NationStates Jolt Archive

Intentionally targeting civilians is terrorism.That's what Israel has been doing for almost 60 years. All that Palestinian Arabs want is back home. Unfortunately there's this invasion force in their land. So how could they defend themselves other than by means of blowing up the invaders?

That's what Israel has been doing for almost 60 years.

please provide evidence to suggest that Israel intentionally targetted innocent civilians.

Note I said innocent, this does not mean:

civilians who planned terrorist activities
civilians who intentionally hid terrorists
civilians while innocent were not targets and died as a result of collateral damage.

Show figures, add it up, tell me how many innocent civilians on either side died.

It's funny when Israel kills civilians by accident, there's a huge international uproar, while Palestinians intentionally targeting Israelis is more or less shrugged off.

please provide evidence to suggest that Israel intentionally targetted innocent civilians.

Note I said innocent, this does not mean:

civilians who planned terrorist activities
civilians who intentionally hid terrorists
civilians while innocent were not targets and died as a result of collateral damage.

Show figures, add it up, tell me how many innocent civilians on either side died.There is more than enough evidence that Israel kills Palestinians, and then they always claim it was "accidentally". As if. Just like the planes against French ships.
On the other side there are no innocent Israeli civilians, as I already pointed out. Every Israeli is responsible for the death and displacement of Palestinians just by being there. Almost every Israeli now dwells in a place that a Palestinian had to leave.

There is more than enough evidence that Israel kills Palestinians, and then they always claim it was "accidentally". As if. Just like the planes against French ships.
On the other side there are no innocent Israeli civilians, as I already pointed out. Every Israeli is responsible for the death and displacement of Palestinians just by being there. Almost every Israeli now dwells in a place that a Palestinian had to leave.

I give up. You are literally beyond hope.

All that Palestinian Arabs want is back home.
Then they should learn from history and realize that the best way to achieve that is by getting the rest of the world to sympathize with your plight and behave accordingly. The reason they don't sympathize for th most part is because most of the world find their methods reprehensible. You don't have to be Ghandi, just choose any military targets with a little more discretion. If you don't want to affect change in the Martin Luther King Jr. way, at least do it in an FMLN way. The had a military struggle going on in El Salvador for two decades and the world sympathized with them. Of course, when they kidnapped the president's daughter they explained their position to her, brought her into their camps, fed her and released her after a couple weeks - after which she called for the government to negotiate a solution, which it did. What they didn't do is cut her head off on video tape and play it to the world. They also didn't strap bombs to their children and send them to blow up buses.

I don't think that the Nazis were as bad as the Isreals, but maybe that's has to do with the fact that I agree with the Nazis.

Illegal? So what? Since when is creating a state in a foreign land legal? And dwelling in the land while the original inhabitants dwell in camps and wait to return?

Are you familiar with the accord that Arafat turned down that offered up 95% of the land back to the Palestinians? Yea that's right. Arafat turned down that deal. As for so what, illegal actions do not win you friends among those that you want to seek support. Have you noticed that most of the western world have cut off aid to the Hamas led government? You know why? Because of their suicide attacks against CIVILIANS. Civilians who have done nothing to the Palestinians I might add.

I clearly see what the purpose of your pointless division into military and civilians is: you try to claim that Israeli civilians are innocent. But they aren't.

If Israeli civilians are not innocent then the Palestinian civilians are not innocent. You want to have your cake and eat it too but in this realm, you can't. You have failed at logic and failed at history as well as International law. Please come back again when you freshen up on it.

Their very existence and remaining in Palestine (which they have renamed after their assumed ancestor Israel) is an atrocity against the original inhabitants of the land: Arabs.

Except that Palestine never was a state. As to the original inhabitants, the Arabs were not the original inhabitants either in case you have forgotten your history (which it seems you have).

The Israeli military only does the will of the Israelis, so it is they who are to blame and who are the source of the Palestinian Arabs misery.

And having nations wage constant war on them had nothing to do with it?

Palestinian Arabs have every right to regain their land. All of their land. By every means they deem necessary. After all it's not their fault, that Jews couldn't get along in Europe (or anywhere else really).

Funny. They seem to get along fine here in the United States. They seem to be getting along in Europe as well. Amazingly arabs and jews are living side by side in Israel and they get along. Let me also tell you that there are Arabs inside the Israeli government as well as the IDF. It is not their fault that their neighbors constantly attack them.

Just imagine: an ordinary Arab family in 1930 or so, with a small house, a garden, and a few acres of land to support the family. How could you possibly expect that this family should give up their home, their land, their lives, their heritage, their friends, etc etc, just to let a bunch of foreigners move in? How?

How could the Arabs tell the palestinians to get out so they could attack the infant Israeli state and then not bring them inside their nations when they lost?

The 'state' of Israel is the terrorist. No-one else.

No, you are the terroirst here.

For seeing no diffrence between a soldier and a child. You have already said that you would condone an innocnet Isralies death if it got you closer to your goal of the death of Israel.

Terroists intentionally target civilians for the purpose of spreading terror as a means to achive their goals. Political or otherwise.

The Isralies dont do that. They kill only those who want to kill their civilians. Civilains will die as a result, but only because that is who the terrorists are hiding amoung

The Britons? They had no right so give away Arab land. It wasn't theirs. They were only supposed to administer it for a time.
Jews weren't in Palestine before Arabs.

And the Arabs were not in Palestine before the Jews. Now that we have established that the Arabs were not, indeed first in the region, nor where they second, your case falls apart.

There is more than enough evidence that Israel kills Palestinians, and then they always claim it was "accidentally". As if. Just like the planes against French ships.
On the other side there are no innocent Israeli civilians, as I already pointed out. Every Israeli is responsible for the death and displacement of Palestinians just by being there. Almost every Israeli now dwells in a place that a Palestinian had to leave.

As a little note "Palestinians" (a term coined by the Brits while they occupied the region) were never required to leave anywhere. If you bothered to check your facts first, you'd know that there innumerable Palestinians who are citizens of the State of Israel.

By the way, when Israel was created, a Palestinian state was also created. In a genuinely misguided effort to say that the whole thing was meaningless and Britain never conquered them at all, they refused to recognize the existance of either state. Thus, theirs was quickly snatched up by Assyria, Jordan, and Egypt.

Then they should learn from history and realize that the best way to achieve that is by getting the rest of the world to sympathize with your plight and behave accordingly. The reason they don't sympathize for th most part is because most of the world find their methods reprehensible. You don't have to be Ghandi, just choose any military targets with a little more discretion. If you don't want to affect change in the Martin Luther King Jr. way, at least do it in an FMLN way. The had a military struggle going on in El Salvador for two decades and the world sympathized with them. Of course, when they kidnapped the president's daughter they explained their position to her, brought her into their camps, fed her and released her after a couple weeks - after which she called for the government to negotiate a solution, which it did. What they didn't do is cut her head off on video tape and play it to the world. They also didn't strap bombs to their children and send them to blow up buses.After almost 60 years of oppression what other way is there than desperately strapping bombs to their children and send them to blow up buses? What they have learned from history is that Israelis are foreign bastards who took away their land with the backing of the UN (especially the West) and that Israelis are generally not trustworthy. You expect Palestinian Arabs to just give up their homeland and basically cease to exist.

I know history.

That's very laughable.

There is more than enough evidence that Israel kills Palestinians, and then they always claim it was "accidentally". As if. Just like the planes against French ships.
On the other side there are no innocent Israeli civilians, as I already pointed out. Every Israeli is responsible for the death and displacement of Palestinians just by being there. Almost every Israeli now dwells in a place that a Palestinian had to leave.

The Palestians were offered to return. As I have said but you have routinely ignored. Why do you think there is such a large Isralie Arab group in Israel

And what about the Arab stares, they seem so vocal in the plight of the Palestians, yet they dont take any in themselves. Seems a little odd to me.

If there is all this evidence that the Isralies are trying to wipe out the Palestians, please provide it.

But the point is that Israelis can't make peace. Well, in fact they can, but only their peace, i.e. the continuation and extension of the occupation.

Oh bullshit. Look at the Peace Treaty with Egypt. Look at the Peace Treaty with Jordan. They offered Arafat 95% of the land that they wanted and he turned it down. Now tell me who wants peace and who does not.

As a little note "Palestinians" (a term coined by the Brits while they occupied the region) were never required to leave anywhere.Which would mean that the many thousands of Jews coming to Palestine wanted to live in those places of Palestine that were not already inhabited by Arabs? But such space never existed, and the immigrating Jews knew that. So from the get-go their aim was to replace the already present Arab population with themselves.

Oh bullshit. Look at the Peace Treaty with Egypt. Look at the Peace Treaty with Jordan. They offered Arafat 95% of the land that they wanted and he turned it down. Now tell me who wants peace and who does not.They never seriously offered Arafat anything.

Israelis/Jews started the war. Palestinians only defend themselves and their home land. Let the Jews go back to where they came from, and Palestinians will make peace. Until then I view every dead Israeli as one step closer to justice.

Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, and Syria started the war. Israel did not. Again, learn your history you racist dog.

How the hell can you ask that, you son of a bitch.

Israel has acted in self-defense to hostile Arab nations around it that want it wiped off the map along with all of the Jews. They are not even in the Nazi's league. the Nazis rounded up and killed over 11 million people with no provocation.

and btw, soviestan, it is idiots like you that make the world a horrible place.:upyours:

Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, and Syria started the war. Israel did not. Again, learn your history you racist dog.Israel started the war by declaring statehood in foreign territory. Learn history you racist dog.

After almost 60 years of oppression what other way is there than desperately strapping bombs to their children and send them to blow up buses? What they have learned from history is that Israelis are foreign bastards who took away their land with the backing of the UN (especially the West) and that Israelis are generally not trustworthy. You expect Palestinian Arabs to just give up their homeland and basically cease to exist.

1. The very word you are so fevently using, "Palestian" is a creation of the west itself. The Roman Empire, in 77AD aprox, changed the name of the area where the Jews lived from 'Judea' to 'Palestinia', there named after the Philistines, who are no relation to the people you would call Palestinans. The region was renamed to lessen Jewish identification with the land.

2. Palestians never had a "homeland" in the sense of a state. What they had was part of southern Syria which they then lost when the Ottomans lost the war for that region.

3. What they could do is accept what Israel has offered them, repeadely. What they could do is rather than aiming for Tel Aviv, aim for the Isralie defence force bases. Tel Aviv is a civilian centre, full of inocent Isralies. And dont think for a second about pulling out that "no such thing as innocent Israleies" line. If your logic were used by the Isralies, every single Palesitinan would be dead.

Palestinians are only killing those who oppress them. That's the Israelis. Students, office workers, mothers, teachers, au pairs, businessmen, bankers, doctors etc, they all pay for the military and they elect the governments to use the military to secure the further occupation of a foreign land. They are guilty.

So why is a teenager, who has done nothing wrong but living the life of a teenager deserve to die when he has done nothing wrong? Why should mothers who raise babies be blown up for doing nothing but existing? You sir are a moron and your computer privileges should be revoked. Where you at? the Middle East?

Jews never wanted peace and they never offered anything seriously. The 2000 proposal was a bad cynical joke. It would have only given the Palestinians autonomy over the hilltops of Samaria, but no water and no infrastructure.

HAHAHAHA!!!! This guy is now moving into the realm of comedy. The 2000 proposal not serious? OH MY LORD! You really are stupid with no clue as to reality.

The 'state' of Israel is the terrorist. No-one else.

Not even Al Qaeda?

Israel started the war by declaring statehood in foreign territory. Learn history you racist dog.

Territory that they had lived in for over 3000 years is hardly forigen. Terriory that was under control of the UN, and thus was the UN's right to direct. Territory where they were in the majority (see previous posts on the UN's assessment of the area).

By your logic, Saudi Arabia should be given back to the Arab Pagans and Mecca should be destroyed. After all, the Pagans were in the majority when the Muslims invaded.

Israel started the war by declaring statehood in foreign territory. Learn history you racist dog.

Israel and the Israelis had been in "Palestine" since before 2000 years ago. if anyone had a right to the land it was them. And it was the Arabs who declared war on a newly created state which they had no right to (and lost, by the way!)

It's funny when Israel kills civilians by accident, there's a huge international uproar, while Palestinians intentionally targeting Israelis is more or less shrugged off.

And the fact that Darfur seems to be falling by the wayside as well while a genocide is still going on there just adds to the misery. Now I know why I hate the UN and most nations on this planet.

