 |
|
| Browse | Ask | Answer | Search | Join/Login |
|
|
||||
|
Hello again, fit:
Just a minor correction, but it makes a big difference. The Saudi plan you mention calls for a retreat to the 1949 Armistice lines. That would be the present state of Israel. Actually, that's fine with the Israeli's. They never wanted anything more than that in the first place. However, the part you didn't mention about the Arab plan is the “right of return” for the Arabs. If that were implemented, then the Arabs would take over Israel from the inside. Uhhh, the Jews aren't going to let that happen. Those of you, who think it SHOULD happen, think that Israel should be wiped off the map, which is exactly what the Arabs call for. They're not lying. They don't want peace. I suggest you examine the position you have taken a little more closely. excon |
||||
|
||||
|
First of all I have read a lot of posters who accuse other people of narrow one -sided views but are equally as one-sided against the palestinians. Do they seriously believe they wanted to be in their current situation & want to wallow in pain & misery & LIKE the fact that they are reduced to sending out human bombs.
Another point, I believe the arabs countries attacked israel after Ben Gurion (similar to Hitler, except for the amount of people he ordered massacred), ordered villages of innocent palestinans slaughtered as a tactic to terrify the populace & get them to abandon their homes. This tactic worked & the rest of the arab states had an influx of palestinian refugees leading to pressure from the arab populace to defend their brethren. You are right in that the greed & corruption of arab states plus the narrow self -interest of the west ensured their defeat. Those that argue against the return of the refugees to their own land seem to be heartless; yes the jews will lose their majority but Israel could remain as a state, if they adopt these people, which is what the jews wanted is it not? Or do they believe that these palestinians will massacre them like the jews massacre palestianians after hitler massacred them ; a vicious cycle of human evil. If the arabs were all wrong like a lot of zionists want to show the world than they would have won the Propanganda war completely but even with a lot of the anti-arab brigade, what israel seems to be standing for, sits uneasily with them. By the way gaza is just a prison, releasing that sliver of land was done on purpose as there were less settlements there then the West bank & this was just done as an appeasement still leaving the central conflict unresolved. Its all worked out for Israeli government. Those years of dehumanising the palestinans & turning them into such reactionaries has worked in their favor as it gives them grounds for arguing against the release of the West Bank or the control of air/ sea borders. |
||||
|
||||
 Originally Posted by fluid identity
Originally Posted by fluid identity
|
||||
|
||||
|
My mistake then since the attacks I referred to did take place but I think in 1953. So I was wrong about the time but they did take place, ordered by Ben Gurion which hardened the hatred for the state of Israel for the sactioned massacre & which is why many palestinans wanted the state to be eliminated. I believe Ariel Sharon was present which did not help future dealings with the palestinans.
At the end of the day the point of my original post was about narrow view points, I can admit when I made an error but many people here lambast the palestinans but don't admit that the state made errors which resulted in the current misunderstandings & hatred. Apparently I am an Anti-Semite to people always quick to try to close discourse. Do you not consider by engaging me you could correct some of my knowledge you believe incorrect. Instead you react with hostility & label me as a hater of a whole race of people that spans two religions (Anti -Semite - from semite stock i.e most arabs are from this stock as well as jews). I actually think that whereas I don't like Zionists but don't extend this antipathy to ALL jews ; certain people here are extremely anti-palestinan, anti-arab & anti-islamic. I think it's the chosen race complex - We are chosen by god so the rest can suffer in camps. Amazingly I think Hitler believed something similar. |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by fluid identity
What amazes me is that you complain about narrow viewpoints at the same time that you promote your own, very narrow viewpoint. I don't know who you specifically refer to, but as someone active in this thread, I also admit when I'm wrong and I have acknolwedged that the sate of Israel is lily white. They have done things I do not condone and even denounce. But any actions on the part of Israel have to be viewed in the context of a beleaguered nation that has been under almost continual attack for nearly 60 years. I firmly believe that, had the arab world agreed to let Israel exist and not tried to wipe it out, then the history of the Middle East would be vastly different. I haven't seen anyone in this thread who is "extremely anti-palestinan, anti-arab & anti-islamic". I have seen some who are extremely anti-Israel. And yes, Arabs are also semites, but the term anti-semitic refers to jews, not all semites. Finally, your Hitler analogy doesn't hold water. Palestinian refugee camps are administered by Israel. Palestinians don't have to go into them. From what I've seen, the arabs want those camps to help breed the terrorists they can turn against Israel. |
||||
|
||||
|
1953 attack on Qibya is one example which was condemned by the UN & led to a suspension of support for a short time by the US (am I making this up?).
