NationStates Jolt Archive

Lahoud has been unpopular for a long time.



Popular or not he is still the head of their government.

How can Israel take over Palestinian terrotory that wan´t on the 1948 map? They of anyone should know how it is to be occupied...As for the history lesson, I bet that the Palestinians have a different version...

Popular or not he is still the head of their government.
One of two. The PM is arguably more powerful now-a-days, especially after the Cedar revolution.

I don't agree with this opinion. I find something interessant. When Israel was founded in 1948, the first attack was arabic. I mean, since the beginning of his history the Jewish State was in war. And why? Because many occidental states didn't took their responsability. For example : United States promised a land to the Palestinian and didn't give it. And when we heard that, for many muslims states, the minimum they could accept is the destruction of Israel, it gives to think. But I find that Israel is not very correct with Palestinian population. They are so scared by the idea of a new Holocaust, that they forget Palestinian basic rights and it isn't a solution.

the 1948 UN resolution called for two states, Israel and Palestine.

Israel accepted, the Palestinians rejected. You fail at history.

retard...the map that the rest of the world wanted in 1948 is the same as now then? you bastard...

How can Israel take over Palestinian terrotory that wan´t on the 1948 map? They of anyone should know how it is to be occupied...As for the history lesson, I bet that the Palestinians have a different version...
Israel refers to it as the occupied territories. If you want to be pedantic you could argue that it belonged to a different Arab country who has now ceded their rights in favour of the palestinians. It all comes out as the same thing.

And how was Lebanon supposed to do that? Hezbollah by itself could put up a very even fight with the Lebanese military, which is in no way a major fighting force.(I have family who are members of the Lebanese armed forces) and that is assuming the Syrian's, who happen to basically control Lebanon, and who just happen to be one of Hezbollahs prinicpal backers and allies wouldn't get involved, which they would. Lebanon can not do shit on its own about Hezbollah, and asking Lebanon to do so is asking us to commit suicide.

It didn't have to control it with its military. A simple anti-terrorism task force would do. They could also have called for assistance from other countries. (It seems pretty clear to me that Israel would have responded to that call if Lebanon was willing. (They could also have asked for U.N. peacekeepers or small amounts of United States troops (They could have cited the hypocracy of the United States declaring its commitment against terrorism, but sending them any troops.).)) They could essentially say, "If you have a problem with what's going on in the South, then you deal with it.

By the way, sorry for the intermittant responses; my computer has been having some trouble.

You're right, I'm not a specialist of the story of Israel. But the war of 1948 started with an arabic attack. So, wich sort of reaction should have Israel? But I agree with you, Israel accepted the motion and Palestinian not. It's a good illustration of the position of this people. And now? Israel abandon Gaza and Palestinian want more. So, sincerly, what should Israel do?

And just as many fought against him. Come on, you can't play the game of slandering an entire side with the same color of paint.
Actually, I meant the leaders.

It didn't have to control it with its military. A simple anti-terrorism task force would do. They could also have called for assistance from other countries. (It seems pretty clear to me that Israel would have responded to that call if Lebanon was willing. (They could also have asked for U.N. peacekeepers or small amounts of United States troops (They could have cited the hypocracy of the United States declaring its commitment against terrorism, but sending them any troops.).)) They could essentially say, "If you have a problem with what's going on in the South, then you deal with it.

By the way, sorry for the intermittant responses; my computer has been having some trouble.
Uhh...UNFIL. It's been there with the consent of the Lebanese for the last few years.



UNIFIL was created in 1978 to confirm Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, restore the international peace and security, and help the Lebanese Government restore its effective authority in the area.

Uhh...UNFIL. It's been there with the consent of the Lebanese for the last few years.



UNIFIL was created in 1978 to confirm Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, restore the international peace and security, and help the Lebanese Government restore its effective authority in the area.

If so, it hasn't been allowed to do much.


I have to go; my computer is being rediculous.

If so, it hasn't been allowed to do much.


I have to go; my computer is being rediculous.
UN peacekeepers are mostly limited to filing complaints. Both sides hold them in contempt, and Israel violates the ceasefire more then Hezbollah does.

They were on the chopping block, if not being exterminated. Saying that the Arabs egged on hitler is asanine as they would be writing their own death warrant.
They didn't know they were on the chopping block. You can't deny the historical fact that the Arabs were proud collaborators of Hitler.

They didn't know they were on the chopping block. You can't deny the historical fact that the Arabs were proud collaborators of Hitler.
Oh for fucks sake...

Yep. Wild exagaration of his importance to get a dig in at the palestinians.


Prove it. Himmler's own top aide proved my point correct. They never captured him so he was never tried for his war crimes. They wanted to get him at Nurenburg though.


Neither here nor there what they would have got. What I'm talking about is what happened. The point is the Palestinians plight is their own fault. (and partially the fault of their Arab neighbors.)




Really? So they knew in 1915 (when they started negotiations) that the British and allies were going to win....despite the defeat of the allies at Gallipoli...are they any good at giving out results for horses as well? By the time they signed on, it was innevitable that the Ottomans wouldn't survive the war.



I suggest you read the report.
Funny, the Mufti's own rhetoric proves you wrong.


So he knew the British would slow down (not end) immigration in advance....One wonders why he didnt use his powers of forsight to better ends......
He didn't know for sure, but it was worth a try. If he failed, it wouldn't matter to him as he would still get to kill Jews as he did in the 20s and early 30s.



Whether you agree or not, or I vanish off the face of the earth or not, what happened happened. And no, it was not only "those who attacked the Jews". Ben Gurion offered an olive branch. Some communities accepted it. They weren't touched. Their decendents are the "Israeli Arabs." Those who didn't accept it lost their land. Most left at the request of Arab leaders though expecting to return in 2 months.




"1998: Letter of Assurance from PNA Chairman Yasser Arafat - In 1998, PLO Chairman Arafat issued a letter assuring the US that provisions of the PLO charter regarding destruction of Israel were null and void, and specified which provisions were nullified. "
Arafat said one thing and did another. This is quite typical of him. The fact is that official PA printed maps don't have Israel on them. If this were true, then they would've repealed the provisions.

Prove it. Himmler's own top aide proved my point correct. They never captured him so he was never tried for his war crimes. They wanted to get him at Nurenburg though.
Not so. Firstly the aide is hardly reliable since his evidence is shifting blame away from himself and the Nazis. And secondly your point was that the mufti was a major factor in convincing Hitler to authorise the holocaust, which the source doesn't state. It says that he encouraged it after it started, and makes the unsubstantiated claim that the mufti was an initiated, but doesn't state in what way and to what extent.

The contras? What were they? Wasnt that where the US had to use a veto to stop itself being criticised by the UNSC? And how many of the worst death squads in Latin America had leaders trained in Fort Benning?

You defend Ortega????!!!!! That is what they were fighting about. The "terrorists" seem to have been Ortega's troops masquerading as Contras.


You sob's really take the cake. You bitch and moan that we put up with dictators, but curiously when we do something about the worst of them, you accuse us of all sorts of baloney.

Samoza was a monster, no doubt, but Ortega and the Sandanistas were as bad or worse.

http://www.answers.com/topic/fsln-human-rights-abuses

Here is a book that compiles a whole lot of former supporters of the Sandanistas who have had - as the book title says "Second Thoughts"

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0819171484/qid=1022658628/sr=1-46/ref=sr_1_46/104-8745493-4487920?n=283155

The relocation and attempted extermination of the Mosquito Indians left 15,000 of them dead or imprisoned.

Often, the Sandanistas disguised themselves as Contra's and used this cover to exterminate Contra sympathisers. Here is an example:

After pointing out the bullet holes and bayonet marks scattered over the wood plank walls of her house, where many of the victims died, 70-year-old Petrona Alvarez de Gonzalez said the incident began on Oct. 22, 1984, when a group of at least 50 men arrived at her farm and said they were contras and wanted to camp on her land while recruiting.

In fact, as later confirmed by the Sandinista Government, they were members of the Sandinista intelligence police, led by Enrique Schmidt, who held a Cabinet-level post in Managua and had volunteered for an undercover mission to trap contras in this strongly pro-contra region.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r102:E03JA2-137:

Here are some more articles you might find enlightening.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r102:E16JY1-274:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/LatinAmerica/bg277.cfm

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=180

http://www.answers.com/topic/fsln-human-rights-abuses

Not so. Firstly the aide is hardly reliable since his evidence is shifting blame away from himself and the Nazis. And secondly your point was that the mufti was a major factor in convincing Hitler to authorise the holocaust, which the source doesn't state. It says that he encouraged it after it started, and makes the unsubstantiated claim that the mufti was an initiated, but doesn't state in what way and to what extent.
http://keyword.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=mufti+holocaust&page=1&offset=1&result_url=redir%3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26requestId%3Daa9b4c106f7adff2%26clickedItemRank%3D7%26userQuery% 3Dmufti%2Bholocaust%26clickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fnotendur.centrum.is%252F%257Esnorrigb%252F mufti5.htm%26invocationType%3D-%26fromPage%3DnsBrowserRoll%26amp%3BampTest%3D1&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2Fnotendur.centrum.is%2F%7Esnorrigb%2Fmufti5.htm


In June 1944, Dieter Wisliceny, Eichmann's deputy for Slovakia and Hungary, told Dr. Rudolf Kasztner in Budapest that he was convinced that the Mufti had

"played a role in the decision to exterminate the European Jews... The importance of this role must not be disregarded ...The Mufti had repeatedly suggested to the various authorities with whom he was maintaining contact, above all to Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler, the extermination of European Jewry. He considered this as a comfortable solution of the Palestinian problem."

http://keyword.netscape.com/ns/boomframe.jsp?query=mufti+holocaust&page=1&offset=1&result_url=redir%3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26requestId%3Daa9b4c106f7adff2%26clickedItemRank%3D7%26userQuery% 3Dmufti%2Bholocaust%26clickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fnotendur.centrum.is%252F%257Esnorrigb%252F mufti5.htm%26invocationType%3D-%26fromPage%3DnsBrowserRoll%26amp%3BampTest%3D1&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2Fnotendur.centrum.is%2F%7Esnorrigb%2Fmufti5.htm
Still a single source, still with the drawback that he is shifting blame away from himself and the Nazis.
Apart from that even if the source is 100% reliable, then it does not follow that all the arabs/palestinians/anyone other than the mufti/etc were in agreement. And you had anti-semites in the USA for example, so surely the arab countries can be forgiven for also having one?

*Post of complete and utter clarity*

I don't know why people continue to argue when IDF won this debate back at page one.

I don't know why people continue to argue when IDF won this debate back at page one.

Because IDF's post, though extremely pretty, and full of lots of information, was heavily biased, and in many cases wrong.(Though in just as many cases, if not more very right).

Read into it exactly, in detail. I posted a short post earlier pointing out just a few of the things that just happened to be missing from his summary, I can pull that up for you and expand on it.

