unjust support of Israel, making your post ironic at best, uninformed and childish at worst.

And your response to those dooches would be to surrender to them?

No, they got the Commandments while they were still wandering around the Negev (or was it the Sinai?) for 40 years.

As for "Arab brutality," MODERN Arabs do not advocate the death of all Jews, or want to "push the Jews into the sea," that is Israeli propaganda. Even Hamas says that they have no problem with Jews.

“I would fight my own brother if he took over my home. I don’t fight Jews because they are Jews. I fight them because they have stolen and arrogated my land, home and orchards and condemned my people to everlasting misery.” - Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (1937-2004), spiritual leader of Hamas


"The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine, for under the wing of Islam followers of all religions can coexist in security and safety where their lives, possessions and rights are concerned. In the absence of Islam, strife will be rife, oppression spreads, evil prevails and schisms and wars will break out.

How excellent was the Moslem poet, Mohamed Ikbal, when he wrote:

'If faith is lost, there is no security and there is no life for him who does not adhere to religion. He who accepts life without religion, has taken annihilation as his companion for life.'" - Article Six of the Hamas Covenant. Doesn't sound like "pushing the Jews into the sea" now, does it?
This is a great post, very true. Allah Akbar

What "dozens of homes"?
All the countries with a state religion of Islam.

The whole affair really seems like Crusades: Redux.

On a basic level, it's just another "Chosen People" trying to return to the Holy Land, just like the Franks thought they were back in the 11th century.
Yeah, so how 'bout this time we try sitting down and work things out instead of beating each other over the head with swords, or AKs as the case maybe.

All the countries with a state religion of Islam.

Muslims aren't all the same. If the Arab immigrants to Europe insisted that the Europeans go to the United States and Latin America, because they were "Christian countries," would you accept that as a legitimate argument?

I'm not going to try to dissuade you from your opinions, but could you explain to me why you hate Jews? I'm not even asking to be convinced you have good reasons, and I don't mean that I can't imagine why anyone would hate them. I just want to know what your reasons are.
Its not the fact that they are jews. Its that they do horrible things and just happened to be jews. They disrespect Islam, violate women, bulldoze houses, blow up kids playing in the streets for fun, just to name a few things. And then when people call them on or question what they do, they cry holocaust and whine about how supposedly they are victims.

Muslims aren't all the same. If the Arab immigrants to Europe insisted that the Europeans go to the United States and Latin America, because they were "Christian countries," would you accept that as a legitimate argument?
No, since they would be a minority in that country, while the jews are the majority in Palestine/Israel. Look at it this way, the Arab has a room with 20something chairs to sit in but he will only sit in the one belonging to the Jew, even though the rest would welcome him.

And your response to those dooches would be to surrender to them?
America has to fight the war on terror now. however it would have been avoidable had it not support the occupation forces in Palestine.

Its not the fact that they are jews. Its that they do horrible things and just happened to be jews. They disrespect Islam, violate women, bulldoze houses, blow up kids playing in the streets for fun, just to name a few things. And then when people call them on or question what they do, they cry holocaust and whine about how supposedly they are victims.
If by kids playing you mean kids rioting, attacking Isreal police, and destroying Jewish settlements you are right. If by disrespecting Islam you mean having an aversion to people who outright have made speeches about how they want to nuke your country, murder all your inhabitants, and destroy your holy sites you would be right. And if by bulldozing houses you mean force refugees who have lost a war where four nations have fought against you then I guess you would be correct.

Its not the fact that they are jews. Its that they do horrible things and just happened to be jews. They disrespect Islam, violate women, bulldoze houses, blow up kids playing in the streets for fun, just to name a few things. And then when people call them on or question what they do, they cry holocaust and whine about how supposedly they are victims.

Funny, I could same muslims do the EXACT same things, do you atleast accept that arabs do these things?

No, since they would be a minority in that country, while the jews are the majority in Palestine/Israel.

They weren't in 1947, and they aren't today if you count the Palestinian refugees.

Look at it this way, the Arab has a room with 20something chairs to sit in but he will only sit in the one belonging to the Jew, even though the rest would welcome him.

They're not "Arabs," they're Palestinian Arabs. They don't want to be forced from their homeland, and your assumption that "the rest would welcome him" has been proven wrong by the experiences of the Palestinian refugees from al-Naqba.

Its not the fact that they are jews. Its that they do horrible things and just happened to be jews. They disrespect Islam, violate women, bulldoze houses, blow up kids playing in the streets for fun, just to name a few things. And then when people call them on or question what they do, they cry holocaust and whine about how supposedly they are victims.