So why is a teenager, who has done nothing wrong but living the life of a teenager deserve to die when he has done nothing wrong? Why should mothers who raise babies be blown up for doing nothing but existing? You sir are a moron and your computer privileges should be revoked. Where you at? the Middle East?As someone posted before here, Israeli teenagers are signing rockets the military fires on Arabs.
And then why does an Arab teenager, who has done nothing wrong but living the life of a teenager deserve to die or to live anywhere else than his father's and grandfather's home when he has done nothing wrong?

They never seriously offered Arafat anything.

You know, repeating empty statemnets gets you nowhere.

They never seriously offered Arafat anything.

Which I am calling bullshit again. It was a serious offer. You just do not like the fact that you are getting hammered here with historical fact after historical fact. Your reasoning has been destroyed upon cross-examination. You sir, have been served more than once.

HAHAHAHA!!!! This guy is now moving into the realm of comedy. The 2000 proposal not serious? OH MY LORD! You really are stupid with no clue as to reality.Just look at the details of the proposed accord. Look at a map outlining the areas of proposed Palestinian "autonomy" and look at what resources would have come under Palestinian control. Laughable. Barak knew that, Clinton knew that, Arafat knew that. And everyone following it all on CNN knew it as well.

As someone posted before here, Israeli teenagers are signing rockets the military fires on Arabs.
And then why does an Arab teenager, who has done nothing wrong but living the life of a teenager deserve to die or to live anywhere else than his father's and grandfather's home when he has done nothing wrong?

HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF SUICIDE BOMBERS? HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF AN ISRAELI SUICIDE BOMBER? THINK ABOUT IT. THE ARAB TEENAGERS CHOOSE TO BLOW THEMSELVES UP SO THEY CAN TAKE INNOCENT LIVES WITH THEM.

Israel started the war by declaring statehood in foreign territory. Learn history you racist dog.

I'm a racist dog? I'm not the one advocating the death of Israelis. I'm not even advocating the death of Arabs or of muslims. You on the other hand want all Israelis to die. Let me remind you that they did not invade the land. They bought some of it and when they declared statehood, they immediately recognized their arab neighbors. I'm not the racist here. You are.

As to learning history, I am a History Major as well as a Political Science Major here at the university I attend. I'm currently taking a Modern Middle East Class. It is rather interesting.

I do support a state for the Palestinians but not until they renounce violence. Once they do, then I will whole heartedly support them.

Just look at the details of the proposed accord. Look at a map outlining the areas of proposed Palestinian "autonomy" and look at what resources would have come under Palestinian control. Laughable. Barak knew that, Clinton knew that, Arafat knew that.

They could have bought the resources from Israel, which Israel would sell them as long as there was peace.

If you call BS on that, then perhaps you would like to look at what they are already offering them. Israels hospitals are amoung the most advanced in the world, mainly because they so often have to deal with people reciving serious injury. The services of these hospitals is fiercely nonpolitical and thus they are open to the Palestians, but the PA has refused that offer. They'd rather have their own people die than let the Isralies save them

As someone posted before here, Israeli teenagers are signing rockets the military fires on Arabs.

During a war I might add. A war they did not start but was started by Hezbollah with illegal, CROSS-BORDER rocket attacks directly aimed at civilian targets.

And then why does an Arab teenager, who has done nothing wrong but living the life of a teenager deserve to die or to live anywhere else than his father's and grandfather's home when he has done nothing wrong?

Deserve to die? No for the same reason that an israeli teenager does not deserve to die.

They could have bought the resources from Israel, which Israel would sell them as long as there was peace.

If you call BS on that, then perhaps you would like to look at what they are already offering them. Israels hospitals are amoung the most advanced in the world, mainly because they so often have to deal with people reciving serious injury. The services of these hospitals is fiercely nonpolitical and thus they are open to the Palestians, but the PA has refused that offer. They'd rather have their own people die than let the Isralies save themBuying the resource of their own land back from Israelis?

Just look at the details of the proposed accord. Look at a map outlining the areas of proposed Palestinian "autonomy" and look at what resources would have come under Palestinian control. Laughable. Barak knew that, Clinton knew that, Arafat knew that. And everyone following it all on CNN knew it as well.

Oh I have looked at it. It was the best offer ever given. Think about this! 95% of the land was more land than what Arafat was expecting. It was the best offer ever and it took everyone offguard when it was offered. You do not like it because it did not dismantle Israel. It was the best offer that Arafat could have gotten and what happens? He turns it down and the 2nd intifada was underway. Why is it that with any kind of serious negotiations, one terror group or another sabotages it and sparks reprisals from the IDF?

Buying the resource of their own land back from Israelis?

As opposed to your solution, kill everyone to get the resources

Money is worth less than blood

During a war I might add. A war they did not start but was started by Hezbollah with illegal, CROSS-BORDER rocket attacks directly aimed at civilian targets.It demonstrated the Israeli mindset.

Deserve to die? No for the same reason that an israeli teenager does not deserve to die.But Arab teenagers are dying by Israeli bullets and because they cannot live on that soil that used to feed their fathers and grandfathers. What do you think how good the living conditions are in the refugee camps while Israelis pursue their decadent euroamerican lifestyles?

What do you think how good the living conditions are in the refugee camps while Israelis pursue their decadent euroamerican lifestyles?

ahhh NOW we're getting to the root of it all. Where have I heard this language before....

As opposed to your solution, kill everyone to get the resources

Money is worth less than bloodPalestinians don't have money to buy their own land back. And it also wouldn't give them the control over their land back.

ahhh NOW we're getting to the root of it all. Where have I heard this language before....Look at Israel in Google Earth. It looks like a suburbian area in France or Germany. Then look at the occupied territories.

It demonstrated the Israeli mindset.

The mindset that they dont like people intentionally targeting their civilian centres.

Yes, what an EVIL mindset *Insert extreme sarcasm*


But Arab teenagers are dying by Israeli bullets and because they cannot live on that soil that used to feed their fathers and grandfathers. What do you think how good the living conditions are in the refugee camps while Israelis pursue their decadent euroamerican lifestyles?

They may not be able to live on the soil of their fathers and grandfathers, but with peace they would be able to live. Which is worth more. Also, as has been pointed out to you, and you have repeadly ignored, after the 1948 war Israel made an offer to the Palesitians who had fled, that they could return as long as

- They becam Isralie citizens
- They renounced vilonece
- They became peaceful and prodcutive

Your way is far worse. Your way more and more Arab teenagers will die, along with Isralies. More lives.

The arab teenagers can have there land, but it will be infertile, posioned by the blood of all those who were killed unessescarly for it.

Look at Israel in Google Earth. It looks like a suburbian area in France or Germany. Then look at the occupied territories.

and who put the arabs in those settlements in the first place. It seems to me that they had the opportunity to participate in the Israeli state, they also had the opportunity to create their own state.

They chose neither. Oops.

Palestinians don't have money to buy their own land back. And it also wouldn't give them the control over their land back.

Not the land, the resoucres. The Isralies would give them the water etc they needed (they are already offering them the medical assistance).

The mindset that they dont like people intentionally targeting their civilian centres.

Yes, what an EVIL mindset *Insert extreme sarcasm*



They may not be able to live on the soil of their fathers and grandfathers, but with peace they would be able to live. Which is worth more. Also, as has been pointed out to you, and you have repeadly ignored, after the 1948 war Israel made an offer to the Palesitians who had fled, that they could return as long as

- They becam Isralie citizens
- They renounced vilonece
- They became peaceful and prodcutive

Your way is far worse. Your way more and more Arab teenagers will die, along with Isralies. More lives.

The arab teenagers can have there land, but it will be infertile, posioned by the blood of all those who were killed unessescarly for it.

Why the fuck should any Arab ever become an Israeli citizen and thus accept foreign rule? Who wants to be ruled by Israelis? By an artificial state that was formed from a religious group? Why should they ever share their land with foreigners? Just because Jews/Israelis have successfully forced themselves into the land?

Not the land, the resoucres. The Isralies would give them the water etc they needed (they are already offering them the medical assistance).Very cynical. To buy the water of one's ancestors' land from foreigners.

It demonstrated the Israeli mindset.

You are aware that even the US wrote stuff on their bombs before they were dropped on enemy formations? I do not know why armies do that but it seems to be standard MO for most armies.

But Arab teenagers are dying by Israeli bullets and because they cannot live on that soil that used to feed their fathers and grandfathers.

And Israeli children are dying by suicide bombers armed with backbacks with explosives and other nasty objects.

What do you think how good the living conditions are in the refugee camps while Israelis pursue their decadent euroamerican lifestyles?

Seems to me the Israelis would love to live at peace with the Palestinians. Its the Palestinians that do not want it. If the Palestinians stop blowing people up with suicide bombers, maybe they can have an actual peace and they can concentrate on updating their equipment and therefore achieve a higher standard of living.

Strawman.

How so?


Aside from the small linguistic concern that there was no such thing as "Palestinians" at the time...

Bzzzzz! Wrong! They were called that for thousands of years, people from that region.

That is acknowledged. There may have been incidents of abuse. But since the land belonged to the United Kingdom by right of conquest, and the UK gave/sold it over to the Jews, it is Israel's land. The Palestinians, or the Arabs or whatever they were called then, did not have a government or representation, so legally it wasn't their land. In other senses... it wasn't their land either, since the earth belongs to humans and the other species that live upon its surface.

You do understand why a bunch of Arab nations went ot war with Israel, right? Because the Zionist Israelis pushed and shoved and manipulated the local Palistinians to leave their land. Sorry, Israel DID push and shove and threaten the locals.


Exactly. And Israel has the right to defend itself. Which it has, explaining why there is no Palestinian state at the present time.

No there is no Palestinian state because when the other Arab nations went to war with Israel they also punished the local people who were not Jewish.

Why the fuck should any Arab ever become an Israeli citizen and thus accept foreign rule? Who wants to be ruled by Israelis?

Better than being ruled by the british like they were?

Oh right, I forgot...they weren't jews...

Why the fuck should any Arab ever become an Israeli citizen and thus accept foreign rule? Who wants to be ruled by Israelis? By an artificial state that was formed from a religious group? Why should they ever share their land with foreigners? Just because Jews/Israelis have successfully forced themselves into the land?
Maybe because Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East? That's reason enough to support it.
Oh yes, and it has the highest Human Development Index in the Middle East too.

You are aware that even the US wrote stuff on their bombs before they were dropped on enemy formations? I do not know why armies do that but it seems to be standard MO for most armies.



And Israeli children are dying by suicide bombers armed with backbacks with explosives and other nasty objects.



Seems to me the Israelis would love to live at peace with the Palestinians. Its the Palestinians that do not want it. If the Palestinians stop blowing people up with suicide bombers, maybe they can have an actual peace and they can concentrate on updating their equipment and therefore achieve a higher standard of living.Seems to me the Israelis would love to live at peace with no Palestinians.

You are aware that even the US wrote stuff on their bombs before they were dropped on enemy formations? I do not know why armies do that but it seems to be standard MO for most armies.



And Israeli children are dying by suicide bombers armed with backbacks with explosives and other nasty objects.



Seems to me the Israelis would love to live at peace with the Palestinians. Its the Palestinians that do not want it. If the Palestinians stop blowing people up with suicide bombers, maybe they can have an actual peace and they can concentrate on updating their equipment and therefore achieve a higher standard of living.

Or maybe the Israelis should give bak the land they stoled from the ones they hurt to recieve the land they came and took, eh? You do realize that back in 1948, the Zionists were not happy on recieving only parto fhte land right?

Why the fuck should any Arab ever become an Israeli citizen and thus accept foreign rule? Who wants to be ruled by Israelis? By an artificial state that was formed from a religious group? Why should they ever share their land with foreigners? Just because Jews/Israelis have successfully forced themselves into the land?

- The Isralies are not forigeners, they have lived there for over 3000 years

- The Paliestinas can be ruled by themselves as part of the Isralie government. Israel is a democracy, the Arabs can vote for Arab members of the parliament. Democarcy means it is ruled by the people.

- If anything a Palestian state is artifical. There has never been such thing before so such a state would be artifical in the extreme and Palestine is a name given to the region by forigeners, even more artifical

Maybe because Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East? That's reason enough to support it.
Oh yes, and it has the highest Human Development Index in the Middle East too.

Liberal? Hardly. Do you see any non-Jews in their political leadership? Anywhere in their government at all? I mean come on.....

I am not saying that the arabs are any better especially with the bombings, but lets get some prospectve here on the facts..

Better than being ruled by the british like they were?

Oh right, I forgot...they weren't jews...They were not ruled by the British. The British were there to administer the area until an Arab government could have been formed. A division of Palestine was not envisioned when the administration was given to the British.

Seems to me the Israelis would love to live at peace with no Palestinians.

They do want to live at peace with the Palestinians. Its the Palestinians who do not want to live at peace with Israel. I take that back, the extremists who are in charge do not want to live in peace with Israel.