I am writing this to give people a brief rundown of the history of the conflict. I know this isn't really taught in American schools.
Oh, bullshit. Don't give me that "liberal public schools" shit. They are constantly on about how the Jews "deserve" a state because of the Holocaust.
Jews have continually been living in Israel. Most people have been misled to believe that they all came around the 1930s and 1940s. That is incorrect.
Ever heard of the Zionist movement? It was in the first half of the twentieth century and the late 1800's. Deal with it.
The Jews and Muslims got along during these times. They actually fought side by side against the Crusaders.
So?
There is a well documented that Jews lived in Israel during Ottoman rule. British reports state 15,000 lived in the Safed region alone in the 16th century. Population figures gathered by the British consul in Jerusalem in the 19th century showed that Jews were the majority population in Jerusalem at this time.
Still no where near the modern numbers,
The Jews and Arabs got along for the most part. The exception would be in the 1830s when Egypt occupied the region. The Egyptians passed discriminating laws and encouraged anti-Jewish riots that were quite similar to pogroms.
Yeah, that doesn't take years of resentment.:rolleyes:
The first great Aliyah (immigration) to Israel occured in the 1880s. Most of these Jews were from the Pale of Settlement. They fled to Israel as the Czars had been instigating pogroms against the Jews. Thousands were killed and beaten during this time. The Jews who came to Israel at the time mainly settled up north in the Jezreel Valley near the Sea of Galilee.
Thus the beginning of the notably racist Zionist movement.
Zionism at the time was unorganized. THere was no universal zionist organisation. There was only a small group of Jews who decided Europe was no longer safe for the Jews. In 1897, Theodore Hertzl launched the modern Zionist movement. He predicted it would take 50 years to have an Israeli state. The partition vote came nearly 50 years to the day of his statement.
A sad fiftieth aniversery fo rhuman rights and ethics.
This area was unoccupied by Arabs or anyone else.
Bull fucking shit. No part of the world is uninhabited in such a manner.
The Jews bought the land from absentee Arab land owners who legally controlled the land. No one was displaced by the Jews in these cases.
Except the squaters who had grown used to the absentee ownership and had been living on the land for generations.
The Arabs by contrast were living in squallor as they didn't work to reclaim the swamps of the Jezreel or the eroded Planes of Sharon in central Israel.
Ah, of course they didn't work they land. They're inferior sand monkeys.:rolleyes: Your blatant racism is apaling.
The Arabs benefited from the Jews.
Yeah, the wise Jews could of course run the sand people's lives better than they could.:rolleyes:
The Balfour Declaration called for the Establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.
Yeah, a letter from a Social Darwinist. Teal persuasive stuff there. Something to really be proud of.
The Arabs on the other hand didn't initially side with the Allies. They waited until defeat of the Ottoman Empire was imminent before declaring their support for the Allies. Even after declaring support, they did little to help win the war.
Of course, because once again they're just dirty sand monkeys.
The same Muslims who lived peacefully with the Jews for centuries were easily led by a charismatic cleric.
Oh yeah/ Of course there can't be any other explaination. The Arabs are too simple minded to have any real grievances, you know like theft and slaughter.
In Berlin, the anti-semitic Mufti found many friends. He quickly became friends with Heinrich Himmler and Adolf Eichmann. Al-Husseini joined the Waffen-SS and helped recruit more people to join the SS. He made addresses on Nazi radio spreading lies about the Jews and further indroctrinating the German population with the idea that harming Jews was a noble cause.
Wow, a Godwan already.
While Hitler was still debating how to deal with "the Jewish question," the Mufti was working with Himmler to push Hitler to authorizing the final solution. Many historians question whether the death camps like Aushwitz would've been used had Al-Husseini not tried to convince Hitler to kill all of the Jews. There was even a case where the Mufti intervened to stop Himmler from trading 5,000 Jewish children in exchange for German soldiers who were held as POWs. Most of the children were put to death.
The dirty Arabs are behind the holocaust too, see, see. The Jews have every right to kill women and children in the streets of Beruit.

The rest of your post is just apologetic bullshit for the terrorist actions of Israel in the next decades and trying to say that the holocaust gives them the right to decide which Muslims live and die. Disgusting.

Love how you leave out some very interesting parts of Israeli history, like the Stern Gang and the Irgun. Before Arab terrorists there were Jewish terrorists(Not saying this becuase I'm pro-Arab, cause I'm not, tho nor am I pro_Israeli both are at fault, I'm saying it cause it is an often overlooked fact.) I can pull up plenty of websites if you would like. That was an extremely biased summary, although I do agree with much of it and it was a very nice summary(Proving you do have plenty of knowledge on the subject), still extremely biased.

As for population in the early 1900's, it stood as follows in Palestine:

December 1918:

Muslim Arab: 512,000
Christain Arab: 61,000
Jewish: 66,000

Qouted from the book, Holy War(very good book, lots of info) page 91, written by Karen Armstrong. That is a British census, note this is AFTER teh start of Jewish immigration and Zionism, in 1900 there were MUCH less Jews in Palestine/Israel(though I do not have exact numbers, I'm sure they could be found if you wanted to look hard enough, but honestly I'm to lazy)


As for the rest, hug post, to big to pick apart, just wanted to point out those two things.

That is what I originally posted about IDF's post, though I'll get into more detail for you, it will take some time as I think everyone can agree that was a long detailed post and will take a bit to pick apart.

Still a single source, still with the drawback that he is shifting blame away from himself and the Nazis.
Apart from that even if the source is 100% reliable, then it does not follow that all the arabs/palestinians/anyone other than the mufti/etc were in agreement. And you had anti-semites in the USA for example, so surely the arab countries can be forgiven for also having one?
There are other sources. Please type "mufti" and "holocaust" into yahoo and see what you get. This is the man the Arabs chose and followed as their leader. He was treated like a hero even after the Holocaust. (His role actually made him a greater hero.)

Oh, bullshit. Don't give me that "liberal public schools" shit. They are constantly on about how the Jews "deserve" a state because of the Holocaust.
I wasn't implying that. I was actually trying to state that they don't teach much about Middle Eastern history in public schools. I never implied it was because of a bias. It is rather because the states tend to have loose history requirements in school.

Ever heard of the Zionist movement? It was in the first half of the twentieth century and the late 1800's. Deal with it.
You don't refute my post at all. You just make yourself look like a close minded idiot. Jews have lived uninterupted in Israel since they returned from the Babalonian Exile in 500 BCE. Show me evidence refuting my point about Jerusalem and the Galilee region (Tiberias and Safed mainly)

So?
Trying to show it hasn't always been like this and the force of the Mufti brought on the violence. Are you illiterate?

Still no where near the modern numbers,
Well duh! Populations grow. You would be surprised to see how many people will descend from 15,000 people after 4 centuries.

Yeah, that doesn't take years of resentment.:rolleyes:
Once again you show your lack of knowledge in the region. This is meant to show the first instances of anti-semitism against the Jews in Palestine. Also shows that Jews were in there before the Zionist movement.

Thus the beginning of the notably racist Zionist movement.
You once again show your ignorance. It is obvious you wouldn't mind it if the Jews were stranded in the anti-semitic countries and slaughtered.

A sad fiftieth aniversery fo rhuman rights and ethics. Can you say anything meaningful?

Bull fucking shit. No part of the world is uninhabited in such a manner.
In an era before technology which allowed us to live in inhospitable environments, there were places like that. The Negev was nearly devoid of life. The Jezreel was swamp land that flooded. The Arabs lived in the mountains, not the JEzreel Valley. They avoided it as living there would mean death from Malaria. I point out evidence, you just post an opinion.

Except the squaters who had grown used to the absentee ownership and had been living on the land for generations. The Jews held the legal deed to the land. Many actually stayed to work for the Jews on the Kibbutzim that sprung up.

Ah, of course they didn't work they land. They're inferior sand monkeys.:rolleyes: Your blatant racism is apaling. They didn't work the land as they didn't have the farming methods to do so. The new group of Jews brought European methods and drained swamps and stabalized wind eroded plains to make inhospitable lands able to sustain crops. The fact remains that Israel is by far the most successful nation in the ME in agriculture.

Yeah, the wise Jews could of course run the sand people's lives better than they could.:rolleyes: They benefited as a result of more food and the fact that the Jews opened up shops creating jobs. Man you need to learn logic.

Yeah, a letter from a Social Darwinist. Teal persuasive stuff there. Something to really be proud of.It's a legal document whether you like it or not. The League of Nations ratified it as part of the mandate so it became legally binding. :p

Of course, because once again they're just dirty sand monkeys. No, they're bandwagon jumpers. (sort of like Cub fans in 2003)

Oh yeah/ Of course there can't be any other explaination. The Arabs are too simple minded to have any real grievances, you know like theft and slaughter.
It never happened before the Mufti. The land at that point was purchased and the Jews didn't even have Haganah. You know jack shit about history.

Wow, a Godwan already.The fact is it happened and the Mufti was a driving force. You can't even show evidence to the contrary (then again you didn't do that once so far in any of your points as you are talking out of your ass.)

The dirty Arabs are behind the holocaust too, see, see. The Jews have every right to kill women and children in the streets of Beruit. In fact they were largely responsible for it. They weren't behind it, but they have a large amount of blood on their hands. I didn't mention Beirut once in my OP. I was giving a history of Israel, not the current crisis.

The rest of your post is just apologetic bullshit for the terrorist actions of Israel in the next decades and trying to say that the holocaust gives them the right to decide which Muslims live and die. Disgusting.
Prove it. Israel hasn't started a single war. You really need to stop talking out of your ass and bullshitting.

bombing Palestine and Lebanon into the stone age

After ISRAEL's withdrawl from the Gaza Strip, it descended into the stoneage.

Israel bombed bridges and airports so Hezbollah had no escape. They intend to cripple or destroy Hezbollah.

A 25 page paper on the subject of the Nazi-Arab collaboration. You need Adobe to read it as it is a PDF file.

http://isfsp.org/backgrounder.pdf

The paper's name is "A Backgrounder of the Nazi Activities in North Africa and the Middle East During the Era of the Holocaust".

IDF, you cant be seriously suggesting that arabs had a role in the holocaust.
This is absurd, if the Nazi's ever came to the middle east, they would have persecuted the muslim arabs, why the hell would they assist them.

IDF, you cant be seriously suggesting that arabs had a role in the holocaust.
This is absurd, if the Nazi's ever came to the middle east, they would have persecuted the muslim arabs, why the hell would they assist them.
I have posted evidence time and time again. The fact is the Muslims didn't know that the Nazis would do this to them. Many of them actually joined the SS after being recruited by the Mufti. The majority during this time period were uneducated and would listen to their religious leaders like the Mufti.

Prove it. Israel hasn't started a single war. You really need to stop talking out of your ass and bullshitting.
What? Every single war "against" them was started by their blatant provacation.

Because IDF's post, though extremely pretty, and full of lots of information, was heavily biased, and in many cases wrong.(Though in just as many cases, if not more very right).

Read into it exactly, in detail. I posted a short post earlier pointing out just a few of the things that just happened to be missing from his summary, I can pull that up for you and expand on it.

And someone can call that bias too.

What? Every single war "against" them was started by their blatant provacation.
In the 47-48 war, they were attacked in the Kibbutzim by 6 invading armies with modern weapons. The Jews had offered the olive branch and the Arabs tried to finish the job Hitler started. (They actually had Nazi war criminals in their ranks.)

1956, The Fedayeen ahd been attacking Israel by crossing over from Gaza. Israel attacked to put an end to it.

1967, Egypt blockades the Straights of Tiran and the Arab armies amass on Israel's border. They learn from intel sources that an attack is imminent so they preempt it.

early 70's War of Attrition: Egypt fires on Israeli positions. Both sides end up exchanging fire in several skirmishes.

1973: Syria and Egypt invade with the intent to kill all the Jews on the holiest day for Jews.

1982: Lebanese fire rockets into Israel.

Please stop posting. You haven't mentioned a single fact. You are pulling shit out of your ass.

In the 47-48 war, they were attacked in the Kibbutzim by 6 invading armies with modern weapons. The Jews had offered the olive branch and the Arabs tried to finish the job Hitler started. (They actually had Nazi war criminals in their ranks.)
Godwin. Arabs just want their land back. Any anti-semtitism is due to their expericance with the Zionist opressors.
1956, The Fedayeen ahd been attacking Israel by crossing over from Gaza. Israel attacked to put an end to it.
And like every Israeli response, it was overkill.
1967, Egypt blockades the Straights of Tiran and the Arab armies amass on Israel's border. They learn from intel sources that an attack is imminent so they preempt it.
And thus destroy any hope of diplomacy.
early 70's War of Attrition: Egypt fires on Israeli positions. Both sides end up exchanging fire in several skirmishes.
The Israelis shouldn't have taken Arab land.
1973: Syria and Egypt invade with the intent to kill all the Jews on the holiest day for Jews.
Because the Jews oppressed their brothers and routinly murder Palestinians.
1982: Lebanese fire rockets into Israel.
Due to Israel's crimes against humanity.

Godwin. Arabs just want their land back. Any anti-semtitism is due to their expericance with the Zionist opressors.More talking out of your ass. The Arabs gave refuge to actual Nazi war criminals and made them officers. Stop yelling "Godwin." Usually people are wrong to tie something to the Nazis, but this is the rare case where there is a direct tie. The Arab anti-semitism is the result of their brainwashing from religious leaders. You really aren't just anti-zionist. You are anti-semitic as you believe the Jews deserved to get attacked. Israel was legally given the land by the United Nations when they fulfilled the promise of the Balfour Declaration.

And like every Israeli response, it was overkill. Hundreds of Jews were being killed on Kibbutzim. Israel had no choice but to defend themselves. I hope you don't even run a country. If you did, then I'd know that its citizens along the border will be murdered as you would allow it to happen.

And thus destroy any hope of diplomacy.
There was no chance of diplomacy. The Arabs were plotting a sneak attack to wipe Israel off the map.

The Israelis shouldn't have taken Arab land. They shouldn't have been trying to destroy Israel.

Because the Jews oppressed their brothers and routinly murder Palestinians. The Arabs tried to commit genocide against the Jews. If the Jews really wanted to do it to the Palestinians, then in 48 hours there would be no Palestinian living.

Due to Israel's crimes against humanity.No, there were no crimes. Just self defense.

Because IDF's post, though extremely pretty, and full of lots of information, was heavily biased, and in many cases wrong.(Though in just as many cases, if not more very right).

Read into it exactly, in detail. I posted a short post earlier pointing out just a few of the things that just happened to be missing from his summary, I can pull that up for you and expand on it.