As for the issue of propaganda, the amount of propaganda that the state of isreal & the USA have spewed forth cannot be matched by anyone else on any other political debate. Unlike most people I don't trust one source & will go to many to try explore the validity of any news story but not everyone can say the same. Please tell me what narrow viewpoint Im promoting. I put forward a point when answering a question to instigate discourse & may be even learn something but Am quickly being attacked because I do not adhere to your beliefs... hmmm... intolerant as perhaps you accuse other people of being. & if the actions of Isreal can be justified because of the position they find themselves over the 60 years then Im sorry but following that same logic every time a palestinan explodes a bomb he is justified as they have been oppressed & mistreated for the same number of years(?) . Therefore if you believe that Isreal can do what it likes becase it is under attack then the palestinans can respond ; we will remain in this same cycle of violence. As for refugee camps, if Israel do not give those refugees a right to return to their lands then they are removing their choice of staying out of camps.. |
||||
|
||||
|
Ex-con... I've never met a zionist who is not a rabid rascist who believe the world owes him because of the holocaust & that muslims are evil & palestinians are vermin that need to be exterminated. Please let me know of any good zionists( if that's not an oxymoron & no no puns on the moron part intended) you have met. That's why I make the distinction between them & other jews.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hello again, fluid:
I'm a Jew. I know lots of Jews, some of whom are Zionists. I've been to Israel. There are lots of Zionists there. I've never met ANY who have the beliefs you put upon them. There was this Klahanie guy who was virulently anti Arab. He had a small following that very well could have believed that way. But, when I say small following, I mean really, really small – 1% of the population. Israeli Jews, Zionist Jews, even NY Jews just don't believe the stuff you ascribe to them. You say you've met Zionists who felt that way, and apparently you've met more than one. Where did you meet them? Indeed, I wouldn't know where to go to meet a group of Zionists, and I'm a Jew. Certainly, Jews love to write. If there is such a group of Zionists (or if Zionists are ALL that way), surly they've written their political views. Where could I go read what a real Zionist thinks? Maybe I'm wrong, and I'm on the wrong side. Help me. excon |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by fluid identity
http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_194...qibya_1953.php From looking at several sites including this one, this is not the wanton massacre of Palestinians as your propagandists would have you believe. Originally Posted by fluid identity
There is a root here to this cycle of violence that you continue to ignore. That the UN approved the establishment of the State of Israel. The Arab world refused to accept this and vowed to wipe out Israel. That started the violence. Had the Arab world accepted the UN action and tried to live peacefully with Israel, then none of this would have happened. So you can't say that the Palestinians are justified because of the mistreatment they have endured (a mistreatment I don't deny). They had the opportunity to peacefully live with Israel and they refused it. This ROOT fact is the one you ignore and narrows your view. |
||||
|
||||
|
Hello again, fluid:
The truth is, you've never met a Zionist, have you? All you've done is repeat what you've heard. Don't feel bad. MOST of the world makes up what they know about Jews, too. It's a shame – but a fact of life Jews accept. There was a time when I thought that reasonable people could work through their differences. I still think so, however it takes two to tango. If one side thinks like you, and the other side thinks like me, peace will NEVER happen. So, after 60 or so years, and after 5 - 10 wars (who's counting?), when are you going to get that you're cutting off your nose to spite your face? You will NEVER wipe Israel away. If you try, they'll wipe you away. Go Jews! excon |
||||
|
||||
|
excon
I have met jews in London who I got on with & some I didn't. I have met Zionists (or so they claimed because it not tatooed on their foreheads) in London who I never got on with Nasty breed - & what I quoted one zionist blatantly said while the others implied with forced reasonable sweetness, hidden dislike, & smiles on their faces - sweet knives but knives nonetheless. & just because you're jewish does not mean I automatically hate you. I can dislike the zionist state of israel & what it stands for but still make a distinction between the government & the jews. Humanity exists in us all... just a few of us have chosen to forgo it to stubbornly stick to murderous regime. Can I ask you why you don't want regime change? Can I clarify, not wiping people of israel away, just the government & install a new non-zionist government - palestinian arab christian & jewish? I accept this is not a serious possibility in the current climate before you exclaim with increduality.. I know it will not happen.. . I just would be interested in your answer to this hypothetical (almost fantastical) situation.. |