Or maybe the Israelis should give bak the land they stoled from the ones they hurt to recieve the land they came and took, eh? You do realize that back in 1948, the Zionists were not happy on recieving only parto fhte land right?

You realize that they also were attacked by 5 nations and defeated those five nations? You realize that at the end of said war, the Jordanians annexed the West Bank and the Egyptians got the Gaza Strip?

Bzzzzz! Wrong! They were called that for thousands of years, people from that region.

Bzzzzz! Wrong! The very name Palestian was a name given artifically to the region by the Romans to disolve links between the Jews and the land, then called Judea. The name was given after the Philistines, people who had not lived there very long at all, and are a nation of people that do not really exist now.


You do understand why a bunch of Arab nations went ot war with Israel, right? Because the Zionist Israelis pushed and shoved and manipulated the local Palistinians to leave their land. Sorry, Israel DID push and shove and threaten the locals.

The Jewish migrants bought the land from the Arab absentee landlords who couldnt care less about the region, and then they began the building up of cities, towns and advanced hydroponics (to deal with the fact they had no naturally arable land untill later)

Or maybe the Israelis should give bak the land they stoled from the ones they hurt to recieve the land they came and took, eh? You do realize that back in 1948, the Zionists were not happy on recieving only parto fhte land right?

Yes, the Arabs wernt happy either. But the diffence was the Jews were prepared to accept whatever they could get.

The expansion was a result of the Arab attack on Israel. An attack that focused on civilian centres.

Liberal? Hardly. Do you see any non-Jews in their political leadership? Anywhere in their government at all? I mean come on.....

Yes there is. Imagine that.

Liberal? Hardly. Do you see any non-Jews in their political leadership? Anywhere in their government at all? I mean come on.....

I am not saying that the arabs are any better especially with the bombings, but lets get some prospectve here on the facts..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Knesset_members#17th_Knesset_.28elected_2006.29

- The Isralies are not forigeners, they have lived there for over 3000 years

- The Paliestinas can be ruled by themselves as part of the Isralie government. Israel is a democracy, the Arabs can vote for Arab members of the parliament. Democarcy means it is ruled by the people.

- If anything a Palestian state is artifical. There has never been such thing before so such a state would be artifical in the extreme and Palestine is a name given to the region by forigeners, even more artificalRepeat: 3000 years ago, Jews or Israelis did not even exist. And only a small number of Jews have lived in the land over 2000 years. The vast majority Israelis are foreigners to Palestine. They have immigrated from Europe, Russia, and elsewhere to Palestine.

Democracy? They could have held a referendum in Palestine about the creation of Israel. And there is no reason why

An Arab state in the heartland of Arabia would in no way be artificial.

Liberal? Hardly. Do you see any non-Jews in their political leadership? Anywhere in their government at all? I mean come on.....

There are a few Muslim arabs in the Kiniset and one arab supreme court judge.

In fact, there are more muslims in the Israeli government then their are in fact in the American government.

Repeat: 3000 years ago, Jews or Israelis did not even exist.

WRONGO! Jews did exist over 3000 years ago as did the Kingdom of Israel. OOPS!!!!!

Democracy? They could have held a referendum in Palestine about the creation of Israel. And there is no reason why

Because Palestine was not a state? :confused:

They do want to live at peace with the Palestinians. Its the Palestinians who do not want to live at peace with Israel. I take that back, the extremists who are in charge do not want to live in peace with Israel.In the past 60 years there has been no indication that Israelis wanted peace with Palestinians. After all, they are still in Palestine, the area priorly inhabited by Arabs and a minority of Jews.

Repeat: 3000 years ago, Jews or Israelis did not even exist..

Bene Yisra'el has been around about 5000 years. Which, incidently, stands for "the people of Israel" and are the ancestors of modern judaism.

In the past 60 years there has been no indication that Israelis wanted peace with Palestinians. After all, they are still in Palestine, the area priorly inhabited by Arabs and a minority of Jews.

there is no such place in the world as "palestine", there never has been.

WRONGO! Jews did exist over 3000 years ago as did the Kingdom of Israel. OOPS!!!!!The ancient kingdom of Israel has nothing to do really with the Jews who immigrated to Palestine in the 20th century.
There is a vast difference between Israelites and Israelis.

Because Palestine was not a state? :confused:And? Does that keep you from asking the population of the territory in question what they want?

The ancient kingdom of Israel has nothing to do really with the Jews who immigrated to Palestine in the 20th century.
There is a vast difference between Israelites and Israelis.

One is the ancestor of the other. There is much a similarity and connection between an Israelite and a modern jew as there is a an original palestinian and a modern arab.

there is no such place in the world as "palestine", there never has been.

That's a ludicrous statement.

One is the ancestor of the other. There is much a similarity and connection between an Israelite and a modern jew as there is a an original palestinian and a modern arab.

Except for a time interval of a little less than two thousand years.

That's a ludicrous statement.

please find me a map that indicated a nation of palestine.

In the past 60 years there has been no indication that Israelis wanted peace with Palestinians. After all, they are still in Palestine, the area priorly inhabited by Arabs and a minority of Jews.

They want peace United Beleriand. It is a shame that you cannot see it. Why not take the rose colored glasses off and actually study a few things. I bet you are not even in college but still in High School by the way you talk.

Bene Yisra'el has been around about 5000 years. Which, incidently, stands for "the people of Israel" and are the ancestors of modern judaism.At least Jews claim so. 5000 years ago the Hebrews have not even left Mesopotamia and the Taurus. And Jacob was still over 1200 years away.

please find me a map that indicated a nation of palestine.

Moving the goalposts, are we?

They want peace United Beleriand. It is a shame that you cannot see it. Why not take the rose colored glasses off and actually study a few things. I bet you are not even in college but still in High School by the way you talk.I'm long past that. And as I said, there is no indication for Israelis wanting peace.

please find me a map that indicated a nation of palestine.We are talking of Arabs here. Arabs living in the territory designated as Palestine since ancient times. Arabs today dubbed as Palestinians. "Nation" is no criterion for anything. And "Nation" also has nothing at all to do with territory. Nation means community through birth.
We are talking about those people who have actually lived in the land for over a millennium and the suffering inflicted on them by Jews who have come from elsewhere to unnecessarily set up their state there.

The ancient kingdom of Israel has nothing to do really with the Jews who immigrated to Palestine in the 20th century.
There is a vast difference between Israelites and Israelis.

Wrong again. You do not know much do you? They are decendents of the 12 tribes of Israel who immigrated back to what is now the Modern state of Israel. So no, there is really no difference between Israelites and Israelis. The only difference is now there are Arabs who are Israeli.

And? Does that keep you from asking the population of the territory in question what they want?

It technically was not their territory as it was under control of many different nations (including the Kingdom of Israel, Babylon, Persia/Mede, Greek, Roman, Ottoman, British and French).

I'm long past that. And as I said, there is no indication for Israelis wanting peace.

You do not talk like you are past that for if you were, you would not be making ludicrous statements. As for no indication of peace, you are blinded by your hatred of Jews not to see that they do want peace.

You do not talk like you are past that for if you were, you would not be making ludicrous statements. As for no indication of peace, you are blinded by your hatred of Jews not to see that they do want peace.

Constant and ongoing promotion of settlements in territory that is
not Israels to the contrary.

I love the way Israelis claim their state on the basis of the UN
but deny anything the UN passes that doesn't suit their wishes.

The only valid Israeli state is the one defined by the UN way back when.
The only possible solution and peace will be when Israel accepts that.

There is no hatred of Jews in the statement that Israels actions
are not those of a nation looking for peace.

Crying Jew Hater does not convince anyone.

You know the only good thing about the German state in the second
world war was that they did not try to convince everyone that resistance
was terrorism and that the rest of the world just hated their freedoms.

The worst of the many bad things about the German state in the
second world war was how they attempted to dehumanise an entire
race and wipe them off the face of the planet.

I love the way Israelis claim their state on the basis of the UN
but deny anything the UN passes that doesn't suit their wishes.

Kind've like say oh....half the Middle East?

The only valid Israeli state is the one defined by the UN way back when.
The only possible solution and peace will be when Israel accepts that.

Not there fault they were attacked first in 1948 and won.

There is no hatred of Jews in the statement that Israels actions
are not those of a nation looking for peace.

I do agree with you.

Crying Jew Hater does not convince anyone.

No but it shows the person who wants the death of innocent Israelis what they truly are.

You know the only good thing about the German state in the second
world war was that they did not try to convince everyone that resistance
was terrorism and that the rest of the world just hated their freedoms.

They just ended democracy in a country, rounded up and killed jews, gypsies, disabled, homosexuals, etc.

The worst of the many bad things about the German state in the
second world war was how they attempted to dehumanise an entire
race and wipe them off the face of the planet.

I can agree to that.

Not there fault they were attacked first in 1948 and won.


Germany attacked everyone else first and lost

It didn't mean we all kept Germany, and look
peace with germans.

You keep their territory and look
no peace.

Have you worked it out yet



No but it shows the person who wants the death of innocent Israelis what they truly are.


No, it shows a lack of argument, appeal to emotion
and claiming victimhood.
Even if, someone had been wanting the death of innocent Israelis.

Germany attacked everyone else first and lost

It didn't mean we all kept Germany, and look
peace with germans.

They surrendered unconditionally as did the Japanese.

You keep their territory and look
no peace.

Have you worked it out yet

Peace treaty with Egypt: Egypt got land back
Peace treaty with Jordan: Same thing

You see a pattern here? You make peace with Israel and you will get land back. Do not make peace with Israel and you don't get land back. Israel offered 95% of the land back to the Palestinians and it was turned down and the 2nd intifada started soon after.

No, it shows a lack of argument, appeal to emotion
and claiming victimhood.
Even if, someone had been wanting the death of innocent Israelis.

Sorry. But I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on that base on the person's comments he has made.

We are talking of Arabs here. Arabs living in the territory designated as Palestine since ancient times. Arabs today dubbed as Palestinians. "Nation" is no criterion for anything. And "Nation" also has nothing at all to do with territory. Nation means community through birth.
We are talking about those people who have actually lived in the land for over a millennium and the suffering inflicted on them by Jews who have come from elsewhere to unnecessarily set up their state there.

- There has never been a political entity called "Palestine"

- The name Palestine was a name given artifically by the Romans, named after people that did not live there at the time

- The first Arabs who moved there were a result of the Arab conquests

- The Jews have lived there for more than 3000 years

Do you want land or life more?

Germany attacked everyone else first and lost

It didn't mean we all kept Germany, and look
peace with germans.

You keep their territory and look
no peace.

Have you worked it out yet.

Which is why they offer territory for peace. Israel has time and again offered do dismantale the occupation in exchange for peace. See the 2000 offer and the Gaza withdrawl. And for anyone claiming that they would have no resoucres, see the Isralie hospital offer.

there is no such place in the world as "palestine", there never has beenThat's a ludicrous statement.

Its true. There has never been an independent political entity called Palestine. Even the very name Palestine is artifical. But the Jews dont care about that, clearly. They have offered the Palestians the West bank and Gaza and the Palestians have rejected it, returning to vilonce. They will now get less land ultimately. To offer more suggests that terrorism is a better way to get what you want than negotaiton, which shouldnt be true.

Its true. There has never been an independent political entity called Palestine.

Arthais101 said "place," not "independent political entity."

Even the very name Palestine is artifical.

All names are artificial.

But the Jews dont care about that, clearly.

Some of them do. It features very prominently in the propaganda of the right-wing Israeli nationalists.

They have offered the Palestians the West bank and Gaza

No, they haven't.

Arthais101 said "place," not "independent political entity."

If a place is named by the people who live there (which it is) then Palestine has not existed. Its name was given forcably to Judea by the Romans after the Jewish revolt of 77AD to disasociate the Jews from their land.


All names are artificial.

This one paritcually so. Peoples names like the Jews, the Uzbeks, the Basque, the English etc are given to them by their own people. They are their own way of identifying themselves. The name 'Palestinian' was given to them by the Romans, named after an agean tribal race (the Philisitnes) that didnt live in the region at the time.


Some of them do. It features very prominently in the propaganda of the right-wing Israeli nationalists.

Well it hasnt affected them giving offers of land and peace


No, they haven't.

Yes they have. See the Clinton Barrack proposals of 2000

Israel would give: -
95% of the west bank
All of Gaza
East Jerusalem

In return for the Palesitians giving: -
Peace
Ending the claim of return

The claim of return was facisious anyway. Given that in 1948, the Palesitians that had left had been offered the ability to return anyway, in exchance for renouncing vilonece and becoming Isralie citizens (when they would have a great deal more rights than in any Arab state)

If a place is named by the people who live there (which it is)

No, no it isn't. Do you object to "America," too?