No No you don't get what I mean, I didn't mean that he was correct about it all.
(Don't take that the wrong way, some of those statements I have to have doubts about.)

I just meant that he won, he used a knowledge proffesional post, and half the replies seem like they're made from Grade school dropouts. Just enforcing his thoughts even more.



See post below. And my mocking replies.

Zionist opressors.
We welcome the oppressors!!


And thus destroy any hope of diplomacy..
Which would be like trying to talk down someone with rabies...


'routinly murder Palestinians.
Yeah... Every Jew is a serial killer... Riight...

<snip>

http://i.somethingawful.com/goldmine/02-04-2003/Shut_2.jpg

:rolleyes:

I am writing this to give people a brief rundown of the history of the conflict. I know this isn't really taught in American schools.


As someone who spent his high school years in America’s public school system, trust me, the Holocaust is pounded into us like crazy. I don’t know how many Holocaust books we read in English class or how many projects we did on it, more than I have fingers to count.



Jews have continually been living in Israel. Most people have been misled to believe that they all came around the 1930s and 1940s. That is incorrect. While most Jews were dispersed across the Roman Empire in 70 CE, a number did stay in Israel. It is an agreed upon fact among historians that thousands of Jews were in Jerusalem during the Crusades. Many of them were murdered by the Crusaders. The Jews and Muslims got along during these times. They actually fought side by side against the Crusaders.

There is a well documented that Jews lived in Israel during Ottoman rule. British reports state 15,000 lived in the Safed region alone in the 16th century. Population figures gathered by the British consul in Jerusalem in the 19th century showed that Jews were the majority population in Jerusalem at this time.


Ok, Jews lived in Palestine, what is your point? They lived there in miniscule numbers. I already provided these figures but I will give them again:

December 1918, population of Palestine:

Muslim Arab: 512,000
Christain Arab: 61,000
Jews: 33,000

Again, this is a British census taken of the population. Qouted from Karen Armstrongs book Holy war.

Note, this is right AFTER the two big Jewish immigrations orAliyah’s in the 1880’s and 1904 which IDF has written about, so a very large amount of those Jew’s were new immigrants to the area. The Jews were a tiny minority, and had been for countless centuries, it has only been recently with the Holocaust and other recent events that a major Jewish population sprouted up in Palestine.




The Jews and Arabs got along for the most part. The exception would be in the 1830s when Egypt occupied the region. The Egyptians passed discriminating laws and encouraged anti-Jewish riots that were quite similar to pogroms.

The first great Aliyah (immigration) to Israel occured in the 1880s. Most of these Jews were from the Pale of Settlement. They fled to Israel as the Czars had been instigating pogroms against the Jews. Thousands were killed and beaten during this time. The Jews who came to Israel at the time mainly settled up north in the Jezreel Valley near the Sea of Galilee.

Zionism at the time was unorganized. THere was no universal zionist organisation. There was only a small group of Jews who decided Europe was no longer safe for the Jews. In 1897, Theodore Hertzl launched the modern Zionist movement. He predicted it would take 50 years to have an Israeli state. The partition vote came nearly 50 years to the day of his statement.



Jews and Arabs did get along for centuries, that is very true. As for the Egypt thing, I don’t know anything about that, first I’ve heard of it.




This area was unoccupied by Arabs or anyone else. The Jews bought the land from absentee Arab land owners who legally controlled the land. No one was displaced by the Jews in these cases. The land was mainly swampland. The Arab landowners throught they were ripping the Jews off. The Jews were able to deal with the malaria and mosquitos by draining the swams. They then farmed this land turning the wild swamps into what is by far the best farmland in the Middle East. Mark Twain had this to say after his 1867 visit to the area: (note, Twain wrote this in "The Innocents abroad

"Stirring scenes...occur in the valley [Jezreel] no more. There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent--not for 30 miles in either direction. There are two or three small clusters of Dedouin tents, but not a single permanent habitation. One may ride ten miles hereabouts and not see ten human beings."

This objective observation by Twain over a decade before the first Aliyah demonstrate that the land the Jews settled on was not occupied.



No, the land was occupied. Over half a million Arabs lived in Palestine in 1918, though area’s of Palestine were sparsely populated compared to others, it was all populated and occupied.


The persecution in Russia continued. The Second Aliyah began in 1904. It was sparked by a sharp increase in Pogroms. (This is the period that "Fiddler on the Roof" took place during. While Tevye was going to America, many of the peole leaving Anatevka would've likely made an Aliyah to Israel.)

These Jews of the 2nd Aliyah were more determined to redeem the land. They were the Jews who built up Kibbutzim all over the Jezreel Valley. They helped tame the swamps filled with malaria carrying mosquitoes. They also founded a town in the desert. That town founded in 1909 became the metropolis that is now Tel Aviv. The Arabs by contrast were living in squallor as they didn't work to reclaim the swamps of the Jezreel or the eroded Planes of Sharon in central Israel. The Jews eventually worked to plant trees to stop erosion of the soil. Central Israel eventually blossomed with mroe Kibbutzim. The Jews worked hard for the land. Many died from diseases as a result.

The Arabs benefited from the Jews. The Jews introduced new farming methods. They brought books, science, music, art, and of course jobs. The average Arab in the early 20th century probably would've welcomed the Jews. For the most part, both sides got along.




A lot of Jews moved in, but as the stats(British Census numbers, so pretty accurate) that I provided above show, they were still a tiny minority of the Palestinian population. They did work to improve the land they were given, yes that is true, and things were peacefull, the Ottomans saw to that. Some of the most peacefull times in the ME have been under Ottoman rule, simply because anyone who caused trouble had their heads roll, and that worked as brutal as it was. But to say the Arabs lived in squalor is false, yes many Arabs were nomads, the Bedouin tribes and the like and they lived in the nomadic fashion, but by the same token even more Arabs were farmers, merchants, exc. The majority of Arabs in Palestine were not nomadic Bedouins, most of the Bedouin tribes were farther south in Arabia.



World War I broke out. The Ottoman Empire was allied with the Central Powers. The Jews risked a lot when they sided with the British during the war. Had the British failed to take the land, the Jews would've faced harsh reprocussions from the Ottomans. The British were so grateful for the Jewish support that a letter was written by British Foreign Minister Arthur Balfour. The 1917 letter would later become known as the "Balfour Declaration." The Balfour Declaration called for the Establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. This declaration became legally binding when the League of Nations made it part of the British Mandate in Palestine.

The Arabs on the other hand didn't initially side with the Allies. They waited until defeat of the Ottoman Empire was imminent before declaring their support for the Allies. Even after declaring support, they did little to help win the war.


I don’t really know how to respond to this, cause it blatantly ignores huge parts of WW1. The Arab revolution occurred in June 1916, well before the war was anywhere near ending, at that point it was actually looking pretty good for the Central Powers, hell it had only been a couple months since Galliploi where the Allies were very bloody repulsed(when I say bloodily I am talking 300,000 Allied casualties, mostly British/Commonwealth). No, if anything it looked as if the Central Powers were going to win, in fact the Ottomans launched a major offensive into Egypt in the beginning of 1916 and again in July of 1916, the Brits were on the defensive until December of that year, and only went on the offensive to support the heavy Arab revolution.

It was Arab forces that kicked the Ottomans out of Arabia and played havoc with Ottoman LOC in the ME(Which in the process literraly tied down tens of thousands of Ottoman troops forced to guard the extended and vulnerable rail lines). It was because of that that the Brits were finally able to amass a 3:1 advantage and smash through Gaza(Which was a fortress and had withstood many British assaults, causing tens of thousands of Brit casualties) and Meggido.

The Arab’s played a key role in the Middle East campaigns. I have never read or heard of any significant Jewish involvement in the Palstinian, Arabian, Mesopatamian or any other ME theaters during WW1. Though countless Jews fought for the various armies(I do no over 100,000 fought for the German army, which is ironic) but they didn’t do it as Jews, they did that as British or German or French citizens.



The Jews and Arabs had gotten along well to this point. That all changed in the 1920s. Mohammed Amin Al-Husseini became the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. The Mufti was a powerful religious figure and could easily sway the hearts and minds of the Muslim population. Al-Husseini was strongly against the Balfour Declaration. He instigated some riots in 1920 and 1921. The Jews were forced to protect themselves. As a result, the Jews founded The Haganah. In 1928, Husseini began intensifying his anti-Jewish rhetoric. When the summer of 1929 rolled around, he ordered a pogrom against the Jews. The same Jews who were in the land to escape the Czar's pogroms now found themselves being terrorised by religious fanatics. The same Muslims who lived peacefully with the Jews for centuries were easily led by a charismatic cleric. The Palestinians were indoctrinated to hate the Jews at this point. The Muslims who partook in the riots shouted "Itbah al-Yahud" (kill the Jews) and "Nashrab dam al-Yahud" (we will drink the blood of the Jews.) The riots were started with no true instigation on the part of the Jews.



Yes, in 1920 some riots broke out that resulted in the deaths of about 9 Jews, but from 1921 to 1928 it was actually extremely peaceful, even though in 1924 America closed off Jewish immigration forcing more Jewish to take the Palestine option. In 1928 the Hajji did in fact start some very violent riots which resulted in the deaths of over a hundred Jew’s and over a hundred Arabs and wounded hundreds more. That was the Mufti’s fault, and the Brit cracked down hard on him and the Palestinians for the violence.






In 1937, the Peel Commission recommended a partition into a Jewish and Arab state. The partition would give the Jews Tel Aviv, a small portion of the Mediterranean coast, and the Jezreel Valley. These areas were nearly 100% Jewish. The Jews accepted this tiny slot of land. The Arabs responded with more riots instigated by the Mufti. The Mufti was going to be arrested by the British, but he was hiding in the Mosque of Omar (Dome of the Rock). The Mufti snuck out one day and fled to Berlin, Germany.


Ummm…no? The Peel Plan called for 250,000 Palestinians to be forcibally transferred to make way for the Jewish state. Those area’s where in no way anywhere near 100% Jewish. Though, the land was to small for a Jewish nation, the Jews needed more than that for the amount of people that were flooding in.

Following quoted from the book Holy War

Joseph Weitz, director of the Jewish National Fund wrote in a report that the deportation of the Palestinians from a Jewish state “does not only serve one aim-to diminish the Arab population. It also serves a second purpose by no means less important, which is to evacuate lands now cultivated by the Arabs and release it for Jewish settlement.”

The Peel Plan at its basis would have pushed hundreds of thousands of Arabs out. And yes, the Arabs responded violently to this idea, just as the Israeli’s do today to the idea of moving them around.

Ben Gurion also wrote in a letter, “We will expel the Arabs and take their places”



In Berlin, the anti-semitic Mufti found many friends. He quickly became friends with Heinrich Himmler and Adolf Eichmann. Al-Husseini joined the Waffen-SS and helped recruit more people to join the SS. He made addresses on Nazi radio spreading lies about the Jews and further indroctrinating the German population with the idea that harming Jews was a noble cause. While Hitler was still debating how to deal with "the Jewish question," the Mufti was working with Himmler to push Hitler to authorizing the final solution. Many historians question whether the death camps like Aushwitz would've been used had Al-Husseini not tried to convince Hitler to kill all of the Jews. There was even a case where the Mufti intervened to stop Himmler from trading 5,000 Jewish children in exchange for German soldiers who were held as POWs. Most of the children were put to death.


While I have not heard about this, I do not doubt that if the Mufti had the chance to get Hitlers ear he would encourage killing the Jews off. And if what you say is true, then it is a disgusting and deplorable thing.



As WWII began, the Hanagah was merged with the British Army and was instumental in defeating Viche French forces in Lebanon. The Arabs on the other hand treated Germans as liberators. They awaited for the time that the Germans would win and the Mufti would return. The Mufti had drawn up plans to open up death camps in Haifa so he could apply Hitler's methods to the Jews in Palestine.


The Haganah was in no way “Instrumental” in the operations in Syria and Lebanon, the Vichy forces there were a joke, and though they fought harder than anyone expected, they had no choice. HEAVILY outnumbered, and cutoff from outside help they were simply put screwed from the beginning.

Again, about the Mufti, I’m not going to argue about him, he was a bastard.

But about the Arab’s, of course they wished the Germans would come, how could you blame them. The German promised them independence(Which the British had promised them when they rebelled, but in the end lied and split the Arab world up between herself and France, wonder why the Arabs would be more inclined to like the Germans?). Look into the Arab history under the Brits, there were several violent revolutions by various Arab peoples vying for independence, which were put down harshly. In many cases the Brits actually used gas on the Arabs to put down revolts.

