[paraclete]

And who decided things in the previous 2,000 years prior to 1948?

force of arms, Romans, arabs, turks, british to name a few. Until there was interest in establishing a jewish homeland palestine was a arid backwater noone wanted. The Ottomans started moving people in to counter jewish migration

[Athos]

Until there was interest in establishing a jewish homeland palestine was a arid backwater noone wanted.

No one wanted the land except for the people living on the land. Interest in establishing a homeland for a group not there is about as evil as is possible.

When the Arab Bedouins helped the allies defeat the Turks in WW1, the British Foreign Office promised the land as a national homeland for the Palestinian Arabs living there. A few years later in 1917, the Balfour Declaration promised the land to Jews as a homeland. Unfortunately, the Arabs weren't even allowed to have a seat at the peace conference in Versailles.

The two promises have been the source of the conflict for over 100 years now. The British have continuously admitted the the Balfour Declaration was vague as to the boundaries involved.

The Palestinians clearly have the greater moral right to the land, but the Israelis have the backing of the major powers and far superior military technology.

[paraclete]

No one wanted the land except for the people living on the land. Interest in establishing a homeland for a group not there is about as evil as is possible.

When the Arab Bedouins helped the allies defeat the Turks in WW1, the British Foreign Office promised the land as a national homeland for the Palestinian Arabs living there. A few years later in 1917, the Balfour Declaration promised the land to Jews as a homeland. Unfortunately, the Arabs weren't even allowed to have a seat at the peace conference in Versailles.

The two promises have been the source of the conflict for over 100 years now. The British have continuously admitted the the Balfour Declaration was vague as to the boundaries involved.

The Palestinians clearly have the greater moral right to the land, but the Israelis have the backing of the major powers and far superior military technology.

Athos you know as I do that the issue isn't as simple as who might have been living there centuries ago. There were only a few hundred thousand arabs living there when the idea was first floated, The jews were evicted by the Romans because they didn't accept being a conquered people. The palestinians are no different. If they would just settle to the new circumstance instead of trying to destroy the newcomers they might be better off

[Athos]

Athos you know as I do that the issue isn't as simple as who might have been living there centuries ago.

This isn't about "centuries ago". You wrote that Israel was established by the UN in 1948, hardly centuries ago.

There were only a few hundred thousand arabs living there when the idea was first floated,

If you're referring to 1948, the Arab population was about 1.25 million. Jews, primarily recent immigrants since the advent of Zionism, were a few hundred thousand. Prior to the late 19th century, the Jewish population had been a small minority and had been static since their expulsion by the Romans in 70 AD.

Jews were evicted by the Romans because they didn't accept being a conquered people. The palestinians are no different.

You have it very wrong. The Palestinians were not conquered. Their homeland was given to a foreign people who had not lived there for almost 2,000 years (with the above exception). This "gift" came from a supra-national agency (the UN) that had no moral or legal right to do so.

If they would just settle to the new circumstance instead of trying to destroy the newcomers they might be better off

To fight an invader trying to conquer your land, resistance is the normal thing to do. Didn't Australia fight the Japanese? Or should they have stopped resisting because they "might be better off"?

[paraclete]

To fight an invader trying to conquer your land, resistance is the normal thing to do. Didn't Australia fight the Japanese? Or should they have stopped resisting because they "might be better off"?

There is a difference between resisting an invader and insurrection after the invasion is over. I'm sure the americans appreciate that after their experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. You can fight for just so long before your country is devastated. The palestinians are fortunate noone has devastated their country

[Athos]

There is a difference between resisting an invader and insurrection after the invasion is over.

As I previously stated, there was NO invasion.

I'm sure the americans appreciate that after their experience in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The issue here is Israel-Palestinians. Not America-Iraq-Afghanistan.

You can fight for just so long before your country is devastated. The palestinians are fortunate no one has devastated their country

Chalk one up for international morality.

[talaniman]

There is a difference between resisting an invader and insurrection after the invasion is over. I'm sure the americans appreciate that after their experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. You can fight for just so long before your country is devastated. The palestinians are fortunate noone has devastated their country

Targeting Saddam, Bin Laden, and AL Qaeda is/was hardly an invasion, and Palestine looks devastated AND oppressed to me.

[paraclete]

Targeting Saddam, Bin Laden, and AL Qaeda is/was hardly an invasion, and Palestine looks devastated AND oppressed to me.

Really, what part of it

As I previously stated, there was NO invasion.