Its name was given forcably to Judea by the Romans after the Jewish revolt of 77AD to disasociate the Jews from their land.

I know. So?

This one paritcually so. Peoples names like the Jews, the Uzbeks, the Basque, the English etc are given to them by their own people. They are their own way of identifying themselves. The name 'Palestinian' was given to them by the Romans, named after an agean tribal race (the Philisitnes) that didnt live in the region at the time.

Again, I know. So what?

Well it hasnt affected them giving offers of land and peace

Yeah, those are just pouring out from right-wing Israeli nationalists, aren't they?

95% of the west bank

Not clear. The Israelis intended to take the central settlement blocs and a strip of territory along the Jordan River ("temporarily"). The state on offer was not a particularly good deal, so Arafat refused. Talks continued at Taba until the Israeli election.

No, no it isn't. Do you object to "America," too?

America was named by the people that lived and settled there, so yes it was named by people who lived there. Not the orignal people, but people who lived there.


I know. So?

Again, I know. So what?

The point being that any Palestianin ancestral claim is null and void. They are not orginally from there in any way the way the Jews are.


Not clear. The Israelis intended to take the central settlement blocs and a strip of territory along the Jordan River ("temporarily"). The state on offer was not a particularly good deal, so Arafat refused. Talks continued at Taba until the Israeli election.

The talks were a very good deal. They would have got all the land that they could have reasonably expexted to get. Its not as if the Palesitians had been giving Israel any reasonable insentive for this other than the cecasion of hostilities. Which isnt reasonable in the first place. If you wanted Israel to give up the land, the first thing you would do is stop fighting, as that is what Israel wants, peace. Give them peace and they will give you the land.

The fact is there are too many people around like United Beleriand who want Isralies dead, and thats it. They want a state and they dont care how many people die to get it.

After almost 60 years of oppression what other way is there than desperately strapping bombs to their children and send them to blow up buses? What they have learned from history is that Israelis are foreign bastards who took away their land with the backing of the UN (especially the West) and that Israelis are generally not trustworthy. You expect Palestinian Arabs to just give up their homeland and basically cease to exist.

First, their tactics did not start after 60 years. They started long before Isreal was a state. Second, people in Central and South America were oppressed for centuries - and in fact still are in many cases and don't choose to blow up their kids.

America was named by the people that lived and settled there, so yes it was named by people who lived there.

No, it wasn't. The people who lived and settled there adopted the name somebody else gave the place. The same thing happened in Palestine.

The point being that any Palestianin ancestral claim is null and void. They are not orginally from there in any way the way the Jews are.

I think immediate claims ("I live here") are more valid than ancestral claims ("I lived here two thousand years ago") anyway.

And the Jews were not "originally from there" either, if you believe the Bible anyway.

The talks were a very good deal.

Apparently the Palestinians didn't think so. They had good reason.

They would have got all the land that they could have reasonably expexted to get.

Then you can't blame them for trying to fight for more.

Its not as if the Palesitians had been giving Israel any reasonable insentive for this other than the cecasion of hostilities.

Self-determination is not something you need to pay somebody for; it's a human right.

Which isnt reasonable in the first place. If you wanted Israel to give up the land, the first thing you would do is stop fighting, as that is what Israel wants, peace. Give them peace and they will give you the land.

Yeah, and that's why Israel maintained the occupation for decades before the First Intifada.

No, Israel wants the land, and has always opposed a genuinely independent and viable Palestinian state. That, combined the intransigence of the Palestinian terrorist factions, is why there is a conflict.

The fact is there are too many people around like United Beleriand who want Isralies dead, and thats it.

I haven't gotten that impression from United Beleriand.

Second, people in Central and South America were oppressed for centuries - and in fact still are in many cases and don't choose to blow up their kids.

You don't think revolutionaries in Latin America have used terrorist tactics?

See FARC and the Shining Path.

You don't think revolutionaries in Latin America have used terrorist tactics?

See FARC and the Shining Path.

I used to work for CISPES and, in fact, spent some time in 1988 monitoring elections in El Salvador. Are there terrorist organizations in Central and South America? Sure. You'll notice they are not as successful as the FMLN or the Sandanistas in large part because of the tactics used. You ask if FARC uses terrorist tactics. Sure, but they're really just drug dealers no matter how they try to dress themselves up. But the fact remains that in most legitimate peasent revolutions suicide bombings of civilian populations - especially working class populations - is not a tactic of choice. For the palestinians it is THE tactic of choice. There are plenty of exposed military outposts to attack in Isreal but they choose to blow up malls and buses. The Sandanistas coud have taken that route but they didn't. Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr. could have taken that route but didn't. Who was more successful? As long as the Palestinians fight the way they do they will never have the world's sympathy the way so many people have in the past. If they appealed to the world the sympathy is ready to give, but it's hard to convince people to support a movement when the world see a bunch of dead children at a bus stop or a bunch of mutilated teenagers at a night club. I wouldn't have been getting arrested at the National Guard Armory in the 80's if the FMLN were blowing up malls instead of attacking garrisons. You realize that probably the most powerful act the FMLN ever did was to kidnap the president of El Salvador's daughter, take her to their camps, feed her let her meet the people, talk with her about what they were going through and then let her go? She immediately made a statement that the government needed to talk to teh FMLN and legitimze them. They were allowed to run a candidate in the next election. They lost, but never again picked up their arms the way they did in the 70s and 80s. If the Palestinians got ahold of one of the of Omert's progeny we'd have a new beheading on the internet with a litany about how all the Jews must die.

But the fact remains that in most legitimate peasent revolutions suicide bombings of civilian populations - especially working class populations - is not a tactic of choice. For the palestinians it is THE tactic of choice.

There is an important difference, however. The peasants are fighting a class war; it would be stupid and counterproductive, and transparently so, to kill other peasants randomly in the process. The Palestinian terrorists see their oppressor as a national entity, and so they target citizens of that national entity. This, too, is counterproductive and stupid - not to mention immoral - but much less transparently so.

There are plenty of exposed military outposts to attack in Isreal but they choose to blow up malls and buses.

When they attack military outposts, they lose. War is about victory, not justice - that is why it is such an abomination.

The Sandanistas coud have taken that route but they didn't. Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr. could have taken that route but didn't. Who was more successful?

I believe a campaign of intense non-violent direct action is the proper course for the Palestinians. I don't really disagree with you.

I come back from studying hoping to see it dead and this thread is still raging. eugh.

Here's another article with some numbers Nodinia. There's tons of material out there on the topic. http://www.ismi.emory.edu/JournalArticles/MESapr84.html

By May 1948 Jews acquired approximately two million of Palestine's 26 million dunams. In terms of Palestine's total land area under the Mandate, this was a small percentage.

Israel is approx 20,000sq.km (20,000,000,000sq.m)
A Dunam is 1000sq.m
Jewish owned land was 2,000,000,000sq.m in 1948 (From your source)

Of the Area that was declared Israel in 1948 the Jewish population would appear to have owned about 10%.

Yup... they brought loads of it.

Edit: I see this was later covered

They didn't own the land anyway. What they did own they abandoned after the other Arabs attacked. Guess who put them in camps? Not the Isreali's. Guess who hasn't accepted them into their nations? Those nicely homogenous arabs.

Throught 1947 and 1948 Zionist Terrorist groups and then the IDF (after the formation of Israel) systematically attacked Palastinian towns and villages delibrately targeting civilians, sometimes wiping out entire villages, with the aim of terrorifying the inhabitands of the surrounding land to flee in fear of their lives.

how do you define it as "arab land"? Jews were living there long before there was such a thing as a muslim. In fact, it was the jewish population that was originally displaced from it. It would seem they have the original claim to it.
And yet...
Wow. News flash. I was born in New York. I vote for my politicians. I contribute in my government.
I AM a native american. The terms "native" lose distinction over time.
you seemt o feel you have a decent claim to land your ancestors have been on for maybe a third of the time the Palastinians ancestors have been on their land...

What reason? Because Britain promised the use of that land as a result of Hitler's action. Take it up with Britain.



Nope.

Law is defined by the decisions of the sovereign. If the sovereign nation says "this land is now Israel" then it is legal, by definition, since it was the use of the power of the sovereign.


Nope.

That land belonged to somebody, and it wasn't the Arabs.

uber-nope. You're three and out, as I think the Amerikans say.


And the Arabs were not in Palestine before the Jews. Now that we have established that the Arabs were not, indeed first in the region, nor where they second, your case falls apart..


The first Arabs who moved there were a result of the Arab conquests
.


But, as genetics show sephardic jews and Arabs share a common ancestor some 6,000 years ago, thats you and your crap equally gone....



And guess what, they were invited to live there again. Imidately after the 1948 war, Israel offered return to those who left during the conflict under three conditions

- they became Isralie citizens
- they renounced viloence
- they became peaceful and productive citizens of Israel.

You left out the part where they had to come with the West Bank and Gaza attached. Shock of shocks, Egypt and Jordan said no. Try reading the full offer next time


. Israels hospitals are amoung the most advanced in the world, mainly because they so often have to deal with people reciving serious injury. The services of these hospitals is fiercely nonpolitical and thus they are open to the Palestians, but the PA has refused that offer. They'd rather have their own people die than let the Isralies save them
.

What happens to ambulances at the checkpoints?


Think about this! 95% of the land was more land than what Arafat was expecting. It was the best offer ever and it took everyone offguard when it was offered. You do not like it because it did not dismantle Israel. It was the best offer that Arafat could have gotten and what happens? .

The best offer Arafat could have got was in the later Taba summit that Barak left and Sharon refused to continue. What was offered in 200 was an Israeli opening position to which Arafat never offered a counter proposal. The plan for East Jerusalem did not offer it in totality, nor was what was offered a workable solution, as an examination of the map shows.


The Paliestinas can be ruled by themselves as part of the Isralie government. Israel is a democracy, the Arabs can vote for Arab members of the parliament. Democarcy means it is ruled by the people.

Arabs in the occupied territories have no vote and are not given or considered for Israeli citizenship


The Jewish migrants bought the land from the Arab absentee landlords who couldnt care less about the region, and then they began the building up of cities, towns and advanced hydroponics (to deal with the fact they had no naturally arable land untill later).

They bought an amazing total of 7% of the land. As the mandate was exporting agricultural produce from Arab owned and worked lan in 1945/6 the rest of your post is similarily incorrect. We can go through the figures if you want.

I come back from studying hoping to see it dead and this thread is still raging. eugh.That's because Israel is still raging.

Right. So the purchases can be used to legally justify 7-8% (2 million out of 26 million dunams). The rest has 'legitimacy' from the UN partition plan and the subsequent wars. If you want to talk about 'jutification' at all. I prefer to talk about reality.
Flight is distinct from expulsion. Obviously those that flew did so because of the Israeli action. Those that did not flee remain in Israel until today as citizens. So clearly there wasn't expulsion in all cases, and the fleeing that did occur was largely not coerced.
Some examples of non-coherced fleeing....

The Dahmash Mosque Massacre, 1948: 100 dead
Israeli 89th Commando Battalion lead by the future Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan, announced to the villagers that they would be safe only if they assembled at the mosque. However, the 100 Muslims who sought refuge there were slaughtered. The terrified residents of Lydda and Ramle abandoned their lands. Approximately 60,000 Palestinians emigrated, and 350 more died en route due to poor medical conditions.

Houla Massacre, 1948: 85 dead
Israeli soldiers forced 85 people into a house and then set it on fire. Afterwards, most of the terrified residents fled to Beirut. Of the 12,000 original residents of Houla, only 1,200 remained.

Salha Massacre, 1948: 105 dead
After residents of the village were forced into the mosque, the people were fired upon until not a single person remained alive.

Can't link you to the source due to graphic images of corpses, use your google skills. In fairness the source is I admit baised - and the language above quoted from it is harsh, but I doubt anyone could find an unbaised source on this issue.

America was named by the people that lived and settled there, so yes it was named by people who lived there. Not the orignal people, but people who lived there.America was named after Amerigo Vespucci. The Native Americans weren't asked at all. And when it was named thus, no folks of European descent lived there at all yet.

The point being that any Palestianin ancestral claim is null and void. They are not orginally from there in any way the way the Jews are.Palestinian Arab descend from those folks who have lived in the land for 4000 years. Canaanites, Hurrites, some Hittites, Jebusites, Amalekites, later some Amorites, Egyptians, some folks out of the Arabian peninsula.