And you have to take into account, no one knew what was happening to the Jews in Germany, the Holocaust was still a secret. This was the 1940’s not the 21st century and the information age where hardly a thing happens without the whole world finding out seconds later on the ‘net. Rumors exc ran rampant,

And one thing you can not forget is the Arab Legion(Think that’s what is was called??) which fought for Britain, and was highly praised.


Before I move on to the next section I would like to bring up something you just happened to leave out, namely the Stern Gang and Irgun. Those groups where the first terrorist organizations in the Middle East, it was the Jews who taught the Arabs terrorism.(Though the Arabs brought it to a new level with the suicide bombers). They kidnapped countless British soldiers and Palestinians(What do ya know, kind of like Hezbollah) and treated them like shit. They castrated hostages, hanged hostages, booby trapped the dead bodies of hostage British soldiers. Bombed hotels(King David hotel, though that can be argued as a military target), buses, embassies, tax centers, homes of British officials(invented the letter bomb and used in throughout Europe to hit British Embassies and officials) assassinating multiple high ranking British and foreign officials. Israel was founded in large part by terrorists, hell the founder of Irgun(Name slipping my mind..Begin?) became Israel’s Prime Minister.

NOTE: I’m am against terrorism of any kind conducted by any person/organization/nation. Just pointing out the facts.



The Jews quickly accepted the decision. The Arabs on the other hand threatened war. Many Palestinians started attacking Israeli settlements in late 1947. The War for Independence had begun. Israel fought back with nothing more than 10,000 trained Palmach and 50,000 untrained Haganah troops armed with handmade sten guns. They fought off the Palestinians and defended their villages and Kibbutzim.


Look up the massacre at Deir Yassin, 250 men, women and children slaughtered by the Irgun and their bodies were mutilated by the Irgun(An act Begin praised). The look up the attack on Arab Jaffa after where the Arab populace was so hoorified and scared by what happened at Deir Yassin that 70,000 Arab civilians fled the city when the Irgun attacked. When the Irgun occupied it they looted and pillaged it. In the early yeas, 1947-8, the Jews were more responsible for the massacres that occurred.



On May 15, 1948, the British left Palestine and the Jews established the state of Israel. On that day, 7 Arab nations with modern armies equipped with fighter aircraft, bombers, tanks, and artillery attacked the newborn nation of Israel. It was 50,000,000 Arabs vs. 500,000 poorly armed Jews with nothing but willpower and the desire to survive. The Arabs were planning the death of all of the Jews. Al-Husseini returned to take command. Many Nazi war criminals who fled capture were harbored in Arab nations. They were officers in the Arab ranks during the war.

The Arabs asked many Palestinians to leave their homes in preparation for the war. The plan was that they would return in 2 months after the Jews were driven into the sea. Many did leave. Many decided to stay though. Those who stayed are now known as the "Israeli Arabs." The rest of the Arab population conveniently forgets to say that they are no different from the Palestinians except for the fact that they decided to not fight the Israelies and stayed neutral. Many of thse Israeli Arabs enjoy living in Israel. They serve on the Supreme Court and in the Knesset.

Israel won the 1947-1948 War of Independence despite all of the odds stacked against her.


Israel did fight extremely bravely and won against the odds, and I have to complement Israel heavily on that. Though, it was not as bad as you put it, the Israeli’s had plenty of armaments from across the globe, AT guns, machine guns, grenades, rifles, a few armored vehicles, explosives even a few planes. Yes, they were heavily outnumbered and outgunned, but Israel was armed, and the Arab’s, didn’t have any better equipment, although what they had they had in much larger numbers.


Former Syrian PM Khalid al-Azm wrote the following in his 1972 memoirs:

"Since 1948 it is we who demanded the return of the refugees ... while it is we who made them leave ... We brought disaster upon Arab refugees, by inviting them and bringing pressure to bear upon them to leave. ... We have participated in lowering their moral and social level. ... Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson, and throwing bombs upon ... men, women and children--all this in the service of political purposes."


It should also be noted that there were more Jews displaced after the conflict. There were almost 1,000,000 Sephardic Jews in Arab nations who were forced to leave following the 1948 war. Israel gladly took them in with operations such as Operation Magic Carpet. Israel took them in on a land that is 20% the size of Indiana. The Arabs on the other hand say they can't take in the Palestinians when they control land that is over 100 times the size of Israel.



Yes, the Palestinians got the shaft, not only from the Jews but from the Arabs who used them.

It doesnt matter what anyone here thinks, Israel is gonna stay where they are, and continue to rack up a huge Arab body count. Wether you hate them or love them.

It doesnt matter what anyone here thinks, Israel is gonna stay where they are, and continue to rack up a huge Arab body count. Wether you hate them or love them.
You seem kind of happy about that, which is odd to say the least.

Prove it. Himmler's own top aide proved my point correct. They never captured him so he was never tried for his war crimes. They wanted to get him at Nurenburg though.provisions.

He was not an important figure. Get used to it baby.


The point is the Palestinians plight is their own fault. (and partially the fault of their Arab neighbors.).

And nothing to do with the men with guns who forced them from their homes.


By the time they signed on, it was innevitable that the Ottomans wouldn't survive the war.

So they knew that the Ottomans would lose, even though they'd just driven off the force at Gallipoli....Wow - more psychic powers......

At this stage I can't tell if you're being serious or 'obtuse'.


Ben Gurion offered an olive branch. Some communities accepted it. They weren't touched. Their decendents are the "Israeli Arabs." Those who didn't accept it lost their land. Most left at the request of Arab leaders though expecting to return in 2 months..

Factually untrue. As for ben Gurion he made perfectly clear he was against any returning after the war.


Arafat said one thing and did another. This is quite typical of him. The fact is that official PA printed maps don't have Israel on them. If this were true, then they would've repealed the provisions.

Its been accepted by the US and by Israel. Were I you I'd complain to them.


You defend Ortega????!!!!! That is what they were fighting about. The "terrorists" seem to have been Ortega's troops masquerading as Contras.
.

Having known some who went over to aid the movement I can safely say "bollocks" though their treatment of the natives left a lot to be desired.


I don't know why people continue to argue when IDF won this debate back at page one..

His OP is an example of how the internet can spread ignorance as easily as knowledge.


They didn't work the land as they didn't have the farming methods to do so. The new group of Jews brought European methods and drained swamps and stabalized wind eroded plains to make inhospitable lands able to sustain crops. The fact remains that Israel is by far the most successful nation in the ME in agriculture..

Yet the figures for agriculture show that Arabs still produced over 75% of the crop yield in 1946/47 (Survey of the British Mandate). The facts show you have the classic colonialist agenda of belittling the natives.

They benefited as a result of more food and the fact that the Jews opened up shops creating jobs. Man you need to learn logic...

Arabs are famous traders. The majority of businesses were Arab owned and again we have the original figures to go on from the survey.

The land at that point was purchased and the Jews didn't even have Haganah. You know jack shit about history....

I've asked you this before - HOW MUCH LAND WAS PURCHASED BY 1946/47?


The fact is it happened and the Mufti was a driving force. You can't even show evidence to the contrary (then again you didn't do that once so far in any of your points as you are talking out of your ass.)..

I've never heard that driving force for the Holocaust was an Arab, and I'm 36and have read the occassional book. There are people here younger than me with better education, and they've never heard it either. Yet when it does appear, it appears alongside the view who want to deny the palestinians the right to self determination.


In fact they were largely responsible for it....

Are you stoned or drinking too much of that 'jolt' stuff the Amerikaners like?


The Arabs tried to commit genocide against the Jews. ....

Nonsense.

ouchies, the IDF got owned.

They were on the chopping block, if not being exterminated. Saying that the Arabs egged on hitler is asanine as they would be writing their own death warrant.

Oh please, do you think Hitler would have let the non white non blonde non blue eyed non Arian Japaneese live once the rest of the world was under his control? Didnt stop Japan from allying with them.

Oh please, do you think Hitler would have let the non white non blonde non blue eyed non Arian Japaneese live once the rest of the world was under his control? Didnt stop Japan from allying with them.

Actually, the Japs would have made off just fine. Hitler had no plans for anything east of the Urals, thats where his German empire would stop, Asia would not have been touched, that was Japan's sphere.

Actually, the Japs would have made off just fine. Hitler had no plans for anything east of the Urals, thats where his German empire would stop, Asia would not have been touched, that was Japan's sphere.

LoL The rest of the world thought the same thing about Poland.

Or perhaps the Israeli government should realise that the illegal occupation of a peoples' land is always going to highly irritate those people that are being occupied. One can see this in numerous examples in history, most recently in Iraq. People don't want to be occupied illegally by a foreign power.

Israel argues that it is attacking Lebanon to make its government and people drive Hizbollah from the south of their country. The reality is that the majority of the Lebanese are some of the most moderate Arabs around. Beirut is one of the most multicultural, open and 'western' Arab capitals - many women are veiless, there are many bars and nightclubs etc. Most of these people do not support Hizbollah or violence, they've only just got rid of their Syrian occupiers around a year ago. However, one thing is true, now that Israel attacks them, their opinion is likely to become more hardline and behind those that defend them against such a disproportionate attack. It's not likely to get them to force Hizbollah out after Israel have attacked innocent Lebanese civilians and civilian infrastructure.

Israel's strategy seems only designed to enrage the terrorists further, leading to more innocent civilian lives being endangered.
I dissagree, it is debatable as to whether Israel occupied those lands illegally and as for Iraq, a majority of the enemy fighters are from other countries that just want to kill coalition troops or people of a diffrent ideology.

I dissagree, it is debatable as to whether Israel occupied those lands illegally and as for Iraq, a majority of the enemy fighters are from other countries that just want to kill coalition troops or people of a diffrent ideology.
Its not debatable, the UN and international community have already said its illegal several times, case closed.

I dissagree, it is debatable as to whether Israel occupied those lands illegally and as for Iraq, a majority of the enemy fighters are from other countries that just want to kill coalition troops or people of a diffrent ideology.
Palestinian territories in the West Bank and Gaza strip are occupied. They are not recognised as part of Israel by the international community. UN resolutions also highlight their illegally occupied status.

I am writing this to give people a brief rundown of the history of the conflict. I know this isn't really taught in American schools.

Jews have continually been living in Israel. Most people have been misled to believe that they all came around the 1930s and 1940s. That is incorrect. While most Jews were dispersed across the Roman Empire in 70 CE, a number did stay in Israel. It is an agreed upon fact among historians that thousands of Jews were in Jerusalem during the Crusades. Many of them were murdered by the Crusaders. The Jews and Muslims got along during these times. They actually fought side by side against the Crusaders.

There is a well documented that Jews lived in Israel during Ottoman rule. British reports state 15,000 lived in the Safed region alone in the 16th century. Population figures gathered by the British consul in Jerusalem in the 19th century showed that Jews were the majority population in Jerusalem at this time.

The Jews and Arabs got along for the most part. The exception would be in the 1830s when Egypt occupied the region. The Egyptians passed discriminating laws and encouraged anti-Jewish riots that were quite similar to pogroms.

The first great Aliyah (immigration) to Israel occured in the 1880s. Most of these Jews were from the Pale of Settlement. They fled to Israel as the Czars had been instigating pogroms against the Jews. Thousands were killed and beaten during this time. The Jews who came to Israel at the time mainly settled up north in the Jezreel Valley near the Sea of Galilee.

Zionism at the time was unorganized. THere was no universal zionist organisation. There was only a small group of Jews who decided Europe was no longer safe for the Jews. In 1897, Theodore Hertzl launched the modern Zionist movement. He predicted it would take 50 years to have an Israeli state. The partition vote came nearly 50 years to the day of his statement.

This area was unoccupied by Arabs or anyone else. The Jews bought the land from absentee Arab land owners who legally controlled the land. No one was displaced by the Jews in these cases. The land was mainly swampland. The Arab landowners throught they were ripping the Jews off. The Jews were able to deal with the malaria and mosquitos by draining the swams. They then farmed this land turning the wild swamps into what is by far the best farmland in the Middle East. Mark Twain had this to say after his 1867 visit to the area: (note, Twain wrote this in "The Innocents abroad

"Stirring scenes...occur in the valley [Jezreel] no more. There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent--not for 30 miles in either direction. There are two or three small clusters of Dedouin tents, but not a single permanent habitation. One may ride ten miles hereabouts and not see ten human beings."

This objective observation by Twain over a decade before the first Aliyah demonstrate that the land the Jews settled on was not occupied.

The persecution in Russia continued. The Second Aliyah began in 1904. It was sparked by a sharp increase in Pogroms. (This is the period that "Fiddler on the Roof" took place during. While Tevye was going to America, many of the peole leaving Anatevka would've likely made an Aliyah to Israel.)