So why do you lump all Jews together as "rats"?

They're not "Arabs," they're Palestinian Arabs. They don't want to be forced from their homeland, and your assumption that "the rest would welcome him" has been proven wrong by the experiences of the Palestinian refugees from al-Naqba.
The 2,540,170 in Jordan proove differently. So do the 694,532 in Lebanon, as well as the 583,827 in Iraq, as well as the 70,215 in Egypt. However, the refugees living in Gaza and the west bank do not equal the refugees living in Jordan alone, therefore they cannot possibly be the majority.

If by kids playing you mean kids rioting, attacking Isreal police, and destroying Jewish settlements you are right. If by disrespecting Islam you mean having an aversion to people who outright have made speeches about how they want to nuke your country, murder all your inhabitants, and destroy your holy sites you would be right. And if by bulldozing houses you mean force refugees who have lost a war where four nations have fought against you then I guess you would be correct.
Jesus Christ, when you say rioting, attacking police you mean throwing rocks at the bad people who dont let them play outside. And I do mean kids playing soccer and like and then an Israeli tank rolling up and blowing the kid apart. And dont you dare say it doesnt happen because I've seen it.

Your country is illegal and I do not recognize it, your people are brutual foreign invaders, and your holy sites are bs.

Those people aren't refugees, they have lived there for centuries. The occupation forces force them to be "refugees" on their own land.

Jesus Christ, when you say rioting, attacking police you mean throwing rocks at the bad people who dont let them play outside. And I do mean kids playing soccer and like and then an Israeli tank rolling up and blowing the kid apart. And dont you dare say it doesnt happen because I've seen it.

Your country is illegal and I do not recognize it, your people are brutual foreign invaders, and your holy sites are bs.

Those people aren't refugees, they have lived there for centuries. The occupation forces force them to be "refugees" on their own land.
Im Catholic, btw.

So why do you lump all Jews together as "rats"?
I was refering to the ones who do or support the things mention. A rational person with feelings or emotion could not do such things, so they must be rats.

The 2,540,170 in Jordan proove differently. So do the 694,532 in Lebanon, as well as the 583,827 in Iraq, as well as the 70,215 in Egypt. However, the refugees living in Gaza and the west bank do not equal the refugees living in Jordan alone, therefore they cannot possibly be the majority.

Oh, right, and they've been graciously welcomed into those countries, have they? :rolleyes:

The Arab countries have double-crossed the Palestinians repeatedly, they're little more than a pawn to the thugs and stooges who run the show.

Im Catholic, btw.
congrats:confused:

Jesus Christ, when you say rioting, attacking police you mean throwing rocks at the bad people who dont let them play outside. And I do mean kids playing soccer and like and then an Israeli tank rolling up and blowing the kid apart. And dont you dare say it doesnt happen because I've seen it.

Your country is illegal and I do not recognize it, your people are brutual foreign invaders, and your holy sites are bs.

Those people aren't refugees, they have lived there for centuries. The occupation forces force them to be "refugees" on their own land.
And Palestineans blow up buses and cofee shop, and round and round it goes. Where it stops everyone knows, blood and tears, and body bits as I kill you and you kill I.

Oh, right, and they've been graciously welcomed into those countries, have they? :rolleyes:

The Arab countries have double-crossed the Palestinians repeatedly, they're little more than a pawn to the thugs and stooges who run the show.
They hardly crossed them when they went to war in their name.

congrats:confused:
you were refering to them as "my people"

And Palestineans blow up buses and cofee shop, and round and round it goes. Where it stops everyone knows, blood and tears, and body bits as I kill you and you kill I.
When Palestinians do those things its out of frustration. What else can they do? It will stop when the occupation forces leave Palestinian land. I promise you it will stop then. Until then, there will be violence and there will be death.

When Palestinians do those things its out of frustration. What else can they do? It will stop when the occupation forces leave Palestinian land. I promise you it will stop then. Until then, there will be violence and there will be death.
And as long as they do those things the Israelies will respond in kind and there will be death. Though I must ask why it is alright for fustrated Palestinians to target non military personal, but wrong for the Israelies, is it less fustrarting for an Israeli parent to see their child blown up in a sucide bombing than it is for a Palestinian to see their's killed by a tank?

you were refering to them as "my people"
sorry, I assumed. never mind

And as long as they do those things the Israelies will respond in kind and there will be death.
I know, I meant violence and death on both sides. I would also just add that often when one becomes a martyr its in response to Israeli action not the other way around like the western media claims.