The talks were a very good deal. They would have got all the land that they could have reasonably expexted to get. Its not as if the Palesitians had been giving Israel any reasonable insentive for this other than the cecasion of hostilities. Which isnt reasonable in the first place. If you wanted Israel to give up the land, the first thing you would do is stop fighting, as that is what Israel wants, peace. Give them peace and they will give you the land.

The fact is there are too many people around like United Beleriand who want Isralies dead, and thats it. They want a state and they dont care how many people die to get it.What talks? There have been no talks since the ridiculous 2000 Israeli proposal to give Palestinians autonomy over the hilltops. I don't want Israelis dead necessarily, just out of all Palestine.

If it is a nation, where was it 100 years ago?

What the hell does that have to do with anything? Where was the czeck republic or slovakia? Where was iraq? Or palestine?
how old those a nation have to be before its considered a nation then?[/QUOTE]


It's only a group of religiously motivated folks. Going to a foreign land to live there regardless who already lives there is cleansing. Or how else should a jewish family live on the land that fed an Arab family before?

Ditto for the USA, spain and god knows how many other countries.

ok then show me the death camps. with a link.

They were and are Arabs. A real ethnic group, a nation. What you speak of are the petty states that were created by the League of Nations.

ethnic group = nation ????

since when?

ethnic group = nation ????

since when?

I believe that is almost the entire justification for the creation of Israel.

Jews are not the "original" occupants of the land, although they may have lived there for some time. But they left out of their own folly. The remaining folks are the ancestors of the Arabs who still dwell there, while the Jews in the "diaspora" mingled with Europeans/Japhites.

the original people as far as all records indicate were semites. jews are a semitic group. arabs are semitic group. Many palestinians + jews share many similar genetic traits.
So what the hell are you talking about?

The Philistines from the bible aren't actually the same people as today's Palestinians. They came with the muslim invasion from saudi arabia.

WHAT????

where the hell did you get this from???

What is it with everyone on this forum saying the jews were there first, or the arabs or one group invaded on such and such date.

Its all total utter bollocks.

Now this is aimed at everyone that claims such & such group was here first/last/middle.

http://www.rense.com/general48/Palestinians.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12743242
http://foundationstone.com.au/HtmlSupport/WebPage/semiticGenetics.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8838913
http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/abstracts.html

I believe that is almost the entire justification for the creation of Israel.

what that 'arabs' are an ethnic group a nation?

because that's what i was answering.... so please explain

what that 'arabs' are an ethnic group a nation?

because that's what i was answering.... so please explain

You asked "ethnic group=nation?? Since when?"

A answered with an example where ethnic groups have been used to justify creation of a nation. The fact it was not an Arab ethnic group should be irrelevent, unless you feel that some wthnic groups are more deserving of nations than others...

The Philistines from the bible aren't actually the same people as today's Palestinians. They came with the muslim invasion from saudi arabia.The Philistines from the bible aren't actually the same people as today's Palestinians. Well, nobody ever claimed that. Philistines originally came from the Aegean and Cyprus. Today's Palestinian Arabs however are descended from Canaanites, Hurrites, some Hittites, Jebusites, Hebrews, Amalekites, later some Amorites, Egyptians, some folks out of the Arabian peninsula. Basically a mixture of all who ever lived in Canaan/Palestine.
What Muslim invasion from what Saudi Arabia? The Saudi family only came to power in the 20th century, and they're not even real Arabs. And the spread of Islam in the 7th and 8th centuries didn't change the ethic constitution of the population (you know, changing your religion doesn't change your descent).

You asked "ethnic group=nation?? Since when?"

A answered with an example where ethnic groups have been used to justify creation of a nation. The fact it was not an Arab ethnic group should be irrelevent, unless you feel that some wthnic groups are more deserving of nations than others...

but as the post i was replying specified that ethnic group equals a nation. which it does not.
i don't any particular group is desrves an nation simply because it is an ethnic group. But then that's also down to how you describe an ethnic group. Linguistics? genetics? culture? etc...

The Philistines from the bible aren't actually the same people as today's Palestinians. Well, nobody ever claimed that. Philistines originally came from the Aegean and Cyprus. Today's Palestinian Arabs however are descended from Canaanites, Hurrites, some Hittites, Jebusites, Hebrews, Amalekites, later some Amorites, Egyptians, some folks out of the Arabian peninsula. Basically a mixture of all who ever lived in Canaan/Palestine.
What Muslim invasion from what Saudi Arabia? The Saudi family only came to power in the 20th century, and they're not even real Arabs. And the spread of Islam in the 7th and 8th centuries didn't change the ethic constitution of the population (you know, changing your religion doesn't change your descent).

that's only a hypothesis. It is believed the philistines might have be part of the group refered to as 'sea people' but their origins are still unknown.

also you forgot the crusader states and the isrealites, which both contributed to the genetics of the area.
And the muslim invasion from that started in saudi arabia must have had some small effect on the genetic make-up as ruling classes would have been made up arabian muslims.

but as the post i was replying specified that ethnic group equals a nation. which it does not.
i don't any particular group is desrves an nation simply because it is an ethnic group. But then that's also down to how you describe an ethnic group. Linguistics? genetics? culture? etc...

I don't agree with it either - but it seems the powers the be do from time to time.

Ethnicity is normally taken as a mix of genetics, culture, religion and language

I'd agree with you if the Isrealis had killed millions of people through previously mentioned tortures, controlled most of the Middle East, and were just plain fanatic in both government and people. You don't see that in Isreal, and just by comparing anything to the Nazis is pretty much cause for losing a point.

But, as genetics show sephardic jews and Arabs share a common ancestor some 6,000 years ago, thats you and your crap equally gone....

In case you have not noticed, I was not using genetics in this case. I was pointing out that neither the Jews nor the Arabs were there first.

The best offer Arafat could have got was in the later Taba summit that Barak left and Sharon refused to continue. What was offered in 200 was an Israeli opening position to which Arafat never offered a counter proposal. The plan for East Jerusalem did not offer it in totality, nor was what was offered a workable solution, as an examination of the map shows.

Have you ever thought about politics? Barak was in the middle of a political crisis which resulted in Sharon being elected PM. Also you forgot that Arafat did indeed turn down the peace offer. No matter how you try to spin your facts, Arafat did turn it down. It does not matter (in reality it does not) that Barak left. Arafat turned it down and then launched his 2nd intifada.

I see that United Beleriand is ignoring my posts. Not surprising since they defeat his pity arguments.

Palestinian Arab descend from those folks who have lived in the land for 4000 years. Canaanites, Hurrites, some Hittites, Jebusites, Amalekites, later some Amorites, Egyptians, some folks out of the Arabian peninsula.

Wrong wrong and wrong. The Palesinan=Cannanite claim has been throughly debunked. The Cannanites as a people disapered more than 3000 years ago, no one knows who their descendnts are now

Even the Palestians themselves admited that. In their 1946 testimony to the Anglo-American commitie, they claimed that there descendency went no further back than the seventh century AD, the Arab conquests.


What talks? There have been no talks since the ridiculous 2000 Israeli proposal to give Palestinians autonomy over the hilltops. I don't want Israelis dead necessarily, just out of all Palestine.

That is their land, at least as much if not more than it is Palestinan. The Isralies and the Arabs have to share that land, something which Israel has demonstrated it is prepared to do, but the Palestians have not declared.

I believe that is almost the entire justification for the creation of Israel.

Israel has existed as a political entity for many thousands of years. Were it not for invasion and disruption, it would still exist and would have existed for over 3000 years. Palestine has never existed as an independent political entity of anything like that which Israel has.

Israel has existed as a political entity for many thousands of years. Were it not for invasion and disruption, it would still exist and would have existed for over 3000 years. Palestine has never existed as an independent political entity of anything like that which Israel has.
Sorry, but a nation that existed over a thousand years ago is a pretty shitty justification for messing with the people who are there now.

Unless you seriously propose redrawing all national borders to as they were in what? 800AD?

The only right Israel has to exist is by the Right of Conquest - which is how almost every nation in the world exists. But likewise - the people being conquested over have the same right to conquest back.

Israel has existed as a political entity for many thousands of years. No it hasn't. From Saul to the Assyrian invasion it's only 290 years.

Palestine has never existed as an independent political entity of anything like that which Israel has.And? The fact that the Arabs have actually always lived in the land since ancient times is sufficient. Jews on the other hand went away and turned their backs on the land.

Sorry, but a nation that existed over a thousand years ago is a pretty shitty justification for messing with the people who are there now.

It is not a state from 3000 years ago. It is a state that has been there for 3000 years save for invasions. The Jews have always made up the principle people of that land and only did not when larger nations bullied them out. They have always been there as long as historians record. The Arabs have not, they arrived in the 7th century AD

People were there now were not a state. If they wanted to be a state they have had the chance several times


The only right Israel has to exist is by the Right of Conquest - which is how almost every nation in the world exists. But likewise - the people being conquested over have the same right to conquest back.

Conquest is not terrorism.

No it hasn't. From Saul to the Assyrian invasion it's only 290 years.

Go back further. Specificly to Abraham and Joshua


And? The fact that the Arabs have actually always lived in the land since ancient times is sufficient. Jews on the other hand went away and turned their backs on the land.

No, Jews were forced out by invasions, but they have never gone away completely.

Now all they want is to share the land that is both theirs and the Palestians (to one extent or another) but the Palesitans want the land just for themseves and do not care how many people die to get it

Wrong wrong and wrong. The Palesinan=Cannanite claim has been throughly debunked. The Cannanites as a people disapered more than 3000 years ago, no one knows who their descendnts are now
Even the Palestians themselves admited that. In their 1946 testimony to the Anglo-American commitie, they claimed that there descendency went no further back than the seventh century AD, the Arab conquests.Canaanites didn't just disappear. Although the other group of people named "Israel" tried hard to slaughter them all. Canaanites just merged with all the other groups in the land. And what Arab conquest ever changed the population?

That is their land, at least as much if not more than it is Palestinan. The Isralies and the Arabs have to share that land, something which Israel has demonstrated it is prepared to do, but the Palestians have not declared.Arabs don't have to share anything with invaders.

It is not a state from 3000 years ago. It is a state that has been there for 3000 years save for invasions. The Jews have always made up the principle people of that land and only did not when larger nations bullied them out. They have always been there as long as historians record. The Arabs have not, they arrived in the 7th century AD

By principle do you mean 'most'? or what?
Do you also mean 'principal'

Until 1948 the state had not been there for over 1000 years. It is fantasy to pretend otherwise. And is frankly a ludicrous position to hold unless you also believe that all states that ceased to exist in the last 1000 years are in fact still there even though they have been other states for a long long long time.

I suppose you feel that North America is a Native American state save for the invasions?


Conquest is not terrorism.

Actually a lot of the methods used to 'cleanse' the land of Palastinains were terrorist in nature.

Terrorism is just another form of conquest - unless you feel the only legitmite conquest is with a marching army to kill the locals and scare them away.

Go back further. Specificly to Abraham and JoshuaAbraham was an Amorite Hebrew. Joshua was an Israelite Hebrew and he lived over 400 years after Abraham. Saul was the second king of Israel (Abimelech doesn't really count) after he managed to turn the tribal confederacy into one kingdom.

No, Jews were forced out by invasions, but they have never gone away completely.Jews were forced out after they started killing Romans (as they couldn't grasp the huge advantages being in the Roman Empire, in which they had many freedoms).

Now all they want is to share the land that is both theirs and the Palestians (to one extent or another) but the Palesitans want the land just for themseves and do not care how many people die to get itIsraelis never wanted to share the land. The original Zionist plans even included all of (Trans-)Jordan.

Abraham was an Amorite Hebrew. Joshua was an Israelite Hebrew and he lived over 400 years after Abraham. Saul was the second king of Israel (Abimelech doesn't really count) after he managed to turn the tribal confederacy into one kingdom.

Actually, Saul was the 1st king of Israel and Abraham was the father of the nation of Israel.

Jews were forced out after they started killing Romans (as they couldn't grasp the huge advantages being in the Roman Empire, in which they had many freedoms).

They don't call it an uprising for a reason. The Romans were true invaders of the land and the Jews fought them and lost and were expelled. Thing is though, not all of them left.

Israelis never wanted to share the land. The original Zionist plans even included all of (Trans-)Jordan.

More BS! In this day in age, they do.

Conquest is not terrorism.

Driving people from their homes by acts of violence and threat of same is what then? I use the term "ethnic cleansing" in that it covers the removal of large numbers of people from an area by dint of their religon/'ethnicity'. Which do you want?

Driving people from their homes by acts of violence and threat of same is what then? I use the term "ethnic cleansing" in that it covers the removal of large numbers of people from an area by dint of their religon/'ethnicity'. Which do you want?