These Jews of the 2nd Aliyah were more determined to redeem the land. They were the Jews who built up Kibbutzim all over the Jezreel Valley. They helped tame the swamps filled with malaria carrying mosquitoes. They also founded a town in the desert. That town founded in 1909 became the metropolis that is now Tel Aviv. The Arabs by contrast were living in squallor as they didn't work to reclaim the swamps of the Jezreel or the eroded Planes of Sharon in central Israel. The Jews eventually worked to plant trees to stop erosion of the soil. Central Israel eventually blossomed with mroe Kibbutzim. The Jews worked hard for the land. Many died from diseases as a result.

The Arabs benefited from the Jews. The Jews introduced new farming methods. They brought books, science, music, art, and of course jobs. The average Arab in the early 20th century probably would've welcomed the Jews. For the most part, both sides got along.

World War I broke out. The Ottoman Empire was allied with the Central Powers. The Jews risked a lot when they sided with the British during the war. Had the British failed to take the land, the Jews would've faced harsh reprocussions from the Ottomans. The British were so grateful for the Jewish support that a letter was written by British Foreign Minister Arthur Balfour. The 1917 letter would later become known as the "Balfour Declaration." The Balfour Declaration called for the Establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. This declaration became legally binding when the League of Nations made it part of the British Mandate in Palestine.

The Arabs on the other hand didn't initially side with the Allies. They waited until defeat of the Ottoman Empire was imminent before declaring their support for the Allies. Even after declaring support, they did little to help win the war.

The Jews and Arabs had gotten along well to this point. That all changed in the 1920s. Mohammed Amin Al-Husseini became the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. The Mufti was a powerful religious figure and could easily sway the hearts and minds of the Muslim population. Al-Husseini was strongly against the Balfour Declaration. He instigated some riots in 1920 and 1921. The Jews were forced to protect themselves. As a result, the Jews founded The Haganah. In 1928, Husseini began intensifying his anti-Jewish rhetoric. When the summer of 1929 rolled around, he ordered a pogrom against the Jews. The same Jews who were in the land to escape the Czar's pogroms now found themselves being terrorised by religious fanatics. The same Muslims who lived peacefully with the Jews for centuries were easily led by a charismatic cleric. The Palestinians were indoctrinated to hate the Jews at this point. The Muslims who partook in the riots shouted "Itbah al-Yahud" (kill the Jews) and "Nashrab dam al-Yahud" (we will drink the blood of the Jews.) The riots were started with no true instigation on the part of the Jews.

There was more immigration in the 1930s as Hitler took power in Germany. Unfortunately too few Jews saw the writing on the wall before it was too late. The Mufti was angered by the ever increasing flow of Jews into Palestine. In 1936, he started even more riots. The riots ended for some months as the Peel Commission investigated the matter. Full blame was put on Al-Husseini and the Arabs.

In 1937, the Peel Commission recommended a partition into a Jewish and Arab state. The partition would give the Jews Tel Aviv, a small portion of the Mediterranean coast, and the Jezreel Valley. These areas were nearly 100% Jewish. The Jews accepted this tiny slot of land. The Arabs responded with more riots instigated by the Mufti. The Mufti was going to be arrested by the British, but he was hiding in the Mosque of Omar (Dome of the Rock). The Mufti snuck out one day and fled to Berlin, Germany.

In Berlin, the anti-semitic Mufti found many friends. He quickly became friends with Heinrich Himmler and Adolf Eichmann. Al-Husseini joined the Waffen-SS and helped recruit more people to join the SS. He made addresses on Nazi radio spreading lies about the Jews and further indroctrinating the German population with the idea that harming Jews was a noble cause. While Hitler was still debating how to deal with "the Jewish question," the Mufti was working with Himmler to push Hitler to authorizing the final solution. Many historians question whether the death camps like Aushwitz would've been used had Al-Husseini not tried to convince Hitler to kill all of the Jews. There was even a case where the Mufti intervened to stop Himmler from trading 5,000 Jewish children in exchange for German soldiers who were held as POWs. Most of the children were put to death.

The Mufti also continued to encourage violence against the Jews in Palestine. The riots continued into 1939. The result of the increased violence was the White Paper. Neville Chamberlain's government once again decided to do what they do best, appease. The riots ended, but the White Paper stopped Jewish immigration. The result was that the British Navy turned refugee ships around and sent them back to Germany. Six million Jews were condemned to the gas chambers and ovens as a result of the actions of the Palestinians and their leader.

As WWII began, the Hanagah was merged with the British Army and was instumental in defeating Viche French forces in Lebanon. The Arabs on the other hand treated Germans as liberators. They awaited for the time that the Germans would win and the Mufti would return. The Mufti had drawn up plans to open up death camps in Haifa so he could apply Hitler's methods to the Jews in Palestine.

When WWII ended, there were 3,000,000 European Jews left out of 9,000,000. Most went to the US or were in Displaced Person camps. The Aliyah Bet tried desperately to get Jews into Palestine and get the British to live up to their 1917 promise to give the Jews a state. In 1947, the UN Special Committe on Palestine (UNSCOP) looked at both sides of the issue and recommended partition into 2 states. The partition came to a vote in November 1947. In what became known as the Miracle at Flushing Meadows, the Israelis won an overwhelming vote. There were only 13 votes against Israel. 11 of the nations were Islamic and Greece was coerced to vote by Egypt under the threat that some of their citizens in Egypt would be harmed if the vote went the other way. The only nation swayed by the Arab argument was Cuba. The rest of the UN voted for partition. The final vote was 33-13.

The Jews quickly accepted the decision. The Arabs on the other hand threatened war. Many Palestinians started attacking Israeli settlements in late 1947. The War for Independence had begun. Israel fought back with nothing more than 10,000 trained Palmach and 50,000 untrained Haganah troops armed with handmade sten guns. They fought off the Palestinians and defended their villages and Kibbutzim.

On May 15, 1948, the British left Palestine and the Jews established the state of Israel. On that day, 7 Arab nations with modern armies equipped with fighter aircraft, bombers, tanks, and artillery attacked the newborn nation of Israel. It was 50,000,000 Arabs vs. 500,000 poorly armed Jews with nothing but willpower and the desire to survive. The Arabs were planning the death of all of the Jews. Al-Husseini returned to take command. Many Nazi war criminals who fled capture were harbored in Arab nations. They were officers in the Arab ranks during the war.

The Arabs asked many Palestinians to leave their homes in preparation for the war. The plan was that they would return in 2 months after the Jews were driven into the sea. Many did leave. Many decided to stay though. Those who stayed are now known as the "Israeli Arabs." The rest of the Arab population conveniently forgets to say that they are no different from the Palestinians except for the fact that they decided to not fight the Israelies and stayed neutral. Many of thse Israeli Arabs enjoy living in Israel. They serve on the Supreme Court and in the Knesset.

Israel won the 1947-1948 War of Independence despite all of the odds stacked against her.

The sad aftermath of the war was the 400,000 Palestinian refugees. I do not blame the people who were made refugees. They were brainwashed by Al-Husseini and filled with hate. They continue to be filled with hate by their leaders.

Former Syrian PM Khalid al-Azm wrote the following in his 1972 memoirs:

"Since 1948 it is we who demanded the return of the refugees ... while it is we who made them leave ... We brought disaster upon Arab refugees, by inviting them and bringing pressure to bear upon them to leave. ... We have participated in lowering their moral and social level. ... Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson, and throwing bombs upon ... men, women and children--all this in the service of political purposes."

It should also be noted that there were more Jews displaced after the conflict. There were almost 1,000,000 Sephardic Jews in Arab nations who were forced to leave following the 1948 war. Israel gladly took them in with operations such as Operation Magic Carpet. Israel took them in on a land that is 20% the size of Indiana. The Arabs on the other hand say they can't take in the Palestinians when they control land that is over 100 times the size of Israel.

The violence continued. In the 1950s, Fedayeen launched raids on some settlements being set up in the Negev (which is Israeli territory). Israel had to put a stop to this. The result was the 1956 Suez War. In 1967, the Arabs blockaded Israel and massed troops on the border for attack. The Mossad had a high level source who informed Israel war was imminent. Israel launched a preemptive strike which saved the tiny nation.

Israel took some land in this defensive war. Most of the land was given back to Egypt in exchange for peace. The lands currently held by Israel are the Gaza Strip and West Bank. The Golan Heights can be legally annexed according to UN Resolution 242 as holding them is necessary to give Israel an ability to defend itself from a Syrian attack. As for the wall, Israel can take the high lands in the West Bank that are needed to ensure Israel can defend herself. Most of the land will be given back to the Palestinians when the borders are drawn in 2009. They would've gotten more had they accepted the 2000 Camp David and Taba offers.

The Yom Kippur War was a great travesty. The Jews were attacked without warning on their holiest day of the year. It was meant to be a war of annihilation. I shudder to think what would've happened had Moshe Dayan not been an Israeli General.

The Israelis do not want to wipe out the Palestinian population. They have the abiltiy to do so at any time, but they don't. When they strike terrorists, they try to avoid civilian casualties. Unfortunately they still occur. That is the reality of war. The Palestinians on the other hand don't recognize Israel. Hamas, which got 74% of the Palestinian vote, doesn't recognize Israel in its charter. It in fact calls for the destruction of the Jews.
I did read all of it. If you want to argue/debate a post, you have to read all of it after all, or your counter-arguments aren't valid.

That aside, I think it's a good post, though not entirely credible because it is obviously written with a predisposition towards the jews (as evidenced by the emotive language in places).

I know too little abouot the history to see if there's any inaccuracies, but use of emotive language does raise some question marks.
I would have to compare it to an arab version of the history (which presumably would be predisposed to the arabs) and see what facts correlate.

The history of that place is so tangled and so charged with religion, emotion and political double-dealing that I don't trust either side to tell the truth.
Thus the comparing of histories.

Palestinian territories in the West Bank and Gaza strip are occupied. They are not recognised as part of Israel by the international community. UN resolutions also highlight their illegally occupied status.


Gaza was given back last summer...violence didn't end. They are not illegal, Resolution 242 says that land should be given back, but not how much or which land. Israel reserves the right to have defensible borders against Arab aggresion.

Israel has a right to exist, and so does Palistine.

IDF, you cant be seriously suggesting that arabs had a role in the holocaust.
This is absurd, if the Nazi's ever came to the middle east, they would have persecuted the muslim arabs, why the hell would they assist them.
No, he has a point there. The Grand Mufti Mohammed Amin al-Husseini actually did play a significant part in both the growing anti-semitic stance in the middle east and Germany's policy against the jews during the 1920's and throughout WWII.

He urged the Nazi top men to implement a harder line against the "jewish problem" and he really did send a letter to Himmler complaining about the release of some jews, among them 4000 children.
He was influential enough that Himmler changed the orders and they were brought to the concentration camps instead.

The source is in swedish, so I don't know it there's any point in linking to it, but the article was published in the second largest national newspaper, who have extensive source-checks.

Gaza was given back last summer...violence didn't end. They are not illegal, Resolution 242 says that land should be given back, but not how much or which land. Israel reserves the right to have defensible borders against Arab aggresion.
Gaza was not properly given back. Israel still didn't recognise a Palestinian state. Israel maintained control and surveillance of Gaza's coastline. The airport was not allowed to reopen.

Not a single major country recognises the West Bank or Gaza Strip (or indeed East Jerusalem) as part of Israel. As far as I am aware, this even includes USA which is of course Israel's closest ally.

Do not misunderstand my remarks. I support Israel's right to exist whole-heartedly. But it should exist only on Israeli territory and should not occupy illegally the Palestinian territories (or the other occupied lands such as Golan heights).

No, he has a point there. The Grand Mufti Mohammed Amin al-Husseini actually did play a significant part in both the growing anti-semitic stance in the middle east and Germany's policy against the jews during the 1920's and throughout WWII.

He urged the Nazi top men to implement a harder line against the "jewish problem" and he really did send a letter to Himmler complaining about the release of some jews, among them 4000 children.
He was influential enough that Himmler changed the orders and they were brought to the concentration camps instead.

The source is in swedish, so I don't know it there's any point in linking to it, but the article was published in the second largest national newspaper, who have extensive source-checks.

I still fail to see that he played any more than the most minor of parts. But, please post the link. Some of us can at least read Swedish.

I know we have had a lot Israel threads recently, but I want to go in a little direction with this one.

As I have been watching the news lately I hear a lot that the kidnapping of a few IDF it was what started this current situation and that Israel is just using self defence. But that seems really misleading to me, as it deflects blame from the ones who truly started this, Israel. The way their state was formed, taking land from others, is provocative. Creating a Jewish state in the middle of Arab and muslim land was provocative. Seems to me that Israel merely being sets off anger and violence that leaves many dead without cause and that if Israel werent around the world would be a more peaceful place. your thoughts


You sound like Adolf or one of his buddies justifing why France or Poland or Russia shouldnt exist because there mere presence is an affront to the true Aryans .
Get a grip..... Israel exist . And if you want to use behavior as an indication , then I would say the world would be much better off if most Arab states did not exist . It would be much more peacefull . And less human bombs would be occuping buses and markets .