I know, I meant violence and death on both sides. I would also just add that often when one becomes a martyr its in response to Israeli action not the other way around like the western media claims.
Thats true and its why the issue won't be resolved until both sides are willing to talk about it or one side is erradicated, and quite frankly Israel would have a beter chance of pulling that off.

They hardly crossed them when they went to war in their name.

Half-heartedly, and in the case of Jordan, there was an explicit betrayal.

I have not read all of this thread.


I would like to say to the OP that the attitude behind most of the most of the posts, and to a degree in your post as well, is horrifyingly paternalistic an totally artificial.
Israel was not a mistake that "western powers" allowed to happen. It was an organic creation of Jews living on the land that demanded, worked, and died for a state of their own. If you could go back and tell THOSE brave people that their dream was a "mistake" you would be laughed out of countenance.

Who is this question adressed to anyway? It all depends on perspective. Israel is not a mistake for the millions of Jews who found sanctuary there. It is also a cause of alot of conflict and injustice to others. As outsiders, historisized speculation upon its justification for existance is both entirely presumtuptous, sickeningly paternalistic, and irrelevant.

I'm feeling rather snarky after reading all the posts so far, and I can't help but feel that the majority of posters here are all hoping for the Kahanist Double Wet Dream of Greater Israel and Palestinian Extinction.

The premise that other powers (UN, US, UK, European countries) had a larger role in the creation of Israel than the Jewish people itself, is in itself a false premise.

All this "we were right in creating Israel" or "we were wrong in creating Israel" talk is a reflection of the postor's self agenda because of the said false premise.

The premise that other powers (UN, US, UK, European countries) had a larger role in the creation of Israel than the Jewish people itself, is in itself a false premise.

All this "we were right in creating Israel" or "we were wrong in creating Israel" talk is a reflection of the postor's self agenda because of the said false premise.

I find this a laugh riot coming from someone who probably thinks the Partitioning was one of the world's greatest mistakes.

*considers posting....decides not to...since the quote should be enough*

and I can't help but feel that the majority of posters here are all hoping for the Kahanist Double Wet Dream of Greater Israel and Palestinian Extinction.

*considers posting....decides not to...since the quote should be enough*

*Shrugs* Just my snarky opinion, nothing more. Is this supposed to put a dent on my perspective somehow? And how convenient putting just what you think is supposed to "discredit" me.

:rolleyes:

I'm feeling rather snarky after reading all the posts so far, and I can't help but feel that the majority of posters here are all hoping for the Kahanist Double Wet Dream of Greater Israel and Palestinian Extinction.

Um, not exactly. Hundreds of thousands were deliberately expelled by Israel; hundreds of thousands of others left to escape the war. Neither of those can fairly be considered to be "of their own free will."

They left because they expected the Arab nations to win the war. At the time they had reason to be optimistic. Six nations against one. For a religion that prides a battle fought at extremely infavourable odds but being won as a sign of God's support, you would think the Muslims would have accepted the loss gracieously.

[x] No, the Jews need a homeland to avoid persecution

It was certainly the best thing to do. It's very sad to see that even still today there are a lot of anti-semitic sentiments :rolleyes:

You know I thought it was the British that ruled Palestine and gave part to the Jews, Israel, and the Palestinian's, which they lost when they invaded Israel. I was also under the impresion that there had been zionist's living in the region from at least the turn of the century. Frankly though I don't really see how it matters at this point in time they are their now and have been for a good fifty years and they aren't going to just up a give all Israel to the Palestinians. Perhaps they should, but I can see why they are a bit unwilling, honestly the whole thing is a mess that isn't going to be resolved until both sides are willing to compromise a little.

Technically, The British didn't create Isreal, Britain had a mandate over Palestine because the kicked the ottomans out (as they did in Iraq and Iran and France did in Syria and Lebenon), and in the begining palestinian Jews, Christians and Muslims got on with life, then they worked together to expell the British, finally the Zionists, proped up by masive migration from Europe, hijacked the process and created Iseral and expelled the other two faiths. The US, in its' anti-empire stage bullied Britain to leave - which it probably whould have done anyway because of Zionist terrorism (e.g. bombing of the King David Hotel).

Those people aren't refugees, they have lived there for centuries. The occupation forces force them to be "refugees" on their own land.