Palestinian is not an 'ethnicity'

Actually, Saul was the 1st king of Israel and Abraham was the father of the nation of Israel.Actually Abimelech was the first king of Israel.
Abraham fathered Isaac who fathered Jacob, dubbed 'Israel'. Nevertheless there didn't exist anything like a 'nation'. It's all mere religious propaganda anyway. Even when the Israelites left Egypt they still were just Hebrews and nobody except the Israelites themselves bothered to make a distinction.

They don't call it an uprising for a reason. The Romans were true invaders of the land and the Jews fought them and lost and were expelled. Thing is though, not all of them left.At least the Romans left all freedoms to the Jews and all others who lived in Judaea, Idumaea, Samaria, Galilaea, and the Decapolis. They left them their customs and their leaders. Only taxes went to Rome now.

More BS! In this day in age, they do.There is no indication for that.

Palestinian is not an 'ethnicity'Arab is.

Conquest is not terrorism.Yes it is. Defense is not terrorism.

Actually Abimelech son of Gideon was the first king of Israel.

That's not actually true UB. If I had my Bible handy, I would prove it to you but I already know you want believe me anyway.

Abraham fathered Isaac who fathered Jacob, dubbed 'Israel'. Nevertheless there didn't exist anything like a 'nation'.

It was not until the 12 tribes of Israel that were born did the nation of Israel begin to exist. It did exist but then, as I said, you would not believe that for it is all 'religious mumbo jumbo'.

It's all mere religious propaganda anyway. Even when the Israelites left Egypt they still were just Hebrews and nobody except the Israelites themselves bothered to make a distinction.

Not entirely true but then, I do not expect you to actually know Biblical history.

At least the Romans left all freedoms to the Jews and all others who lived in Judaea, Idumaea, Samaria, Galilaea, and the Decapolis.

And that is only if they behave.

There is no indication for that.

Which proves how ignorant you are.

Arab is.

Arab yes but not Palestinian. However, there are many arabs living in Israel today so....

Yes it is. Defense is not terrorism.

It is if you target civilians with suicide bombings. Then it is no longer defense. Something again that you can't seem to get through your hard head.

Arab yes but not Palestinian. However, there are many arabs living in Israel today so....Israelis are living on Arab land, you mean.

It is if you target civilians with suicide bombings. Then it is no longer defense. Something again that you can't seem to get through your hard head.Defense is fighting off the one who attack you. It is the civilians who attack the Palestinian Arabs, so they have every right to strike back.

Israelis are living on Arab land, you mean.

Circular reasoning. You keep forgetting that the Arabs were not there first. You keep forgetting that the Jews were not there first either. However, Jews have a longer claim to the territory than the Arabs do. Go back and actually learn history.

Defense is fighting off the one who attack you. It is the civilians who attack the Palestinian Arabs, so they have every right to strike back.

Civilians have not attacked the Palestinian arabs. Civilian palestinians have attacked Israeli civilians with suicide bombings.

That's not actually true UB. If I had my Bible handy, I would prove it to you but I already know you want believe me anyway.http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges%209;&version=31;

It was not until the 12 tribes of Israel that were born did the nation of Israel begin to exist. It did exist but then, as I said, you would not believe that for it is all 'religious mumbo jumbo'.So you're contradicting what you said before.

Not entirely true but then, I do not expect you to actually know Biblical history.I do know biblical history pretty well.

And that is only if they behave.As long as they didn't kill Romans.

Which proves how ignorant you are.No, how vigilant.

Circular reasoning. You keep forgetting that the Arabs were not there first. You keep forgetting that the Jews were not there first either. However, Jews have a longer claim to the territory than the Arabs do. Go back and actually learn history.Unlike you I know history.

Civilians have not attacked the Palestinian arabs. Civilian palestinians have attacked Israeli civilians with suicide bombings.Jews who late renamed themselves Israelisattacked Palestinian Arabs with their setting foot upon Palestine when they came from Europe and elsewhere in the early 20th century.

Actually, Saul was the 1st king of Israel and Abraham was the father of the nation of Israel.

You mean patriarch of the Israelites and the arabs.

Anyway most text seem to point that ancient references to israel is to the people not a nation.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=7&chapter=9&verse=6&version=31&context=verse

As I said, if I have my bible handy, I would show you that you are wrong. I won't be near my Bible however until around 400.

So you're contradicting what you said before.

No I am not. I'm stating historical fact. However, tracing the lineage, the nation of Israel began to exist when Abraham's son was born. It was not unified however, until the 12 tribes of Israel were born and got going while in slavery in Egypt.

I do know biblical history pretty well.

Apparently not if you consider it mumbo jumbo. By allowing your prejudice to intervene in an argument, it shows that you do not care at all for facts.

As long as they didn't kill Romans.

Sounds like standard MO back in those days.

No, how vigilant.

No how ignorant you are.

Palestinian is not an 'ethnicity'

why not? the problem with the word ethnicity is that it its an umbrella term to cover cultural, religious, genetic, etc... groups.

Unlike you I know history.

*dies of laughter* It is apparent you do not. Where are you located? The Middle East?

Jews who late renamed themselves Israelis attacked Palestinian Arabs with their setting foot upon Palestine when they came from Europe and elsewhere in the early 20th century.

There are also arabs who are Israelis so to say that they are jews is rather stupid. They did not attack the palestinians, the arabs attacked Israel. Go back and read a book and study. As I said, you know jack about Middle east history.

Circular reasoning. You keep forgetting that the Arabs were not there first. You keep forgetting that the Jews were not there first either. However, Jews have a longer claim to the territory than the Arabs do. Go back and actually learn history.

Again - a ludicrous claim - unless you are argueing that all land everywhere should be returned to the ethnic groups that controled it for the longest time in history so far.


Civilians have not attacked the Palestinian arabs. Civilian palestinians have attacked Israeli civilians with suicide bombings.
Militants are the ones who strap bombs to themselves. As soon as someone straps a bomb to themselves they are no more a civilian than the Israeli soldier who takes part in an airstrike in civilian areas.

Another thing is that Israel blurs the line between civilian and not by requiring all Israelis to do military service and by having a huge reserve army (which could be taken as hiding soldiers amoung the civilian population) and the army acts on behalf of and with the permission of the elected government who are the responsibility of the civilian population - hence the civilians are responsible for the armys actions.

To put it another way - If I hire someone to go and kill somebody then I am not an innocent party to the murder - I bear direct responsibility. In a similar way the civilians who pay the army and direct it through their government also bear responsibility.

*dies of laughter* It is apparent you do not. Where are you located? The Middle East?

There are also arabs who are Israelis so to say that they are jews is rather stupid. They did not attack the palestinians, the arabs attacked Israel. Go back and read a book and study. As I said, you know jack about Middle east history.Coming to a foreign land and declaring statehood is a declaration of war and an attack on the people of the land.

There are also arabs who are Israelis so to say that they are jews is rather stupid. They did not attack the palestinians, the arabs attacked Israel. Go back and read a book and study. As I said, you know jack about Middle east history.

Before and after the 1948 war Israeli groups (various terrorist groups and later the IDF) launched a series of attacks on palastinian populations with the aim of getting palastinians in the surrounding areas to flee in fear of their lives so the land could be given over to Jewish people.

Before and after the 1948 war Israeli groups (various terrorist groups and later the IDF) launched a series of attacks on palastinian populations with the aim of getting palastinians in the surrounding areas to flee in fear of their lives so the land could be given over to Jewish people.Exactly. I think even as early as 1946.

Before and after the 1948 war Israeli groups (various terrorist groups and later the IDF) launched a series of attacks on palastinian populations with the aim of getting palastinians in the surrounding areas to flee in fear of their lives so the land could be given over to Jewish people.

only groups such as the Etzel and Lehi, the Hagana didn't do such actions

only groups such as the Etzel and Lehi, the Hagana didn't do such actions

As I said - various groups.

Though on reading up very briefly just now it seems some more extreme groups split off from the Hagana.

Coming to a foreign land and declaring statehood is a declaration of war and an attack on the people of the land.

you mean the 1947 UN Partition Plan, that was voted on a ratified by the UN?

you mean the 1947 UN Partition Plan, that was voted on a ratified by the UN?

Don't confuse Beleriand with legalities and facts...

Coming to a foreign land and declaring statehood is a declaration of war and an attack on the people of the land.

There were Israelis already living there so to say it was an 'invasion' is rather silly claim to make. Again you are dodging my question. Where are you located?

Before and after the 1948 war Israeli groups (various terrorist groups and later the IDF) launched a series of attacks on palastinian populations with the aim of getting palastinians in the surrounding areas to flee in fear of their lives so the land could be given over to Jewish people.

And the Arabs told the Palestinians to leave so they could attack and then did not accommadate for them. Jordan did but then expelled them after a failed assassination attempt on the King of Jordan. Syria has taken responsiblity for the refugee crisis but is doing nothing about it (as usual). There is more than enough blame to go around and to blame it on one side or the other soley is stupid.

Don't confuse Beleriand with legalities and facts...

And he claims to know history. As I said, he's ignorant of History.

There were Israelis already living there so to say it was an 'invasion' is rather silly claim to make. Again you are dodging my question. Where are you located?

The portion was very very small. Even today almost half the Israelis were not born in Israel.

The Zionist movement resulted in a huge influx of Jews to the area, in the 1930s the British seeing trouble ahead with increases racial tensions tried to limit the immigration by imposing quotas, which some Zionist movements responded to by engaging in assisting illegal immigration.


Do you happen to have handy the proportion of the population in the area that were Jewish in 1900?

And the Arabs told the Palestinians to leave so they could attack and then did not accommadate for them. Jordan did but then expelled them after a failed assassination attempt on the King of Jordan. Syria has taken responsiblity for the refugee crisis but is doing nothing about it (as usual). There is more than enough blame to go around and to blame it on one side or the other soley is stupid.

Are you denying that Jewish groups carried out attacks on palastinian towns and villages in an effort to drive them out of Israel before AND after the war?

Are you denying that the IDF also forcefully mass expelled palastinians from Israel?

Are you denying that the IDF also forcefully mass expelled palastinians from Israel?

Are you denying that the Arabs forcefully expelled members of their own race so they could attack Israel? Are you denying that Arabs have been attacking Jews just as long?

Are you denying that the Arabs forcefully expelled members of their own race so they could attack Israel? Are you denying that Arabs have been attacking Jews just as long?
I don't suppose you could answer the question?

But anyway - the Palastinians who were expelled after the 1948 War... That was the Arabs yes?

The palastinian villages who were rounded up and murdered to scare the neighboring villages off - that was the Arabs yes?

I don't suppose you could answer the question?

Apparently, you won't answer mine either. You know why I am not answering yours? It is not because I can't for I can answer it. I'm not answering it because I'm not arguing that side of the debate. I am arguing on the side of Israel. Just like you are arguing on the side of the Palestinians. That is why you are not answering my questions.

Palestinian is not an 'ethnicity'

I did not specify which or what constitued it in this case, however muslim and christian Arabs known as "palestinians" were expelled en masse.

I did not specify which or what constitued it in this case, however muslim and christian Arabs known as "palestinians" were expelled en masse.

Yep. By both sides. Now that we have established the fact that both sides did it....

Apparently, you won't answer mine either. You know why I am not answering yours? It is not because I can't for I can answer it. I'm not answering it because I'm not arguing that side of the debate. I am arguing on the side of Israel. Just like you are arguing on the side of the Palestinians. That is why you are not answering my questions.

Sorry - but thats a pretty shitty dodge.

"Waaaa you asked a question that if I tell the truth to I will expose my side as having carried out activities similar to ethnic cleansing so I won't answer."

So can I take it then that you admit that the Zionists behaved pretty shittily?

As to your question:
I am not so aware of the issue of Arabs forcefully removing Palastinians from Israel so I would appreciate if you can provide me with a source.

As to the Arabs attacking the Jews - well - given the jews were immigrating into the land with the express intention of creating a jewish state, and also formed several violent groups to act against the Palastinians I would say they might be justified in viewing the Zionists as a hostile invading force who they might want to repeal.

So, who wants the entire jewish population of israel will leave israel this moment to return each to their respective to the lands their forefathers originated.... oh wait... that would mean that I'll be needed to divided and have one part send to Poland, another to Russia and another to Lithuania.... that might be a problem, but of course they don't mind.... I'm an israeli after all...

(this is to show the level of respect I got to this thread... which apparently aims toward the negative scale)

So, who wants the entire jewish population of israel will leave israel this moment to return each to their respective to the lands their forefathers originated.... oh wait... that would mean that I'll be needed to divided and have one part send to Poland, another to Russia and another to Lithuania.... that might be a problem, but of course they don't mind.... I'm an israeli after all...