I guess the Hebrews just came from a space ship and sprouted from the Mythical kingdom of Atlantis .

And less human bombs would be occuping buses and markets .
Even though it was the Tamils and Persians that first used and perfected these 'human bombs'....

Gaza was not properly given back. Israel still didn't recognise a Palestinian state. Israel maintained control and surveillance of Gaza's coastline. The airport was not allowed to reopen.

Not a single major country recognises the West Bank or Gaza Strip (or indeed East Jerusalem) as part of Israel. As far as I am aware, this even includes USA which is of course Israel's closest ally.

Do not misunderstand my remarks. I support Israel's right to exist whole-heartedly. But it should exist only on Israeli territory and should not occupy illegally the Palestinian territories (or the other occupied lands such as Golan heights).

Israel pulled out of Gaza and gave control of Gaza fully to the Palestinian Authority. There is no state because the Palesinians haven't declared one or sat down to the table with the UN to actually negotiate a state.

Israel needs the Golan Heights because Israel also needs defensible borders, just as Israel occupies the West Bank in order to secure itself and its population. You want a pali state? stop the terrorism!

This area was unoccupied by Arabs or anyone else. The Jews bought the land from absentee Arab land owners who legally controlled the land. No one was displaced by the Jews in these cases. The land was mainly swampland.

I'm trying to control my anger as I write this.

My father was seven years old when his family was forced off their land and home at gunpoint by Jews. They soon fled to Egypt. How this putrid lie is being spread makes me furious.

My maternal grandparents were also born in Palestine, and were forced to flee to Transjordan (current day Jordan) because of militant Jewish activity. Many of these people were violently taking over land. My uncles, aunts and grandparents did not sell their land to anyone. They were forced off.

The fact that they don't hate all Jews to this day is a testament to what great people they are.

And IDF, I want to tell you what they don't teach in American school or in American media: they don't show the everyday suffering of everyday Palestinians in Israel. I have family in the West Bank. If they decide to put a checkpoint between you and your workplace, guess what? You're not going to work today, because you're a Palestinian. People are impoverished and unable to work. They do not have freedom of movement through no fault of their own. I'm talking about people like you and me trying to live, I'm not talking about the terrorists.

I do not condone terrorism. I do, however, understand the desperation one must feel in order to think blowing yourself up will do more good for you and your family than to continue living. The Palestinians are not innocent, but Israelis are NOT innocent either. And whenever Israelis react to terrorism, they do so in a way that maximizes the misery of innocent civilians. For example, plowing down the entire village, including people that are just living everyday lives like you and me, simply because a suicide bomber used to live there.

In the news this week, they bombed a major international airport (Beirut). They also are bombing neighborhoods of arguably one of the most beautiful cities in the world (Beirut), killing thousands of civilians in hopes of killing a couple of Hezbollah.

I agree that those bastards (Hesbollah, Al Qaeda, etc.) need to be crushed. But it needs to be done in a calculated, effective manner. And remember, these organizations were not created in a vacuum. If the Israel government had treated these people fairly, they would have no reason to become insurgents/terrorists in the first place.

I agree that those bastards (Hesbollah, Al Qaeda, etc.) need to be crushed. But remember, these organizations were not created in a vaccuum. If the Israel government had treated these people fairly, they would have no reason to become insurgents/terrorists in the first place.

And that's the same reason why those terrorist groups hate us. It's because America backs Isreal and even provides them with substancial funds, which should be spent here in America rather than given away to Isreal. They're the reason for 9/11, they're the reason for the 1993 bombings on the WTC, they're the reason for the destruction of several US embasys in Africa.

I still fail to see that he played any more than the most minor of parts. But, please post the link. Some of us can at least read Swedish.

Sure thing.
http://www.si-info.org/test/artiklar/dokument/63.asp
Artikeln publicerades i Svenska Dagbladet 9/9 2004. Står längst ner på sidan.


I also found a wiki article about him, in english.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni

We should just give give Israel back. Maybe we can annex some Russian land or Romanian land and give the Jews that. Hell it's be a lot safer. Or maybe some Hungarian land.

You sound like Adolf or one of his buddies justifing why France or Poland or Russia shouldnt exist because there mere presence is an affront to the true Aryans .
Get a grip..... Israel exist . And if you want to use behavior as an indication , then I would say the world would be much better off if most Arab states did not exist . It would be much more peacefull . And less human bombs would be occuping buses and markets .

I guess the Hebrews just came from a space ship and sprouted from the Mythical kingdom of Atlantis .
yes, I critize Israel so I must be a god damn Nazi. It all makes sense now, thank you for showing me the light. btw, the only reason there are human bombs in markets and buses is because of Israel and its occupation. You take that away that you suddenly get peace, no 9/11 and quite simply a better world.

I know we have had a lot Israel threads recently, but I want to go in a little direction with this one.

As I have been watching the news lately I hear a lot that the kidnapping of a few IDF it was what started this current situation and that Israel is just using self defence. But that seems really misleading to me, as it deflects blame from the ones who truly started this, Israel. The way their state was formed, taking land from others, is provocative. Creating a Jewish state in the middle of Arab and muslim land was provocative. Seems to me that Israel merely being sets off anger and violence that leaves many dead without cause and that if Israel werent around the world would be a more peaceful place. your thoughts


So what you're saying is that the world would be better if only those horrible jews would be dead.

I'll counteract: the arabs will just have to live with the fact that Israel exists.

If they don't like it, they can die. And I won't cry.

yes, I critize Israel so I must be a god damn Nazi. It all makes sense now, thank you for showing me the light. btw, the only reason there are human bombs in markets and buses is because of Israel and its occupation. You take that away that you suddenly get peace, no 9/11 and quite simply a better world.
Isn't that oversimplifying quite a bit?

But for argument's sake: What would you do if Israel was declared null and void, but the jews still were around?

Besides, there's similar situations all over the world. Northern Ireland, China-Taiwan, Darfur, what happened in Rwanda.
The world would not be a better place just because Israel dissapeard.

So what you're saying is that the world would be better if only those horrible jews would be dead.

I'll counteract: the arabs will just have to live with the fact that Israel exists.

If they don't like it, they can die. And I won't cry.
Um, aren't you saying almost the same thing as Sovietistan, only the other way around?

Um, aren't you saying almost the same thing as Sovietistan, only the other way around?

I'm saying that the Arabs can learn to live with the world as it is.

They proclaim they can't - but I say they can.

So what you're saying is that the world would be better if only those horrible jews would be dead.

I'll counteract: the arabs will just have to live with the fact that Israel exists.

If they don't like it, they can die. And I won't cry.
I'm saying that the Arabs can learn to live with the world as it is.

They proclaim they can't - but I say they can.
Hmm, I thought you said that they must learn to live with it or they can die.

I'll take your intention though, and I agree. Anyone can learn to live with almost anyone else. On a society level it's even easier. All it takes is time.

A problem that delays things is the anti-semitic propaganda that has worked itself into the arab mainstream culture (like the Zion Protocols) and that the extremists has become very good at making themselves indistinguishable from the moderates.

And, since people get killed on both sides, sorrow and the instinctive need for revenge continues to spoil things as well.

I do not object the existence of the State of Israel, the jewish people do have the right to own a country of their own. However, I do object, heavily, the policies that Israel has developed to fight terrorism.

Dolfinsafia, I have heard exactly the same from other people that live around. Plus, I have heard several angry complains from people of the Lebanon (that strangely, are christians, Maronite christians, and not arabs). Violence only brongs more violence. Sadly, the conflict in the area already escalated to the War Without an End scale, meaning that it won't stop until one side crushes the other side, as the opinions of both the arab and the israeli supporters in this forum show.

So what you're saying is that the world would be better if only those horrible jews would be dead.

I'll counteract: the arabs will just have to live with the fact that Israel exists.

If they don't like it, they can die. And I won't cry.
No, Im saying the world would be better of if the state of Israel was dead. I have absolutely no problem with jews.

But for argument's sake: What would you do if Israel was declared null and void, but the jews still were around?
That would be great but what are you getting at?


Besides, there's similar situations all over the world. Northern Ireland, China-Taiwan, Darfur, what happened in Rwanda.
The world would not be a better place just because Israel dissapeard.
Im not saying the world would be great, Im saying it would be better. There's a difference.

Hmm, I thought you said that they must learn to live with it or they can die.

I'll take your intention though, and I agree. Anyone can learn to live with almost anyone else. On a society level it's even easier. All it takes is time.

A problem that delays things is the anti-semitic propaganda that has worked itself into the arab mainstream culture (like the Zion Protocols) and that the extremists has become very good at making themselves indistinguishable from the moderates.

And, since people get killed on both sides, sorrow and the instinctive need for revenge continues to spoil things as well.


Let me put it this way: around 2002, the Approval Rating for OBL amongst Palestinians was about 70%.

An Arab moderate is a chap who considers letting Jews live - provided they leave the Middle East.

And it takes not much to persuade him not to let them live at all - he is a reasonable Moderate, whose mind is not totally fixed, you see?

The distinction between an extremist and a moderate is a distinction without a difference in most of the middle east.

No, Im saying the world would be better of if the state of Israel was dead. I have absolutely no problem with jews.


... provided they live on the moon?

Without spacesuits?

-snip-

A good read

I am writing this to give people a brief rundown of the history of the conflict. I know this isn't really taught in American schools.


Bravo. Well done. You just became one of my favorite posters.

A good read
so is the bible, but in both cases they are works of fiction.

so is the bible, but in both cases they are works of fiction.

You're a work of fiction.

... provided they live on the moon?

Without spacesuits?
No, provided they dont live in the middle of Arabs, on land they stole from said Arabs.

Let's face it, since Arabs and Persians have existed in that area there have been wars between them and Western nations. It goes on even to this day. Maybe if the Arab and Persian nations were destroyed (note that I'm going to avoid being called a racist by stressing the word nations instead of people) there could be peace on earth.

Most people claim that the problems in the middle east are a result of collonialism or the Israel issue, but that's really misleading. It deflects blame from the ones who truly started this cycle of warfare, the Arabs and Persians. For example, the Persians attacked the ancient greeks. When Islam was developed Arabs and Persians routinely attacked and conquered European lands. Even America wasn't safe as the Barbary pirates would raid American vessels until the USMC put a stop to it.

Seems to me that the existence of Arab and Persian states merely rile their populations up into anger and violence that lead to many deaths without cause and if there were no Arab or Persian nations The world would be a more peaceful place.

You're a work of fiction.
No, you are

No, you are

Nope. I know I am real. You are the one that is not real.

Technically you can. You see, you keep the fire under control, and burn a specific section of the woods, and then extinguish it so when the not under control fire gets there, it has nothing to burn.

That would be in the case of a forest fire only.

Not, for example, someone burning to death and property being destroyed. In those cases, burning more people and property is exactly the wrong thing to do, since the whole point is not to have people and property burn.

IDF...still need a reply to my break down of your post.

I'm trying to control my anger as I write this.

My father was seven years old when his family was forced off their land and home at gunpoint by Jews. They soon fled to Egypt. How this putrid lie is being spread makes me furious.

My maternal grandparents were also born in Palestine, and were forced to flee to Transjordan (current day Jordan) because of militant Jewish activity. Many of these people were violently taking over land. My uncles, aunts and grandparents did not sell their land to anyone. They were forced off.

The fact that they don't hate all Jews to this day is a testament to what great people they are.

And IDF, I want to tell you what they don't teach in American school or in American media: they don't show the everyday suffering of everyday Palestinians in Israel. I have family in the West Bank. If they decide to put a checkpoint between you and your workplace, guess what? You're not going to work today, because you're a Palestinian. People are impoverished and unable to work. They do not have freedom of movement through no fault of their own. I'm talking about people like you and me trying to live, I'm not talking about the terrorists.

I do not condone terrorism. I do, however, understand the desperation one must feel in order to think blowing yourself up will do more good for you and your family than to continue living. The Palestinians are not innocent, but Israelis are NOT innocent either. And whenever Israelis react to terrorism, they do so in a way that maximizes the misery of innocent civilians. For example, plowing down the entire village, including people that are just living everyday lives like you and me, simply because a suicide bomber used to live there.

In the news this week, they bombed a major international airport (Beirut). They also are bombing neighborhoods of arguably one of the most beautiful cities in the world (Beirut), killing thousands of civilians in hopes of killing a couple of Hezbollah.