The Jews have lived there for far, far longer. And the areas that the Jews wanted to create as Israel were much smaller than what Israel is now. But the Jews were happy to accept that.


MYTH

The Jews have no claim to the land they call Israel

FACT
A common misperception is that all the Jews were forced into the Diaspora by the Romans after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70 C.E. and then, 1,800 years later, suddenly returned to Palestine demanding their country back. In reality, the Jewish people have maintained ties to their historic homeland for more than 3,700 years.

The Jewish people base their claim to the Land of Israel on at least four premises: 1) the Jewish people settled and developed the land; 2) the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people; 3) the territory was captured in defensive wars and 4) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham.

Even after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and the beginning of the exile, Jewish life in the Land of Israel continued and often flourished. Large communities were reestablished in Jerusalem and Tiberias by the ninth century. In the 11th century, Jewish communities grew in Rafah, Gaza, Ashkelon, Jaffa and Caesarea.

The Crusaders massacred many Jews during the 12th century, but the community rebounded in the next two centuries as large numbers of rabbis and Jewish pilgrims immigrated to Jerusalem and the Galilee. Prominent rabbis established communities in Safed, Jerusalem and elsewhere during the next 300 years. By the early 19th century — years before the birth of the modern Zionist movement — more than 10,000 Jews lived throughout what is today Israel.1 The 78 years of nation-building, beginning in 1870, culminated in the reestablishment of the Jewish State.

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.

MYTH

“Palestine was always an Arab country.”

FACT
The term "Palestine" is believed to be derived from the Philistines, an Aegean people who, in the 12th Century B.C.E., settled along the Mediterranean coastal plain of what are now Israel and the Gaza Strip. In the second century C.E., after crushing the last Jewish revolt, the Romans first applied the name Palaestina to Judea (the southern portion of what is now called the West Bank) in an attempt to minimize Jewish identification with the land of Israel. The Arabic word "Filastin" is derived from this Latin name.3

The Hebrews entered the Land of Israel about 1300 B.C.E., living under a tribal confederation until being united under the first monarch, King Saul. The second king, David, established Jerusalem as the capital around 1000 B.C.E. David's son, Solomon built the Temple soon thereafter and consolidated the military, administrative and religious functions of the kingdom. The nation was divided under Solomon's son, with the northern kingdom (Israel) lasting until 722 B.C.E., when the Assyrians destroyed it, and the southern kingdom (Judah) surviving until the Babylonian conquest in 586 B.C.E. The Jewish people enjoyed brief periods of sovereignty afterward before most Jews were finally driven from their homeland in 135 C.E.

Jewish independence in the Land of Israel lasted for more than 400 years. This is much longer than Americans have enjoyed independence in what has become known as the United States.4 In fact, if not for foreign conquerors, Israel would be 3,000 years old today.

Palestine was never an exclusively Arab country, although Arabic gradually became the language of most the population after the Muslim invasions of the seventh century. No independent Arab or Palestinian state ever existed in Palestine. When the distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testified against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said: "There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not."5

Prior to partition, Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity. When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, the following resolution was adopted:

We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds.6

In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: "There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria."7

The representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the United Nations submitted a statement to the General Assembly in May 1947 that said "Palestine was part of the Province of Syria" and that, "politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity." A few years later, Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, told the Security Council: "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria."8

Palestinian Arab nationalism is largely a post-World War I phenomenon that did not become a significant political movement until after the 1967 Six-Day War and Israel's capture of the West Bank.

Is not the real question this:
Is the creation of Israel symptomatic of both the post war weakness of the European powers and attempt by both America and Russia to speed up the process?

*Shrugs* Just my snarky opinion, nothing more. Is this supposed to put a dent on my perspective somehow? And how convenient putting just what you think is supposed to "discredit" me.

:rolleyes:I thought Aryavartha was agreeing with you... not the other way round.

The state of Isreal was created by several factors.

1. The influx of Jews into the region caused by migration away from Europe starting in 1881 and later, Nazi Germany.
2. The failure of the British to uphold the Palestinian mandate in 1922, partially because of WW2
3. The increased militancy of Jews before 1948, with some groups choosing to fight the British rather than Palestinians*

* indeed, some groups (such as Lehi) in Israel are known to have contacted Nazi Germany with a view towards forming an alliance against the British in exchange for a Jewish state.

With violence from Palestinians towards the arriving Jews, it fell to Jews to defend themselves. with apparently no support from the British Mandate authorities, the Jewish community realized it would have to rely on itself for self-defense.