I'm sure the palestinians would disagree

The issue here is Israel-Palestinians. Not America-Iraq-Afghanistan.

The issue is the UN, representing the nations of the world, voted to create the state of Israel. The palestinians have never accepted that decision

Chalk one up for international morality.

You think that exists, you are more niave than I thought

[Athos]

Jeez - you managed to miss the point of everything I wrote -----

I'm sure the palestinians would disagree

And I'm sure they know the difference between an invasion and the ruling by the UN. I'm surprised you don't.

The issue is the UN, representing the nations of the world, voted to create the state of Israel. The palestinians have never accepted that decision

You are skipping past what the discussion was about. It's ok to change a subject but don't imply it's an answer to the subject just discussed.

You think that exists, you are more niave than I thought

This is a reference to my comment on international morality. You again missed the point - this time in a big way. As anybody can see (apparently some exceptions) my comment was a bit of irony, or sarcasm if you prefer. Who's being naive, now?

[paraclete]

Guilty I'll admit it if you will, I'm totally naive, I believe in the innate goodness of mankind

[talaniman]

So do I but you cannot ignore the loons liars and innate criminal behavior of some of mankind, or the bad behavior whether intentional or unintentional.

[tomder55]

There was never a 'Palestine ' even when the UN recommended they establish a state during the partition . The Arabs there are Arab ,indistinguishable from Arabs from Jordan ,Syria, Sinai Bedouins ,Lebanon, Iraq .Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitant's part of the great "Arab nation" . Jerusalem in it's whole history has never been recognized as other that Israel's Capitol ;during the First and Second Temple periods ,and of the modern state of Israel . The land was Israel as far back as 1000 bce . If there was any conquest it was of Israel by such empires as Philistines ,Egypt ,Assyria ,Babylon ,Persia ,Greeks ,Parthenia,Rome ,Eastern Roman Empire ,Byzantines ,the Turks /Ottomans ,Germany ,England ,France , and a whole bunch of other minor empires and invaders . The Jews who returned after the UN mandate were living in diaspora after conquers threw them out of their homeland .

[Athos]

There was never a 'Palestine '

Of course, there was. The name is attested to in ancient Greece and in ancient Rome.

The Arabs there are Arab ,indistinguishable from <other> Arabs

That's like saying Irish in Ireland are indistinguishable from Irish in England. So what?

The <Arabs> have always considered Palestine and its inhabitant's part of the great "Arab nation"

Again, so what?

Jerusalem in it's whole history has never been recognized as other that Israel's Capitol

WRONG! A settlement at the site of Jerusalem goes back at least 6,000 years. By 3,000 BC, a city inhabited by Canaanites existed. This city was named after a Canaanite god (Shalem) and was later inhabited by a tribe from Canaan called Israelites. This was about 1100 BC.

The land was Israel as far back as 1000 bce . If there was any conquest it was of Israel by such empires as Philistines ,Egypt ,Assyria ,Babylon ,Persia ,Greeks ,Parthenia,Rome ,Eastern Roman Empire ,Byzantines ,the Turks /Ottomans ,Germany ,England ,France , and a whole bunch of other minor empires and invaders

This is all generally true, but what does it have to do with the discussion at hand?

The Jews who returned after the UN mandate were living in diaspora after conquers threw them out of their homeland .

Not true. AFTER the UN action in 1947, Jews had a hard time leaving their home countries, primarily Eastern Europe and Russia, and had, in fact, an even harder time getting into Israel due to British blockades against immigrant Jews.

In any case, what is your point about this history of the Jews?

[paraclete]

he is trying to prove palestine is a construct of modern history and that the palestinian people never existed

[Wondergirl]

he is trying to prove palestine is a construct of modern history and that the palestinian people never existed

He needs to read Genesis and
https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine

[Athos]

he is trying to prove palestine is a construct of modern history and that the palestinian people never existed

I guess he was wrong. I wonder, then, exactly whose land it was that Israel took over in 1947?

[paraclete]

I guess he was wrong. I wonder, then, exactly whose land it was that Israel took over in 1947?

It was British mandated Palestine

[Athos]

It was British mandated Palestine

My question was Whose land was it?

[paraclete]

My question was Whose land was it?

Some Jews lived there, some Arabs lived there and it was occupied by the British military

[Athos]

Some Jews lived there, some Arabs lived there and it was occupied by the British military

Then why did you say the Palestinian people never existed?