(this is to show the level of respect I got to this thread... which apparently aims toward the negative scale)

So your ancestors are not all from Israel of over 1000 years ago?


Anyway - I think what most people would be happy with would be something like making the green line a permanent border between Israel and the West Bank along with the dismantlement of the settlements in the West Bank.

I also would be happy if instead they formally declared all of Gaza and the West Bank as Israel and made all present inhabitants Israeli citizens.

So your ancestors are not all from Israel of over 1000 years ago?


Anyway - I think what most people would be happy with would be something like making the green line a permanent border between Israel and the West Bank along with the dismantlement of the settlements in the West Bank.

I also would be happy if instead theyformally declared all of Gaza and the West Bank as Israel and made all present inhabitants Israeli citizens.

Then it would cease to be Israel. It's a democratic country and adding millions and millions of Muslim Palestinians would turn it into just another Arab country. It would no longer be a Jewish homeland. In fact, I think the Palestinians would immediately begin driving the Jews out and killing them.

you mean the 1947 UN Partition Plan, that was voted on a ratified by the UN?That also but rather the declaration of Israeli statehood on May 14, 1948, one day before British administration expired.

Then it would cease to be Israel. It's a democratic country and adding millions and millions of Muslim Palestinians would turn it into just another Arab country. It would no longer be a Jewish homeland. In fact, I think the Palestinians would immediately begin driving the Jews out and killing them.And? There's nothing bad in a non-existing Israel.

And? There's nothing bad in a non-existing Israel.


What will you do with all the people who currently live there

And? There's nothing bad in a non-existing Israel.

Yeah there is. Israel is a productive nation with a strong high-tech industry. Arab nations produce nothing but oil. Israel has no oil. Converting it into another Arab nation means you trade a nation that contributes to the technological progress of humanity for a nation of date farmers and beggars. The world would be a poorer place.

What will you do with all the people who currently live there

Well, you can make soap and lampshades I guess. I'm sure the Palestinians would love to sell those to the world.

Well, you can make soap and lampshades I guess. I'm sure the Palestinians would love to sell those to the world.Palestinians don't engage in ancient Jewish rituals.

Well, you can make soap and lampshades I guess. I'm sure the Palestinians would love to sell those to the world.

Don't forget mattresses stuffed with hair...

Then it would cease to be Israel. It's a democratic country and adding millions and millions of Muslim Palestinians would turn it into just another Arab country. It would no longer be a Jewish homeland.
So Israel should only be a democracy when there is a Jewish majority?
What happens if the faster growing Palastinian population exceeds the Jewish population?
Why does Israel hold the West Bank if they never intend on allowing the Palastinians there to be Israelis? It seems they are trying to circumvent democracy by having jewish voters there but not having to let the palastinian voters take part in the democratic process like the jewish people living in the west bank. Are they just looking for a way to get rid of the palastinians?

Palestinians don't engage in ancient Jewish rituals.

You don't have a clue, do you?

You don't have a clue, do you?

No, he just wants to kill some j00z.

Yeah there is. Israel is a productive nation with a strong high-tech industry. Arab nations produce nothing but oil. Israel has no oil. Converting it into another Arab nation means you trade a nation that contributes to the technological progress of humanity for a nation of date farmers and beggars. The world would be a poorer place.

Rascism much...

And why could the nation not continue to be a high tech country if there is a significant palastinian population?

Then it would cease to be Israel. It's a democratic country and adding millions and millions of Muslim Palestinians would turn it into just another Arab country. It would no longer be a Jewish homeland. In fact, I think the Palestinians would immediately begin driving the Jews out and killing them.

firstly, whats wrong with muslims?

theres no reason why jews need a home land. one cant just randomly pick a country and call it your new home. besides if any religion has claim to that region is the christian.
"born is the king of israel".

Palestinians don't engage in ancient Jewish rituals.

What the fuck are you talking about? I was comparing the Palestinians to the Nazis. After all, they've had a history of collaborating with the Nazis.

Rascism much...

And why could the nation not continue to be a high tech country if there is a significant palastinian population?

Considering that most of the middle east is not a high tech society....

What the fuck are you talking about? I was comparing the Palestinians to the Nazis. After all, they've had a history of collaborating with the Nazis.
Didn't some Jews too?

Considering that most of the middle east is not a high tech society....

Well - Israel is, why would it not continue to be?

firstly, whats wrong with muslims?

theres no reason why jews need a home land. one cant just randomly pick a country and call it your new home. besides if any religion has claim to that region is the christian.
"born is the king of israel".

Actually, Christians do not have a strong claim to the region. We do have a claim but the jews have a stronger claim than the Muslims do to the area.

What will you do with all the people who currently live there

in the 30's someone came up with a solution, didnt work though.

in the 30's someone came up with a solution, didnt work though.

So you agree with the so called Final Solution?

in the 30's someone came up with a solution, didnt work though.

Yeah, and we know how that backfired, huh?

So Israel should only be a democracy when there is a Jewish majority?
What happens if the faster growing Palastinian population exceeds the Jewish population?
Why does Israel hold the West Bank if they never intend on allowing the Palastinians there to be Israelis? It seems they are trying to circumvent democracy by having jewish voters there but not having to let the palastinian voters take part in the democratic process like the jewish people living in the west bank. Are they just looking for a way to get rid of the palastinians?

Personally I'm in favor of setting a workable border between a viable Palestinian state and a secure Israel. Israel was designed to be a Jewish state. If it becomes just another Arab nation the purpose of it's creation is defeated.

Actually, Christians do not have a strong claim to the region. We do have a claim but the jews have a stronger claim than the Muslims do to the area.

jews have no claim. area became christian. then muslim. the palestinians have a bigger claim not because they are muslim but because they were living there.

Personally I'm in favor of setting a workable border between a viable Palestinian state and a secure Israel. Israel was designed to be a Jewish state. If it becomes just another Arab nation the purpose of it's creation is defeated.

Where would you place that border? Why not the Green Line?

(You still have not answered the not unrealistic scenario - what should happen to democracy in Israel if the Palastinian population within Israel ends up exceeding the Jewish one?)

Yeah, and we know how that backfired, huh?

yeah, the creation of israel is the deffinition of irony. for yanks reading this, that is ironic, despite what americans think it means.

The thing I do so love about couch politics, that it is practiced by people who have no real power who just know how to whine all day on the injustice of the world.

jews have no claim. area became christian. then muslim. the palestinians have a bigger claim not because they are muslim but because they were living there.

Actually the Jews do have a claim. A stronger claim than the Christians or Muslims. The Palestinians have actually very very little claim to the land. The Jews have a very very strong claim to the land.

yeah, the creation of israel is the deffinition of irony. for yanks reading this, that is ironic, despite what americans think it means.

no, this thread is the definition of irony....

The thing I do so love about couch politics, that it is practiced by people who have no real power who just know how to whine all day on the injustice of the world.

And have extreme solutions to solve the problem.

Rascism much...

And why could the nation not continue to be a high tech country if there is a significant palastinian population?

How about because they've got fewer people with the necessary education? How about the poor performance record of Arab countries in science and tecnology?

No Arab country spends more than 0.2 percent of its gross national product on scientific research, and most of that money goes toward salaries. By contrast, the United States spends more than 10 times that amount.


Fewer than one in 20 Arab university students pursue scientific disciplines.


There are only 18 computers per 1,000 people in the Arab world. The global average is 78 per 1,000.


Only 370 industrial patents were issued to people in Arab countries between 1980 and 2000. In South Korea during that same period, 16,000 industrial patents were issued.


No more than 10,000 books were translated into Arabic over the entire past millennium, equivalent to the number translated into Spanish each year.http://chronicle.com/free/v50/i26/26a03601.htm

(You still have not answered the not unrealistic scenario - what should happen to democracy in Israel if the Palastinian population within Israel ends up exceeding the Jewish one?)

he has. stated israel should only be a jewish. like how the nazis wanted germany to be a non-jewish state.

Actually the Jews do have a claim. A stronger claim than the Christians or Muslims. The Palestinians have actually very very little claim to the land. The Jews have a very very strong claim to the land.

Again - Are you proposing that every race returns to it's borders of over 1000 years ago?

America? Australia? England?

Or is a claim only valid if you have the might to back it up.

Might is Right?

I've got a great idea.

The US invades yet another country (Israel), and instead of occupying the place, we give everyone (and I mean, everyone) who is currently living there a free ride out by air or sea to anywhere else in the world (including the US).

Then the US kills anyone who refused to leave.

Then the US bulldozes or demolishes every manmade structure in the country, and brings the radioactive waste from the US and plows it into the topsoil everywhere (no more Yucca Mountain!).

Bring over all of our toxic chemical waste and dump it there, too.

Since nobody wants to be nice and play together, nobody gets it.

How about because they've got fewer people with the necessary education?
The people currently there with the necessary education will all forget?:confused:

he has. stated israel should only be a jewish. like how the nazis wanted germany to be a non-jewish state.

*cough*Bullshit*cough*

Again - Are you proposing that every race returns to it's borders of over 1000 years ago?

Trying to put words in my mouth?

firstly, whats wrong with muslims?

theres no reason why jews need a home land. one cant just randomly pick a country and call it your new home. besides if any religion has claim to that region is the christian.
"born is the king of israel".

What's wrong with Muslims? Books have been written on that subject. I suggest What Went Wrong by Bernard Lewis.

It was widely agreed after the holocaust that Jews DO need a homeland. That homeland was Israel. Granted the borders were different then. Israel IS the Jewish homeland. What's done is done.

no, this thread is the definition of irony....

explain how.

the function of this thread is to discus a topic. we are discusing a topic. thus the meaning of irony.

Trying to put words in my mouth?
Seeking a clarification.

you are stating the palastinians who have been there over 1000 years have little claim to the land as other people were there before them.

I am curious - does such logic carry to America, Australia or England? Or does it only apply when the people concerned are muslim? Or the people with the claim are jewish?

Again - Are you proposing that every race returns to it's borders of over 1000 years ago?

America? Australia? England?

Or is a claim only valid if you have the might to back it up.

Might is Right?

i'm against this. we dont want irish americans in our country.

Where would you place that border? Why not the Green Line?

(You still have not answered the not unrealistic scenario - what should happen to democracy in Israel if the Palastinian population within Israel ends up exceeding the Jewish one?)

It's not my decision what should happen if Palestinians become a majority in Israel. I know what should not happen though. The Jews shouldn't be left to be exterminated by the Palestinians as they were abandoned by the rest of the world to Nazi Germany. They should be welcomed into western nations as new citizens.

Personally I'm in favor of setting a workable border between a viable Palestinian state and a secure Israel.What about Israeli compensation for everything Palestinians have lost?

Israel was designed to be a Jewish state. If it becomes just another Arab nation the purpose of it's creation is defeated.The purpose of its creation to have a place where they could live out their strange customs and bathe in their glory of being the chosen seed, regardless of who actually lived in the land.

The people currently there with the necessary education will all forget?:confused:

No, just that there aren't enough to drive a tech industry as large or advanced as Israel's.

Seeking a clarification.

you are stating the palastinians who have been there over 1000 years have little claim to the land as other people were there before them.

I am curious - does such logic carry to America, Australia or England? Or does it only apply when the people concerned are muslim? Or the people with the claim are jewish?

I was just responding to who had the stronger claim to the region. I was not advocating what you said I was trying to advocate.

*cough*Bullshit*cough*

since thats what he said i assume you mean hitler didnt want to kill all the jews in germany?

It's not my decision what should happen if Palestinians become a majority in Israel. I know what should not happen though. The Jews shouldn't be left to be exterminated by the Palestinians as they were abandoned by the rest of the world to Nazi Germany. They should be welcomed into western nations as new citizens.
Why would the be exterminated?

Havn't a lot of them come from western nations in which they were citizens anyway? What was so bad about England and America they all fled to Israel?

It's not my decision what should happen if Palestinians become a majority in Israel. I know what should not happen though. The Jews shouldn't be left to be exterminated by the Palestinians as they were abandoned by the rest of the world to Nazi Germany. They should be welcomed into western nations as new citizens.So why don't they just go into western nations as new citizens today?

I was just responding to who had the stronger claim to the region. I was not advocating what you said I was trying to advocate.

You said the palastinians had a very very small claim as they have only been there for a little over 1000 years, and there were jews there before.

Does that logic extend to the validity of claims on America, Australia or England?

What about Israeli compensation for everything Palestinians have lost?

The purpose of its creation to have a place where they could live out their strange customs and bathe in their glory of being the chosen seed, regardless of who actually lived in the land.

No compensation. They took their payment in the blood of Israeli civilians.