||||
|
||||
|
Quoting Scottgem
"There is a root here to this cycle of violence that you continue to ignore. That the UN approved the establishment of the State of Israel. Had the Arab world accepted the UN action and tried to live peacefully with Israel, then none of this would have happened. So you can't say that the Palestinians are justified because of the mistreatment they have endured (a mistreatment I don't deny). They had the opportunity to peacefully live with Israel and they refused it. This ROOT fact is the one you ignore and narrows your view.[/QUOTE] Remember who are on the UN security council & at the time where the balance of power was in the world. Like someone on this site said earlier Palestine was taken by might not by right so therefore Palestinians will always be justified fighting for their freedom. This is quite eloquently & impartially stated by Gandhi. "Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French... What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct... If they [the Jews] must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs... As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regard as an unacceptable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds." Mahatma Gandhi, quoted in "A Land of Two Peoples" ed. Mendes-Flohr. |
||||
|
||||
|
Quoting Scottgem:
So you can't say that the Palestinians are justified because of the mistreatment they have endured (a mistreatment I don't deny). They had the opportunity to peacefully live with Israel and they refused it. This ROOT fact is the one you ignore and narrows your view.[/QUOTE] It is not a root fact except in your lexicon... When someone is told to accept a situation or leave it is a ulitmatum, which was foisted on the palestinans. It is not or never will it be justified for Israel to create a exclusive nation on another peoples land. That is the root fact. The fact you quote is adjacent to the root of the misery (from your viewpoint I hasten to add). They had the opportunity to live with Israel... The european zionist jews should have requested an opportunity to live peacefully with palestinians not stride in arrogantly & claim the land as theirs in recompense for the holocaust. But anyway like I asked previously why will you not advocate the right of return for palestinans living in refugree camps if they agree to live peacefully on their lands under israeli rule, even if it is in sufferance? I also request that you calm your vehement answers down... stop trying to pound your viewpoint into me... we have already established we are approaching this conundrum from completely different angles. I think you are misguided & another cog in Israeli propaganda war machine while you think I've been raised on a diet of malnorished palestinan manna. |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by fluid identity
Whether the UN was right in establishing the State of Israel is a subject for another discussion. The fact is that they did it. You ask why doesn't the government include non-Jews. I do not believe that being jewish is a requirement for being a citiizen of Israel. Nor is it a requirement for participating in the government of Israel. The fact is that, in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel an appeal was made "to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions". So, its not a root fact only in my lexicon. I ask you what government existed in Palestine prior to 1948 or even prior to Brisitsh occupation? The fact is there was no Palestinian state. The area now known as Palestine was part of the Ottoman empire until WWI. Going back to Roman times and before it was part of the kingdom of Judea. Therefore, Ghandi's quote is inaccurate in that Jews do have a valid claim on the area. After WWI the Middle East was divied up between England and France. Palestine was carved out of parts of Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt. The British controlled Palestine and was its government. As indicated by the quote from the Declaration above, the Arabs living in Palestine WERE given the opportunity to participate in the State of Israel as equal citizens and live in peace in their homes. They were never told to leave. Just the opposite. They chose to leave rather than help build a government. |
||||
|
||||
|
[QUOTE=ScottGem]Zionists are not a "breed". They are people who share a belief. Stereo typing a group based on the few you might have met is wrong and, In my opinion, shows your true feelings.