I agree that those bastards (Hesbollah, Al Qaeda, etc.) need to be crushed. But it needs to be done in a calculated, effective manner. And remember, these organizations were not created in a vacuum. If the Israel government had treated these people fairly, they would have no reason to become insurgents/terrorists in the first place.


Killing thousands of civilians in Lebanon? As of Monday night the casualties numbered around roughly 170 dead civilians...ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY...not THOUSANDS, and we don't even know how many of those were active in Hizballah. If you so blatantly lied about what is happening as of 5 minutes ago, I shiver to think of what you could distort when you add another 58 years to the equation.

Killing thousands of civilians in Lebanon? As of Monday night the casualties numbered around roughly 170 dead civilians...ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY...not THOUSANDS, and we don't even know how many of those were active in Hizballah. If you so blatantly lied about what is happening as of 5 minutes ago, I shiver to think of what you could distort when you add another 58 years to the equation.


I like when Israeli women provoke me . It makes me get wood . they get some good propaganda up there...like the guy who claimed hezbolla had two million fighters..:D


wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee this is fun.

its raining missiles and rockets and artilery shells ....at least its not boring .

I like when Israeli women provoke me . It makes me get wood .
I don't think anyone can argue that point. Israeli women are mighty fine, even more so when they are in uniform for some reason.

I don't think anyone can argue that point. Israeli women are mighty fine, even more so when they are in uniform for some reason.

they may have the nicest bodies, but their faces make you want to spew up.

But theyre not really Israeli, most of Israel is just migrants from Poland, Russia, Africa, etc

Gaza was given back last summer...violence didn't end. They are not illegal, Resolution 242 says that land should be given back, but not how much or which land. Israel reserves the right to have defensible borders against Arab aggresion.

They are illegal. No ifs buts or maybes. And if Syria can't reserve the right to wander about Lebanon, why should Israel reserve the right to occupy the territories or blow crap out of Beirut?


Let's face it, since Arabs and Persians have existed in that area there have been wars between them and Western nations. It goes on even to this day. Maybe if the Arab and Persian nations were destroyed (note that I'm going to avoid being called a racist by stressing the word nations instead of people) there could be peace on earth. .

If you are in your teens, I forgive you.

Originally Posted by Corneliu
You're a work of fiction.

No, you are

Nope. I know I am real. You are the one that is not real.
The maturity level of this exchange is staggering.

You can both debate better than this, I've seen it. Why make yourselves out to be juveniles fighting on the playground?

Let me put it this way: around 2002, the Approval Rating for OBL amongst Palestinians was about 70%.

An Arab moderate is a chap who considers letting Jews live - provided they leave the Middle East.

And it takes not much to persuade him not to let them live at all - he is a reasonable Moderate, whose mind is not totally fixed, you see?

The distinction between an extremist and a moderate is a distinction without a difference in most of the middle east.
Proves my point about the extremists blending in with the moderates.

Besides, both sides lie and use propaganda.

There's been to much blood on both sides. The respective leaders can always find something in the past that "justifies" the new atrocities.

I doubt it can be solved without foreign troops stepping in, but that will not be well recieved by either side and might lead to an even worse conflict.


*shrugs* It's not a good solution, but nuking the entire area (after evacuating everyone) or making it into a giant parking lot is perhaps the only way to end it.

I know the deaths are a tragedy to the families, but from the outside it sometimes look as both sides enjoy killing eachother. That's how far it's gone.
The cycle of violence has such momentum that neither side can break free of it.
(Nor are they the only ones. Don't even get me started on the Balkans...)

Proves my point about the extremists blending in with the moderates.

Besides, both sides lie and use propaganda.

There's been to much blood on both sides. The respective leaders can always find something in the past that "justifies" the new atrocities.

I doubt it can be solved without foreign troops stepping in, but that will not be well recieved by either side and might lead to an even worse conflict.


*shrugs* It's not a good solution, but nuking the entire area (after evacuating everyone) or making it into a giant parking lot is perhaps the only way to end it.

I know the deaths are a tragedy to the families, but from the outside it sometimes look as both sides enjoy killing eachother. That's how far it's gone.
The cycle of violence has such momentum that neither side can break free of it.
(Nor are they the only ones. Don't even get me started on the Balkans...)


The Balkan Question(s) is a perfect example:
As Lenin once remarked, we must start with Who, and Whom.

Which is to say: who is affected by this issue, and whom do we support.

All else follows from those questions.

Suppose you were to prove to me that Israelis are bad.
If you were then to suppose that I might switch sides and become pro-Arab, then you would be mistaken.
For the simple matter is that our own Western interests demand a vigorous and unqualified stance against Islamists wherever they exist.

As in the 2nd WW, this meant a full and unqualified support for the Soviets and Tito and similar morally suspect characters in their struggle against the nazis, in the present global situation, our support must be unqualifiedly in favour of Blacks in Sudan, Israeli's in Israel, and Kurds in Kurdistan.

Proves my point about the extremists blending in with the moderates.

Besides, both sides lie and use propaganda.

There's been to much blood on both sides. The respective leaders can always find something in the past that "justifies" the new atrocities.

I doubt it can be solved without foreign troops stepping in, but that will not be well recieved by either side and might lead to an even worse conflict.


*shrugs* It's not a good solution, but nuking the entire area (after evacuating everyone) or making it into a giant parking lot is perhaps the only way to end it.

I know the deaths are a tragedy to the families, but from the outside it sometimes look as both sides enjoy killing eachother. That's how far it's gone.
The cycle of violence has such momentum that neither side can break free of it.
(Nor are they the only ones. Don't even get me started on the Balkans...)


The same logic applies to the Arab side: they will also ask Who and Whom.

And their behaviour follows from answering those questions.

If you were to prove to an Arab that OBL was Satan, that would not shake his support for those who oppose the non-Arab archenemies.

Morals are ALWAYS secondary to Who and Whom in the Big League of Global Politics.


There is a reason why cycles of hate persist: the first side to break a cycle is the side whose destruction is usually assured.

I do not seriously believe in the possibility of peace in the ME until one side has vanquished the other - for only after such an occurence is anyone able to break the cycle without suicidal effect.

You maybe right that the existance of Isreal is causing problems, but everyone has a right to live in the world. The fact that the very existance of Isreal angers the arabic countries shos how selfish they are. they have to accept Isreal and move on from grudges long ago. Isreal is acting in self defence to the capture of its soldiers, so should not be getting the hard end of the stick. I just hope that this conflict doesn't escalate to more than a dangerous crisis in the middle-east.

The same logic applies to the Arab side: they will also ask Who and Whom.

And their behaviour follows from answering those questions.

If you were to prove to an Arab that OBL was Satan, that would not shake his support for those who oppose the non-Arab archenemies.

Morals are ALWAYS secondary to Who and Whom in the Big League of Global Politics.


There is a reason why cycles of hate persist: the first side to break a cycle is the side whose destruction is usually assured.

I do not seriously believe in the possibility of peace in the ME until one side has vanquished the other - for only after such an occurence is anyone able to break the cycle without suicidal effect.
Alignment: Lawful neutral? ;)

What does OBL stand for?

I'm not sure I agree with the who/whom thing, but that might be my conscience speaking. I take it who/whom is what realpolitik is about?
You do what's best for your country, not what you'd prefer to do?

Explains a lot about many countries and their policies.

Whatever is said, Israel is not blameless.
An interesting fact to consider:
On the eve of the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein's régime had violated four UN resolutions.
To date, the state of Israel has violated twelve UN resolutions.

1. Alignment: Lawful neutral? ;)

2. What does OBL stand for?

3. I'm not sure I agree with the who/whom thing, but that might be my conscience speaking. I take it who/whom is what realpolitik is about?

4. You do what's best for your country, not what you'd prefer to do?

5. Explains a lot about many countries and their policies.

1. Lawful Evil, in the Adam Smith sense. I believe in the TfT approach in games-theory.

2. Osama Bin Laden.

3. Not quite: realpolitik is about switching whenever you detect an advantage to switching. In Tit for Tat you focus a lot more on consistency - for even enemies appreciate your preference for living up to your promises.

4. We express our conscience in our vote, but within the context of a Democracy, we ACT out the majority-decision.
The Kerry Approach: I vote against Vietnam, but once the majority decides that I am called up to go there, I fight to the utmost of my ability.

My vote was against entering the Iraq War - but now that it is on, we do the best we can to win it.

You may accept the theory that you refuse to carry out your orders given by society because your conscience objects - but that must go hand-in-hand with recognising the right of society to jail you for that decision.
As ML King and Thoreau willingly accepted.

5. Explains almost everything except faith based initiatives.
Which tend to bugger up politics, create instability and bloodshed.

You maybe right that the existance of Isreal is causing problems, but everyone has a right to live in the world. The fact that the very existance of Isreal angers the arabic countries shos how selfish they are. they have to accept Isreal and move on from grudges long ago. Isreal is acting in self defence to the capture of its soldiers, so should not be getting the hard end of the stick. I just hope that this conflict doesn't escalate to more than a dangerous crisis in the middle-east.
It's not the existance of Israel as such that causes problems. It's history that causes problems.
Well, and propaganda and extremists and shortsighted politicians and grieving families.
However, the reason they cause trouble is also found in history.

*shrugs* I can't deny that the past shapes the present, but I wish it didn't rule people the way if often does now.
Or that there wasn't so many versions of "the truth".
That is largely how it is though, hence the giant parking lot idea. :p

1. Lawful Evil, in the Adam Smith sense. I believe in the TfT approach in games-theory.

2. Osama Bin Laden.

3. Not quite: realpolitik is about switching whenever you detect an advantage to switching. In Tit for Tat you focus a lot more on consistency - for even enemies appreciate your preference for living up to your promises.
1. Well the alignment comment was more of a joke. ;)

2. Ah ok. And yes, you're correct there. They wouldn't change their minds. Thanks for explaining.

3. Hmm, I see. Doesn't that open up for doing the wrong things for all the right reasons though (both realpolitik and TfT)?
Though, morality wasn't a factor, was it?

1. Well the alignment comment was more of a joke. ;)

2. Ah ok. And yes, you're correct there. They wouldn't change their minds. Thanks for explaining.

3. Hmm, I see. Doesn't that open up for doing the wrong things for all the right reasons though (both realpolitik and TfT)?
Though, morality wasn't a factor, was it?


*cues back* had to leave before I could finish the post.

The maturity level of this exchange is staggering.

You can both debate better than this, I've seen it. Why make yourselves out to be juveniles fighting on the playground?

Oh relax. Its called Humor.

Whatever is said, Israel is not blameless.
An interesting fact to consider:
On the eve of the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein's régime had violated seventeen UN resolutions.
To date, the state of Israel has violated twelve UN resolutions.

Fixed. Don't know really about Israel's number so I'm leaving that alone.

Fixed. Don't know really about Israel's number so I'm leaving that alone.


No doubt the home-owner who kills the intruder breaks a law or two. Or 12.

But that does not matter: the thing is that the whole blame lies with the intruder.

Whose side are we on? ( rhetorical - as you and I are on the same side on this one. )

No doubt the home-owner who kills the intruder breaks a law or two. Or 12.

But that does not matter: the thing is that the whole blame lies with the intruder.

Whose side are we on? ( rhetorical - as you and I are on the same side on this one. )

So, the blame lies with the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan... And Israel in Lebanon.

So, the blame lies with the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan... And Israel in Lebanon.


I'd say that interpretation places you solidly with the pro-islamist ranks.

So, the blame lies with the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan... And Israel in Lebanon.

Umm yea....

Do you want kool aide with that?

You can't deny the first part of the post about the lack of settlement in the area by Palestinians and how there has been a constant Jewish presence in Israel since the Exodus. (meaning they never left)

If you expect the Jews to be able to march in and establish an exclusively jewish state in territory most occupied by Muslims (Jews made up 30% of the population and owned 7% of the land) without retalliation, you need to get a clue.

All Israel had to do was withdraw from Gaza and the West Bank.

Fixed. Don't know really about Israel's number so I'm leaving that alone.

Israel rejected alot more than 12.

If you expect the Jews to be able to march in and establish an exclusively jewish state in territory most occupied by Muslims (Jews made up 30% of the population and owned 7% of the land) without retalliation, you need to get a clue.

All Israel had to do was withdraw from Gaza and the West Bank.


No reason to do so until after the unconditional surrender of the Arab League.

No reason to do so until after the unconditional surrender of the Arab League.

And whats the reason for being there in the first place?

And whats the reason for being there in the first place?

I have already told you to take your anti-semitic views out of this forum.

If you expect the Jews to be able to march in and establish an exclusively jewish state in territory most occupied by Muslims (Jews made up 30% of the population and owned 7% of the land) without retalliation, you need to get a clue.

Funny that they did nothing to provoke the three wars that have erupted around them. They want to live in peace with their neighbors. To say otherwise is just dumb

All Israel had to do was withdraw from Gaza and the West Bank.