As a result of the 1921 Arab attacks, the Haganah was formed to protect Jewish settlements. The Haganah was mostly defensive in nature, which among other things caused several members to split off and form the Irgun in 1931. The Irgun adhered to a much more active approach, both in retaliation to attacks and initiation of armed actions against the British, while the Haganah often prefered restraint. A more aggressive group was later created, Lehi, which unlike the Irgun refused any co-operation with the British, even during World War II, and was much more extreme in its methods, adopting terrorist and guerrilla tactics used by the IRA to good effect. Instead of targeting Palestinians, they targeted the British.

In 1947, following increasing levels of violence by Jewish militant groups together with unsuccessful efforts to reconcile the Jewish and Arab populations, the British government decided to withdraw from the Palestine Mandate. The United Nations created the state of Isreal, which was rejected by the Arab world, and led to conflict.

From a British perspective, they had an empire to defend, and Isreal/Palestine was not within that empire. Faced with the conflict in Europe, Britain was stretched thin. Isreal was simply not a priority for the British considering their other concerns.

I feel that restoring the Jewish nation to a state is a good idea, but not in palestien. I'm sure the people of Ohio would be kind enough to sell their land collectivley....

Something I'm surprised about is that no one has brought up the topic of oil.

By the end of WWII it was known that the center of world oil production would shift from the US/Caribbean region to the Middle East/Perian Gulf. Saudi Arabia alone was known to have 2 billion barrels of proven reserves, 5 billion barrels of probable reserves, and 20 billion barrels of possible reserves.

I won't say that geopolitical resource competition was the primary motive behind the West's support of a Jewish state (and ally) in Palestine, but at the same time... it's hard to ignore all that oil.

You know, The Professor has lent me his "What If" machine.. Let's see what would have happened if Israel hadn't been created!

Maybe so, but the fact is...the British did run shit in the middle east, and in doing some decided (U.N.) to give the land to the Jews, the A-rabs couldnt deal with this so they invaded and tried to kill the Jews. The Jews won, end of story. Seems to me they have a right to be there.
That's ultimately what right boils down to; who (or what) ever can rally the most military or political force.

In the mean time... I want my homeland back (and a nice villa on the med.) :D

Time for an independant and free Cain!

I feel that restoring the Jewish nation to a state is a good idea, but not in palestien. I'm sure the people of Ohio would be kind enough to sell their land collectivley....

And how would having a palestinian presence in Ohio help us politically?

I think ultimately creating Israel was a good political move, in terms of giving "us" a presence in the area.

But I also think that the support it got was from some whacked-out Christian pre-mil hope that putting Israel back in its geographical location would somehow help God along in his grand scheme for ending the world. Or some such bunk. And how could 144 thousand jews be converted if there was no Israel, right? And whatever other idiocy they believed. Or not, but I think morally, it was a dreadful thing to do.

Add those two together, and moral trumps political, so I think the creation of Israel at the expense of the people already living there, just to further a political agenda was dreadful, and I think we've facilitated a never-ending war in the region. Not that it was so peaceful before, but we just HAD to help it along, didn't we?

You know, The Professor has lent me his "What If" machine.. Let's see what would have happened if Israel hadn't been created!
Does it work on foodstuffs as well? I had a bit of a dicky tummy on Tuesday, and I'd like to know whether the curry or beer was to blame.

I don't think the US had a right to take Palestinian land and give it to the Jews. But on the other hand, it really was inevitable that they would get Isreale, or at least Jerusalem back. Some superpower would at least give them the city to make up for all the horrors done to them during the Holocaust. It just ended up being the US,and now the entire Arab world hate them. Not that i'm complaining...

nice bigoted attitude you have there....you hate americans..how peechy,guess it is hippy sheik to hate a whole country,no matter all the good we have done in the world.
not that i would bother trying to point out that the us has contributed so much aid to starving countries,rebuilt europe and japan after the war(when before in history has a conquering country forgave atrocities commited against it's citizens,and rebuilt the defeated...not took the spoils of war as all conquering countries before had)
i would just being pissing in the wind....cause open minded people like you...snear down your noses at us,while proclaiming how worldly and sophisticated and open minded you are....then in the same breath...hate an entire country for the actions of a few.

it is akin to me saying,i hate black people cause i was mugged and beaten by one,and rightfully,people would jump all over me...but you enlightened few..do the same,but it is ok i suppose..what a fucking pathetic joke you are..led by the nose stupid liberal bigot.