So, its not a root fact only in my lexicon. I ask you what government existed in Palestine prior to 1948 or even prior to Brisitsh occupation? The fact is there was no Palestinian state. The area now known as Palestine was part of the Ottoman empire until WWI. Going back to Roman times and before it was part of the kingdom of Judea. Therefore, Ghandi's quote is inaccurate in that Jews do have a valid claim on the area. After WWI the Middle East was divied up between England and France. Palestine was carved out of parts of Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt. The British controlled Palestine and was its government." Please explain what Zionist are supposed to stand for then? Ghandi's quote refers to the fact that the Jewish claim is not as valid as the claim of the people that lived there at the time & previously for the last few hundred years , descendents of the original inhabitants of that area.Stronger than some claim by majority of the people that lived a hundreds of years in another continent. Again I state that if these jews felt that strongly they should have entered the area in peace & with the permission of the inhabitants (muslim, chritian & jews already there) rather than controlling the whole area like a god given right (which its not otherwise they would never have lost it inb the first place). A state may not have existed there before but that was not through fault of the people there but through exsternal factor & the current state has denied the people the right of self-determination as well. The fact it was controlled by Britain does not mean anything as they imperialistically controlled the area & had promised the arabs self rule & determination but then supported the land claim of the European Jews out of guilt. They essentially betrayed the people they were supposed to be (unelected) guardians of. |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by fluid identity
Again I point out that quote from the Declaration where all residents of the established State of Israel were invited to live in peace and participate in the government. But yes, in the Jewish religion the land WAS granted them by God. That they lost it for a time was due first to the Romans and then the Ottomans. I am also noting a typical pattern here. You make an argument based mostly on opinion and propaganda. I counter with an argument that is supported by hard facts. You ignore those facts and keep repeating the propaganda. |
||||
|
||||
|
Hello again, fluid:
One can cherry pick history to find times when the land we're talking about belonged to Arabs. Others can find times in history when the land belonged to the Jews. Why would ownership of land at one time in history be any more valid than somebody else's ownership of the same land at another time in history? I don't think it is. In fact, I think the Arabs claim on the land is just as valid as the Jews. So, how would one determine the correct owner?? In my view (and the view of the world), the land belongs to those who can hold it. Indeed, that's how we do it, and that's how we've always done it. Where do you live? Wasn't the land your house sits on owned by native people at one time? Aren't YOU occupying their land? Would you give it back to them if they asked? If you aren't predisposed to giving away your house, maybe if they threatened to kill your family, you might. I wouldn't. Nope. If it was me, I wouldn't give back my land. Indeed, it IS me. I own land and I'm not going to give it back to the Indians even though it wasn't taken fairly from them. excon |
||||
Not your question?
Ask your question
View similar questions
| Question Tools | Search this Question |
Add your answer here.
Check out some similar questions!
Marketing Coca Cola in Israel
[ 1 Answers ]
Were can I get valid information on marketing or market history of Coca-cola or other soft drinks in Israel? Thanks Flair
Support
[ 1 Answers ]
I live in Texas and I am the sole managing conservator of my son. I've been in and out of court on enforcement issues concerning visitation. We always come to an agreement or arrangement. Out of all these times I am suppositly in contempt she has not once made a physical appearance to try and pick...
View more questions Search
|