And they did withdraw from Gaza. Guess what? They got attacked by hamas in Gaza.

Funny that they did nothing to provoke the three wars that have erupted around them. They want to live in peace with their neighbors. To say otherwise is just dumb

Yeah because they just walked in and handed out candy, right? Israel did nothing less than conquer the land now known as Palestine.

If they did nothing to provoke it, I dont think the palestinians would react in such a way, as there is nothing to react to. Everything was fine until they tried to establish an exclusive Jewish state.

And they did withdraw from Gaza. Guess what? They got attacked by hamas in Gaza.

So they withdrew from Gaza and then were attacked in Gaza? Great logic.

Yeah because they just walked in and handed out candy, right? Israel did nothing less than conquer the land now known as Palestine.

I didn't know Palestine was a nation? I didn't know that Israel attacked the nation of Palestine (which is stupid since Palestine was never a nation to begin with).

Five nations attacked Israel unprovokely and were soundly defeated. Gaza was then annexed by Egypt and Jordan got the west bank. You really have no clue to history do you?

If they did nothing to provoke it, I dont think the palestinians would react in such a way, as there is nothing to react to. Everything was fine until they tried to establish an exclusive Jewish state.

There was no provocation. Anyone who studies history knows that. Arabs didn't like the fact that Israel declared statehood and declared war on them and attacked without even so much as diplomatic negotiations.

So they withdrew from Gaza and then were attacked in Gaza? Great logic.

Hamas attacked from within gaza after Israel pulled out. Grow up and learn facts about the history of the Middle East Crisis.

Essentially a fallacy. Prior to the first crusade, and Urban II's expediant exploitation and augmentation of the notion of a divinely sanctioned conflict, the three semitic faiths co-existed quite contentedly. Granted, s good proportion of Spain was, by virtue of the Moors, Islamic, and the Byzantine empire was in a perpetual decline at the hands of Islam, however the conflicts were not motivated and characterised as issues of faith, but of terrirtory and politics.

I should imagine it is not the presence of Israel that, in itself, riles the Islamic world overly, as much as the manner in which it was established, and the extent to which its actions are condoned by the "powers".

I didn't know Palestine was a nation? I didn't know that Israel attacked the nation of Palestine (which is stupid since Palestine was never a nation to begin with).

I said "the land known as Palestine" so thanks for the strawman.

Five nations attacked Israel unprovokely and were soundly defeated. Gaza was then annexed by Egypt and Jordan got the west bank. You really have no clue to history do you?

And Israel still occupied them.

There was no provocation. Anyone who studies history knows that. Arabs didn't like the fact that Israel declared statehood and declared war on them and attacked without even so much as diplomatic negotiations.

Oh yeah, no provocation, people just suicide bomb for no reason right?

There are, then, two issues at the very core of the continuing conflict and escalating violence in the Middle East:

First, there is the inevitably destabilizing effect of trying to maintain an ethnically preferential state, particularly when the exclusionist entity is of largely colonial origin. As we have seen, the original population of what is now Israel was 95 percent Muslim and Christian. And yet, Muslim and Christian refugees are not being allowed to return to their homes in the current "Jewish state." Israeli peace negotiators refuse to even discuss the possibility of applying this UN guaranteed right.

Second, Israel’s continued confiscation of Palestinian land in the West Bank and Gaza is being resisted by the Palestinian inhabitants. It is these occupied territories that, according to the Oslo peace accords of 1993, were going to become a Palestinian state. However, when Israel continued to take land in these areas and to move its citizens onto it, the Palestinian population rebelled. This uprising, called the "Intifada" (Arabic for "shaking off") began at the end of September 2000 and continues to this day.

Maybe you should read up on what is actually going on.

Essentially a fallacy. Prior to the first crusade, and Urban II's expediant exploitation and augmentation of the notion of a divinely sanctioned conflict, the three semitic faiths co-existed quite contentedly. Granted, s good proportion of Spain was, by virtue of the Moors, Islamic, and the Byzantine empire was in a perpetual decline at the hands of Islam, however the conflicts were not motivated and characterised as issues of faith, but of terrirtory and politics.

I should imagine it is not the presence of Israel that, in itself, riles the Islamic world overly, as much as the manner in which it was established, and the extent to which its actions are condoned by the "powers".

Eh, no.

A change of policy of the muslim rulers, (I think it had something to do with the turks, but I should check) starting to harass pilgrims, gave Urban II the excuse to call for mass crime in the name of Christ.

Eh, no.

A change of policy of the muslim rulers, (I think it had something to do with the turks, but I should check) starting to harass pilgrims, gave Urban II the excuse to call for mass crime in the name of Christ.

Not according to what I read.

No regime, other than a Christian state, ever condoned systematic harrassment of pilgrims in the middle ages. With omission of a Berber monarch, and a single Ottoman, presumably whose exploits constituted a part of Urban's pretext,Christians were tolerated by the Islamic states.

Indeed, the Crusade was primarily catalysed by Alexius' appeal to Urban for aid, and Urban's temporal ambitions.

I'd say that interpretation places you solidly with the pro-islamist ranks.

Yay! Black and white is back.
Well. You did say the blame lies with the "intruders". Anyway I don't care much if you think I'm in the "pro-islamist ranks" as you put it. Your president gave me a choice a while back: I'm either unquestioningly all for stuff such as the Invasion of Iraq, the Guantanamo camp and American imperialist and anti-intellectual crap, or I'm a terrorist.

Not according to what I read.

No regime, other than a Christian state, ever condoned systematic harrassment of pilgrims in the middle ages. With omission of a Berber monarch, and a single Ottoman, presumably whose exploits constituted a part of Urban's pretext,Christians were tolerated by the Islamic states.

Indeed, the Crusade was primarily catalysed by Alexius' appeal to Urban for aid, and Urban's temporal ambitions.

The crusades were initially a project of pope Gregorius VII, fearing the decline of the Byzantine Empire, taken up by Urban II.
The aim of the very first crusade was to go and help the Byzantine Empire, which was being attacked by the Seljoukides Turcs who also were, reportedly, attacking Christian pilgrims. Those were the pretexts given by Urban II at the Clermont Council in 1095 to call for a crusade to help the Byzantine empire, protect pilgrims and liberate Jerusalem.

The crusades were initially a project of pope Gregorius VII, fearing the decline of the Byzantine Empire, taken up by Urban II.
The aim of the very first crusade was to go and help the Byzantine Empire, which was being attacked by the Seljoukides Turcs who also were, reportedly, attacking Christian pilgrims. Those were the pretexts given by Urban II at the Clermont Council in 1095 to call for a crusade to help the Byzantine empire, protect pilgrims and liberate Jerusalem.

Those those!, the Seljoukides Turks, who were attacking pilgrims.

I mean, I know it was an excuse for the complot between the Byzantine Emperor and the pope, but then again, soldier kidnapping, pilgrim harassing, it always need an excuse.

Yay! Black and white is back.
Well. You did say the blame lies with the "intruders". Anyway I don't care much if you think I'm in the "pro-islamist ranks" as you put it. Your president gave me a choice a while back: I'm either unquestioningly all for stuff such as the Invasion of Iraq, the Guantanamo camp and American imperialist and anti-intellectual crap, or I'm a terrorist.

Wrong analysis: you support the crap politically despite your own feelings - or you cross sides.

Those those!, the Seljoukides Turks, who were attacking pilgrims.

I mean, I know it was an excuse for the complot between the Byzantine Emperor and the pope, but then again, soldier kidnapping, pilgrim harassing, it always need an excuse.

History has taught us, that there are no politics (irrespective of being deffensive or agressive) without pretexts, whatever they might be.

History has taught us, that there are no politics (irrespective of being deffensive or agressive) without pretexts, whatever they might be.

That is actually a true statement.

I didn't know Palestine was a nation?

State, no.
Nation-state, no.
Nation, yes.

State, no.
Nation-state, no.
Nation, yes.

:rolleyes:

Palestine was never a state nor was it ever a nation.

:rolleyes:

Palestine was never a state nor was it ever a nation.

You don't need to have a state to be part of a nation.

Merriam-Webster
Main Entry: na·tion
Pronunciation: 'nA-sh&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English nacioun, from Anglo-French naciun, from Latin nation-, natio birth, race, nation, from nasci to be born; akin to Latin gignere to beget -- more at KIN

1 a (1) : NATIONALITY 5a (2) : a politically organized nationality

3 : a tribe or federation of tribes (as of American Indians)

Wrong analysis: you support the crap politically despite your own feelings - or you cross sides.

I don't need a racist yank to tell me what I think, feel or support.

If I did, then we'd just be two Bush-supporters chatting about guns, wouldn't we?

:rolleyes:

Palestine was never a state nor was it ever a nation.

Well technically neither is Israel since it has no constitution nor does it define its borders.

As far as nation is concerned:

nation - A relatively large group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.

Yeah its a nation.

Well technically neither is Israel since it has no constitution nor does it define its borders.

Actually, Israel does have define borders, It does have a constitution (albeit unwritten but then so is Great Britain's Constitution)

As far as nation is concerned:

nation - A relatively large group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.

Yeah its a nation.

Actually, no Palestine is not a country and has never been a country.

Actually, Israel does have define borders, It does have a constitution (albeit unwritten but then so is Great Britain's Constitution).

Unwritten constitutions are not constitutions per se

Actually, no Palestine is not a country and has never been a country.

'Country' is a too vague term. It is never used in politics when describing a place. State and Nation (to a lesser, infrequent extent 'nation-state' if it is one) are used.

It is not a state.

It is however a nation.

Actually, Israel does have define borders, It does have a constitution (albeit unwritten but then so is Great Britain's Constitution)

It does not have a written constitution nor has it ever officially defined its borders.

Actually, no Palestine is not a country and has never been a country.

I just defined nation for you. Palestine fits that definition. And you say I say stupid things?

Unwritten constitutions are not constitutions per se

Well in that case, Britain isn't a country either since it doesn't have a Constitution.

Well in that case, Britain isn't a country either since it doesn't have a Constitution.

The United Kingdom consists of multiple "countries".

'Country' is a too vague term. It is never used in politics when describing a place. State and Nation (to a lesser, infrequent extent 'nation-state' if it is one) are used.

It is not a state.

It is however a nation.

Then we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this topic for I do not buy that Palestine is a nation.

The United Kingdom consists of multiple "countries".

They still dont have a written constitution.

:rolleyes:

Palestine was never a state nor was it ever a nation.

So what do you want to call them? "A gathering of communist nazis"? Or just "the homeless problem" ?

They still dont have a written constitution.

No, but the countries that make up the United Kingdom do (to my knowledge).

They still dont have a written constitution.

Actually we could say they do: The "Magna Carta" has still some provisions in force today.

Then we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this topic for I do not buy that Palestine is a nation.

Its not there for you to 'buy'. Its fits the definition of a 'nation', not a 'state'.

It is a nation.
Deal with it.

Actually, no Palestine is not a country and has never been a country.[/QUOTE]

Then when the British were ruling over the mandate of Palestine, it didn't exist. And before you point out that prior to that it was a part of the Ottoman Empire and not specifically called Palestine as a country, it should be remembered that the basis for most countries in Africa was Europeans rawing lines on a map and giving them a name. IN this sense Palestine was most definitely a country, in just the same way that Israel is now a country when previously it was not.

Actually, no Palestine is not a country and has never been a country.

If its a group of people with a government, its a nation.

Then we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this topic for I do not buy that Palestine is a nation.


In a way this mirrors reality. American ignorance defies the rest of the world, and due to its current power, prevails. Depressing.

Actually, no Palestine is not a country and has never been a country.
What Palestine is not is a STATE. This is what they fight for, to give the nation of Palestine a state. Its like Kurdistan, it is very much a real nation, but is not a state.

What Palestine is not is a STATE. This is what they fight for, to give the nation of Palestine a state. Its like Kurdistan, it is very much a real nation, but is not a state.

Or the Nation of Domination.

http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/wwfmi/nodthen.jpg

Then we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this topic for I do not buy that Palestine is a nation.
The shear stupidity of this statement makes me want to flame you to no end, but I will keep it civil. 1) Please go to a University and take a course or two on international affairs/relations. 2) look up what nation means. Aw screw it, here let me help you. A state is a legally sovereign terrority with borders and international recognition. A nation is not. A nation is simply a large group of people with a shared history, language, culture, ethnicity, etc. People within that nation generally have a strong sense of belonging to their nation. Such as the US civil war. While the US state was united the nations of the North and south had stronger ties to their nation, and thus fought. My point is that Palestine is very much a nation, to state otherwise is just blindly ignorant.

The Confederate States of America were a nation too.

Yet we wiped it out.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.