and to the statement about the us giving israel the land,correct me if i am wrong,was not the brits and french heavily involved in all this..seeing how they were the colonialists of the time!
but put it on the u.s.!!!!
your a twit...sorry,but i am sick of people hating the u.s. just because it is politically correct and hip to do so.

people like you make me want to be an isolationist...tsunami....bummer..famine...bummer,floods and disasters..dont come knocking.
you want to trade...great,anything else..screw off and deal with your problems,dont ask me for shit...ok...works for me,save me a boatload of taxes not helping the world,most of which problems can be traced to british and french colonialism.
not america.

rant off.

if i misinterpeted your post,i apologise,but i doubt it.
if i did not...go back to the cafe,put on your stupid beret and continue to bitch,while we try to help people(americans that is..not our gov)
smirking your way thru life feeling superiour is proof that you are a weak coward,and insecure,and probably hate the u.s. cause your jealous...sad::mad:

The Jews were kicked out of that region for being agitators and for annoying the Romans. I believe that by leaving the region the Jews agreed to a treaty with the Romans that, in exchange for not being totally wiped out, they would disperse and leave palestine. The creation of Israel is clearly a violation of that treaty with Rome.

But aside from that, the government of Israel's crimes against the Palestinian people are unforgivable. For example, that 13 year old girl that was shot to death by an Israeli soldier in 2004. (http://www.palestinenet.org/english/archive2006/feb/week3/180206/report3.htm) The soldier emptied 23 rounds into her, even though she was not even remotely a threat to anyone (she was walking back to an area of civilians) The Israeli soldier actually tracked her down and shot her, reporting on his radio that he killed her and would have done the same even if she was a 3 year old.

That soldier was later commended and given an advancement in rank.

Not that they listen to us.

Isreal can exsists just because of thge 6 Day War. And they were led by a pirate!

http://www.jewlicious.com/wp-content/dayan_1.jpg

The holy pirates have blessed them! They can not lose!
Ahh Moshe Dayan. That man is a personal hero of mine.

As for the Arabs. They were offered an amazing deal in 1937 that would result in no loss of land on their part. They refused the Jews the right to use the land they purchased for a state. They instead initiated a Pogrom led by Hitler's friend, the Grand Mufti.

Or Israel could just get annihilated. Problem solved.
It’s time to abort that retarded fetus of a country.

i hope that was sarcasm.

if not...your a rascist bigot.

i got no dog in this fight,either side,but you wont here me calling for the annihilation of anyone.

the arabs have proved just as or worse then the jews when it comes to atrocities and blind hatred..but i think the arabs take the cake with indiscriminate murder of civilians as a tactic,whereas,i think(could be wrong)but i doubt the israilis intentionally target innocents.

dont want to go into the whole..it's the only way they can fight back argument..cause it is bullshit of the first order...YOU DO NOT INTENTIONALLY target women and children,and until they stop doing that,they are shit to me,animals if you will,worthy of no respect or support.

besides,if israel magically dissapeared over night...they would just fight each other,just like no other arab countries took the palistinians in...it is just a means to an end for some countries...cough cough..iran/syria/saudis et al.

i think the sun baked all their freakin brains over there,and they are all borderline insane.:headbang:

GOOD!!! f**K Israel! F**K the illegal occupation. LONG LIVE PALESTINE!
Why don't you just **** yourself?

Something I'm surprised about is that no one has brought up the topic of oil.

By the end of WWII it was known that the center of world oil production would shift from the US/Caribbean region to the Middle East/Perian Gulf. Saudi Arabia alone was known to have 2 billion barrels of proven reserves, 5 billion barrels of probable reserves, and 20 billion barrels of possible reserves.

I won't say that geopolitical resource competition was the primary motive behind the West's support of a Jewish state (and ally) in Palestine, but at the same time... it's hard to ignore all that oil.
You do realize Israel has not a drop of oil, right?

Israel exists. That's a reality. It is a functioning, prosperous country. The Mufti WAS a friend of Hitler, and if he had taken that deal, the Middle East might be radically more peaceful. Both sides are at fault in the conflict. Both have commited crimes. Both peoples deserve peace.
GOOD!!! f**K Israel! F**K the illegal occupation. LONG LIVE PALESTINE!
Way to be balanced. Yep, you're a real crusader for peace. Your views sicken me.

I blame the British...I've been to Israel and Palestine..there both nice people..

If the British hadn't just dumped the Jews in Palestine and said "yeah well...whatever.." The world would have been a lot better.