What strange customs? You going to display your bigotry and ignorance by dragging out the Protocols of the Elders of Zion or maybe the old Blood Libel?

since thats what he said i assume you mean hitler didnt want to kill all the jews in germany?

THat part I wasn't saying bullshit too. I was saying bullshit to the fact that Israel should only be a jewish state. Inside their country, they have Jews, Christians, and Muslims living together.

Why would the be exterminated?

Havn't a lot of them come from western nations in which they were citizens anyway? What was so bad about England and America they all fled to Israel?

The Mufti of Jerusalem encouraged and aided Hitler's holocaust. The Palestinians haven't exactly changed their minds about the Jews since then.

Well, a lot of them were expelled from Muslim countries where they lived. Many came from Europe shortly after the holocaust (didn't seem like such a safe neighborhood back then), many are coming from the former Soviet Union where they face a rising tide of antisemitism.

So why don't they just go into western nations as new citizens today?

Because they're not going to abandon their own Jewish nation.

Why would the be exterminated?

Havn't a lot of them come from western nations in which they were citizens anyway? What was so bad about England and America they all fled to Israel?

Fled? No they immigrated to Israel.

Fled? No they immigrated to Israel.That means with no necessity?

You said the palastinians had a very very small claim as they have only been there for a little over 1000 years, and there were jews there before.

Does that logic extend to the validity of claims on America, Australia or England?

Not arguing about America, Australia or England here. We are arguing over Palestine and Israel and comparing Israel to Nazi Germany (which is idiotic as there is no comparison).

Well, a lot of them were expelled from Muslim countries where they lived. Many came from Europe shortly after the holocaust (didn't seem like such a safe neighborhood back then), many are coming from the former Soviet Union where they face a rising tide of antisemitism.

And havn't a lot of them come from America and England?

Inside their country, they have Jews, Christians, and Muslims living together.

hence what free randomers was saying, what if the arabs become the majority? it will then not a jewish state.
its wierd i'm agrreeing with him.

hence what free randomers was saying, what if the arabs become the majority? it will then not a jewish state.
its wierd i'm agrreeing with him.

It all depends if they want to persecute the Jews or make both main religions the main religions of the country.

Not arguing about America, Australia or England here. We are arguing over Palestine and Israel and comparing Israel to Nazi Germany (which is idiotic as there is no comparison).

yes there is a comparison, stated earlier. just different scale at the moment.

And havn't a lot of them come from America and England?

Sure. I'm not sure how many, but yeah. American and British Jews do move to Israel sometimes. Some of them leave Israel for America too. So what?

yes there is a comparison, stated earlier. just different scale at the moment.

I'm keeping my arguments to the topic at hand. America, England and Australia is not the topic on hand.

It all depends if they want to persecute the Jews or make both main religions the main religions of the country.Arabs are not defined by religion. So what's your point?

Not arguing about America, Australia or England here. We are arguing over Palestine and Israel and comparing Israel to Nazi Germany (which is idiotic as there is no comparison).

It's pretty clear the debate has shifted a long way from Jews vs Nazis in the evil stakes.

Your statement was nothing to do with the thread topic at all - you were not talking about the ludicrious proposition that the Jews are worse than the Nazis.

You said the palastinians have very very little claim to the land as the Jews were there before them, over 1000 years ago.

Does such logic apply to other parts of the world - America, Australia or England? Or are Jewish people the only ones who retain a claim to land from over a thousand years past?

Either admit the ancestoral claim is bunk unless the same logic also applies to ALL land EVERYWHERE, or come straight out with your reason why in this special case Jews have a claim to land some of their ancestors might have lived on 1000 years ago that superseedes the palastinian claim from people alive today while original populations of nations like America, Australia and England do not have a more valid claim.

Where are you from BTW?

I'm keeping my arguments to the topic at hand. America, England and Australia is not the topic on hand.

it makes sence to use a simular situation to compare to another to try and derive a good solution.
jews went to europe.
europeans went to america.
if we should move the jews to israel, should we move all americans back to europe or what ever.

It's pretty clear the debate has shifted a long way from Jews vs Nazis in the evil stakes.

True. Will agree with you there.

Your statement was nothing to do with the thread topic at all - you were not talking about the ludicrious proposition that the Jews are worse than the Nazis.

My statements did at first and when the subject changed, I changed with it. Therefor, I have remained on topic.

You said the palastinians have very very little claim to the land as the Jews were there before them, over 1000 years ago.

Correct. It was in response to a statement made by someone who I can't think of right now.

Are Jewish people the only ones who retain a claim to land from over a thousand years past?

Was not saying that at all. I told you that once. I guess you missed it.

Where are you from BTW?

The United States of America.

this is becoming a farce

this is becoming a farce

Ain't that the truth. I am wondering if some of these people are one and the same.

Correct. It was in response to a statement made by someone who I can't think of right now.
Just wanted to clarify that was your meaning.

Was not saying that at all. I told you that once. I guess you missed it.

I don't suppose you could quickly copy/paste or re-clarify your position of wether other places on earth share the same ancestoral rights as Israel?


The United States of America.

Are you a Native American or did your ancestors arrive since Colombus?

If the latter - do you concede that you have very little claim to live in America?

this is becoming a farceA jewish state is a farce. Just like a mormon or rastafarian state would be.

A jewish state is a farce. Just like a mormon or rastafarian state would be.

The jewish state IS a farce, but you got the wrong reasons to call it that.

A jewish state is a farce. Just like a mormon or rastafarian state would be.


No, centuries of persecution and a nearly sucessful attempt to exterminate them made most people realize that a Jewish state is a necessity, not a farce.

No, centuries of persecution and a nearly sucessful attempt to exterminate them made most people realize that a Jewish state is a necessity, not a farce.If it was only about a state, they could/would have set it up somewhere else, e.g. in the central US. But for ideological reasons they wanted to set it up in an already populated area, with the clear aim to remove the inhabitants.

If it was only about a state, they could/would have set it up somewhere else, e.g. in the central US. But for ideological reasons they wanted to set it up in an already populated area, with the clear aim to remove the inhabitants.

They wanted to set it up in their old ancestral homeland.

They wanted to set it up in their old ancestral homeland.Regardless of whose current homeland it was.

Regardless of whose current homeland it was.

Yeah, well, fuck it. They're there now. Who's going to move them? Nobody. Best resolution to the problem is to establish workable borders and get on with the business of running their countries. Or we could go on with Palestinians launching rockets and blowing themselves up followed by Israeli tanks and planes punishing the Palestinians and let the corpses pile up.

A jewish state is a farce. Just like a mormon or rastafarian state would be.

thats a very good poin. but i think ethiopia is technically the rastafarian homeland.

what I've gotten out of this conversation is one thing.

The jews shouldn't have fought the roman invaders because the jews would have had freedoms in the roman empire, and should have let their land be conquered by an enemy.

The palestinians on the other hand should continue to fight the "israeli invaders" because they're conquering despire the fact that arabs in Israel tend to prefer life in Israel than anywhere else in the middle east.

In other words this has nothing to do with justice. This has nothing to do with intellectual honesty. This is "the jews should have sat back and let themselves be conquered but the palestinians are perfectly justified in blowing up jewish teenagers".

In short, it's racism, nothing more.

Regardless of whose current homeland it was.

well if Israel was traditionally jewish land, with arabs living on it at the time....

That would make the ARABS the invaders, no?

well if Israel was traditionally jewish land, with arabs living on it at the time....

That would make the ARABS the invaders, no?

Ehhh, no. That may as well have the same implications for ALL OF MANKIND.

"Well fuck it, 15,000 years ago my ancestors arrived here by a fucking coconut raft. Now get out of my house"

I don't suppose you could quickly copy/paste or re-clarify your position of wether other places on earth share the same ancestoral rights as Israel?

I made my point clear. In Israel, both sides have claim to the land. Just that Israel has a stronger claim. As to the rest, I will not comment on Britain as I do not know that much about British history but the Aboriginies do have a strong claim to Australia just like the Native Americans do. However, the Native Americans have somewhat integrated into the fabric of the US.

Are you a Native American or did your ancestors arrive since Colombus?

If the latter - do you concede that you have very little claim to live in America?

According to what I have been told, I do have some Native American blood in me.

Ehhh, no. That may as well have the same implications for ALL OF MANKIND.

"Well fuck it, 15,000 years ago my ancestors arrived here by a fucking coconut raft. Now get out of my house"

what defines an invader? Someone who takes over the land of someone else? Wast that not what the arabas in israel did originally?

What's the time lag between an invader and an opportunist?

what defines an invader? Someone who takes over the land of someone else? Wast that not what the arabas in israel did originally?

What's the time lag between an invader and an opportunist?

By your logic, man invaded and took the land that is rightly belonging to the apes.

The 'time lag' is common sense. That lag doesn't extend back thousands of years. At best you are talking about a few short generations- as is the case here or in Northern Cyprus.

Actually, I think that the Jewish state is fast approaching Nazi Germany.

They have erected walls around the Palestinians, making their whole area like a concentration camp, wherein people are beaten if they don't comply, women are raped, and houses destroyed.

They don't do medical experiments, but rather leave the entire population without adequate medical care.

The Israeli soldiers treat Palestinians with contempt, and if a Palestinian wants to work, then they have to play nice, or their kids starve. As for their treatment, this only gets better when older Israeli women stand around and monitor checkpoints http://www.batshalom.org/article.php?id=18

Israel has gone from being the oppressed to just being the oppressors, with US backing of course.

By your logic, man invaded and took the land that is rightly belonging to the apes.

may I ask that you take some effort to ensure your analogies make some sense? Land does not "rightfully" belong to animals in any sense of the word, and I think a discussion as to why animals don't own property because...well...they're fucking animals, would be a pointless diversion at this time.

The 'time lag' is common sense. That lag doesn't extend back thousands of years. At best you are talking about a few short generations- as is the case here or in Northern Cyprus.

So what is it? does it change if the original occupents are forced off their land versus left voluntarily?

Is it an invasion as long as 1 original inhabitant remains?

if not 1, 10?

25?

50?

100?

1000?

10,000?

May I remind you that there have always been jews in that land, uninterrupted? Just not very many.

As long as there were "some jews" there, does that make it an invasion? If not, how many had to be there?

Both regimes carried out an occupation they deemed as just, but the international community did not. Both setup ghettos, roadblocks and curfews for the occupied, those who break curfew get shot in the street with tanks. Both were racist regimes who operate(d) with a sense of superiority. Both committed mass killings and slaughters including of women and children. Both used the holocaust as justification or propaganda for their actions. Both are hated by the international community and invaded their neighbours. And both are feircely militaristic.

Its a very close race but the Nazis haven't been around for 60 years and only lasted around 20. The regime of Israel is still around and has been for 60 years. Its close, but I say Israel takes this one. your thoughts?

You need to be more discriminating about where you get your information. The world press is very anti-Israel, so most information you recive about Israel (wether it's in a school room or in a news report) is going to paint them in a negative light, and their enemies as tragic, desperate, freedom fighters.

If Israel takes some mesures that we veiw to be extreme, just remember that this is a nation that has been under constant attack since it's inception. It is a place where a suicide bomber may end your life at any moment.

I don't think we, from our relatively peaceful position are capeable of fully understanding the mentality of a war-weary nation under seige, threatened with distruction on all sides, who is attacked almost daily by their enemies.

To compare them to the nazis shows both an ignorance of their situation, and a deploreable lack of empathy.

may I ask that you take some effort to ensure your analogies make some sense? Land does not "rightfully" belong to animals in any sense of the word, and I think a discussion as to why animals don't own property because...well...they're fucking animals, would be a pointless diversion at this time.
Man is an animal. Go back far enough (like you're trying to do) and you're saying our ancestors (homo sapiens et al) 'invaded' and took land from those who were there originally....



So what is it? does it change if the original occupents are forced off their land versus left voluntarily?
Of course it does. Emigrating does not give you the right to come back later and 'demand your' land. You left it freely.

Is it an invasion as long as 1 original inhabitant remains?

if not 1, 10?

25?

50?

100?

1000?

10,000?

What the hell are you talking about?

May I remind you that there have always been jews in that land, uninterrupted? Just not very many.
No, there have been people on that land. Before the Arabs there were others. Before the Christians, there were others. Before the Jews there were others.

As long as there were "some jews" there, does that make it an invasion? If not, how many had to be there?
Land belongs to people. Because you have a religious affiliation doesn't give you the 'right' to demand something that someone of the same faith had 10,000 years ago.

I call bullshit on that thought process.

Repeat after me, Soviestan: I....AM....SOFA....KING....WEE.....TODD....ED. Now, say it a few times really fast.

In the words of comedian Ron White, "Next time you have a thought...just let it go..."

Additionally, a wise man once said "It is better to be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."