Soooo I blame the British they put 2 different people on one land and then refused to finish the job by breeding understanding.

And yeah...I feel strongly for both sides...I've been to border areas and watched Israeli and Palestine children play together...

You do realize Israel has not a drop of oil, right?

Israel exists. That's a reality. It is a functioning, prosperous country. The Mufti WAS a friend of Hitler, and if he had taken that deal, the Middle East might be radically more peaceful. Both sides are at fault in the conflict. Both have commited crimes. Both peoples deserve peace.

Way to be balanced. Yep, you're a real crusader for peace. Your views sicken me.

Actually, Israel relies heavily on money given to it by the United States. To date, the US has just handed over about 3 trillion dollars. The US will never get that money back, it is simply gone. Will the US cease to hand over money to Israel? No. Will we ever see that money again? Definately not, unless we take it back by force.

For reference, $3 trillion over 58 years (counting from 1948) is roughly $51.7 billion per year. Israel's yearly budget is $58.04 billion. Israel's GDP is $163.45 billion.

We have given them quite a large chunk of change.

Note that this 3 trillion is just from the US government. Private citizens and corporations hand over much much more.

Alright, but that wasn't relevent to what I said. Israel has no oil, which I thought you said. Prehaps I misinterpreted you...

Alright, but that wasn't relevent to what I said. Israel has no oil, which I thought you said. Prehaps I misinterpreted you...

I never mentioned oil, that was someone else.

If you believe the Bible, then the Hebrews had a far greater right than the Canaanites to the land, being the Chosen People.Just what does it means "The Chosen people" ???

The premise that .. (..UK..) had a larger role in the creation of Israel ... is in itself a false premise.some time ago you told me that Indians and Pakistanis are one race/one people..

So why are you killing each other now? (it is only because you are a bunch of bloodthirsty animals.. or is it more complicated than that?)

it is only because you are a bunch of bloodthirsty animals.. or is it more complicated than that?

No, no, it is very simple like you said. We indeed are bloodthirsty animals. Be very wary. :rolleyes:

You do realize Israel has not a drop of oil, right?

Well, yeah, my point is that by having a permanent ally in an area so close to so much oil, we gain easy military access should we need to stabilize any "situations."

Just what does it means "The Chosen people" ???

The Bible says that the Jews became God's chosen people due to their Covenant to obey His Commandments (the New Testament says that they forfeited that by not recognizing Jesus, but that's another matter).

The Jews have lived there for far, far longer.
For much of the time after the Diaspora, the Jews have lived there as a minority group. When the British government undertook its first census in the Mandate, the Jews only represented 11% of the total population in the area, while the Muslim population represented 78%.

That hardly gives the Jews the right to take the amount of land that they did. Even in 1947 the Jewish population was outnumbered by the Muslim population several times.

I also wonder why the word “eviction” appears in the poll. The Palestinians (understandably) left the area on their own free will.
Hmmm, not exactly. Heard of Deir Yassin? (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_incident) This is fairly representative of the terror tactics used to forceably displace hundreds of thousands of people.

It's understandable that the Jewish people wanted a homeland after the holocaust. However, with so much empty space in parts of the world, that it had to be in such a densely populated area with such easily inflamed sectarian tensions is very unfortunate. But then again, a book written more than 2000 years ago claimed the God-given right to the area, so I guess all can be forgiven :rolleyes:

Interestingly, Stalin tried to set up an alternative Jewish homeland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast). Of course, he put it in the middle of nowhere, where it was no good to anyone, then after a few years purged the leaders. Typical Stalin.

I blame the British...I've been to Israel and Palestine..there both nice people..

If the British hadn't just dumped the Jews in Palestine and said "yeah well...whatever.." The world would have been a lot better.

Soooo I blame the British they put 2 different people on one land and then refused to finish the job by breeding understanding.

And yeah...I feel strongly for both sides...I've been to border areas and watched Israeli and Palestine children play together...
Totally. Just another example of colonial arrogance and stupidity causing ongoing conflicts.

Just a friendly reminder about the word "Palestine". :p

It was a name given to a part of Israel when occupied by the Romans who held the Holy Lands as Byzantium until the Moslem invasion. Moslem control was interrupted by the Crusaders of course and ended in 1918 by "British" crusaders.

No, no, it is very simple like you said. We indeed are bloodthirsty animals... ... Interesting.. I recall you blamed the UK on this one.. Now you say its only because most towel headed brownskins are savages?

its that all there is to it? skin color and head-wear?

dp

Plus FDR blows goats because he totally enlarged our government and made it more socialist than I could ever even have nightmares about, the bastard.
Pointless threadjacking. But maybe you have a point. I supported Bush's invasion of Iraq, which greatly reduced the size and power of the US federal government. :rolleyes:

Invasion of Iraq = socialist. Which is why I support it. Tee hee.

I admit that I say bad shit about arabs, but I would never preach to someone not to be ignorant.
Are you proud to be ignorant?

Just a friendly reminder about the word "Palestine". :p

It was a name given to a part of Israel when occupied by the Romans who held the Holy Lands as Byzantium until the Moslem invasion. Moslem control was interrupted by the Crusaders of course and ended in 1918 by "British" crusaders.But some Jews(and other Zionists) say there is no such a thing as "Palestine".. they say it never has existed.. (and they probably mean to say: they will never let it be..)

For much of the time after the Diaspora, the Jews have lived there as a minority group. When the British government undertook its first census in the Mandate, the Jews only represented 11% of the total population in the area, while the Muslim population represented 78%.

That hardly gives the Jews the right to take the amount of land that they did. Even in 1947 the Jewish population was outnumbered by the Muslim population several times.

Incorrect.

In 1947 the population statistics for the region which was given to the Jews was as follows (according to the UN)

538,000 Jews Aprox to 397,000 Arabs

And lets not forget that Hebron was in the Arab sector simply because there was an Arab majority there. But the only Arab majority existed because in 1929 and 36, there were massacres of the Jews who were living there.

But some Jews(and other Zionists) say there is no such a thing as "Palestine".. they say it never has existed.. (and they probably mean to say: they will never let it be..)

Some of the Arabs say that too

"It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria."

"There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria."

"Palestine was part of the Province of Syria...politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity."

"There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not."

We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds

Some of the Arabs say that too

Actually, the trem Palestine is a Roman creation on a par with Caledonia, Hibernia, London and Africa. True, where Palestine is today, was, intermiantly, Jewish, Asyrian, Roman, Persian Ottoman, Crusader and ultimately British territory, but how many nations today are the products of long and complicated, even unjust and bloody histories?

Actually, the trem Palestine is a Roman creation on a par with Caledonia, Hibernia, London and Africa. True, where Palestine is today, was, intermiantly, Jewish, Asyrian, Roman, Persian Ottoman, Crusader and ultimately British territory, but how many nations today are the products of long and complicated, even unjust and bloody histories?

Well the point I was making was that Palistine as an individual nation has never existed. Thats the point. Its like saying Kent as an individual nation has never existed. It has (according to these people) always been part of Syria.

Well the point I was making was that Palistine as an individual nation has never existed. Thats the point. Its like saying Kent as an individual nation has never existed. It has (according to these people) always been part of Syria.

But before the formation of a unified Britain, kent was a seperate nation. The Asyrian Empire includes many places that are not Syrian any more, most notably, Isreal and Lebenon.

This has nothing to do with the holocaust but here is the reality. I am a liberal except when it comes to Israel. Why? Because the liberals seem to care more about the human rights of 250 million Muslims than the rights of 4.8 million Jews who are just trying to get on a bus in the morning before a suicide bomber kills them. No liberal has ever put out a logical response to such an act even though they were often paid for by the Iraqi, Saudi, and now Iranian gov'ts. Any liberal who says the wall is bad for human rights has never been to Israel and had to get on a bus! Destroying the houses isn't as bad as you think considering they have enough money from the Shahid funds to rebuild another.
If the Palestinians would not have passed up the deal at Camp David, granted it was not a perfect deal, they would have a state and their people could live with greater freedom than they have. However, they turned the PA turned it down so Palestinians could live in abject poverty while the PA can live well off while bemoaning the horrid treatment they get from the zionist oppressor.
Liberals have gone off the reservation when it comes to human rights and the Israeli Palestinian issue. We shouldn't be asking whether Israel has the right to exist because it does. The people who are asking these questions should be asking "do I really care about human rights" or is this closeted anti-semitism? If you can tell me about the human rights situation in Chechnya and the parties involved, Iran, Saudi Arabia , China, etc.. I will believe you may care about human rights but I doubt you can.

some time ago you told me that Indians and Pakistanis are one race/one people..

So why are you killing each other now? (it is only because you are a bunch of bloodthirsty animals.. or is it more complicated than that?)
India and Pakistan are closer to peace then ever before.