The Middle East Conflict Thread

BBSA said:
Not at all, I was pointing out that the Jews was not doing well at all at the time after you said they were managing just fine. 6 Million killed is not "managing just fine" in my book but you may have a different perspective.
Click to expand...

I was thinking of a period of centuries before 1948...
 
Aqua_lung said:
Exactly...

Tell me frankie do the Tamil suicide bombers share this ideology? they are not Muslims.
Click to expand...
So aqua, just a small number of the modern day terrorist attacks were not by Muslims is no argument against the fact that most are by Muslims, and while the Muslim clerics like Abu Hamza, Omar Bakri, Abu Qatada, Abu Bakar Ba'asyir continue to preach hatred and death to all kaffurs, they make it clear that peace is not on the agenda.
 
aperio said:
Whenever a discussion about the Middle East comes up, be it last year's invasion by Israel of Lebanon, the right of Israel to exist, suicide attacks on Israel, or Israeli attacks on Gaza, it is quite clear that many people are under the impression that the modern state of Israel:

1. Has been in existence for thousands of years, populated by mainly Jews and
2. Has a God-given right to exist and expand their borders as they wish.

The article below sheds some light on these popular misconceptions.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the population of Palestine consisted substantially of Muslim and Christian Arabs, plus around 20,000 Jews. Until 1948, Palestine was a British mandated territory and British policy on the territory was informed by the Balfour Declaration of 1917, whereby Palestine would be regarded as a homeland for the Jews, subject to the rights of the Arabs, but would not necessarily be an independent state. By 1939, Britain was moving away from this position, and a white Paper recommended that an Arab state of Palestine be created.

In order to force Britain's hand and ensure a favourable outcome, the Jews commenced a program of terrorism, with the Stern Gang as the main participant. In 1946, the British headquarters in the King David Hotel were blown up. By February 1947, the number of British casualties in Palestine has risen sharply and Britain called on the UN to solve the Palestinian problem.

At this point, the United States reached agreement with USSR that Palestine was to be divided. In November 1947, a UN Special Committee on Palestine presented a report to the General Assembly, with a majority advocating division, but a minority advocating a unitary state based on democracy. Intense pressure by USA and USSR was necessary to gain the necessary two thirds majority vote for partition.

At first, the international solution was for the Palestinians to receive the major portion of the divided territory, but the Jews gradually achieved concessions, until a United Nations "Green Line" was drawn, dividing the territory approximately into two, by means of four sectors which touched at one point, so that a Jew or Palestinian need not cross the other's territory in order to move from one of his two sectors to the other.

Some publications that may provide more information include:

* A history of modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples (2004) by Professor Ilan Pappe (University of Haifa, Israel);
* The History of Israel (1998) by Professor Arnold Blumberg;
* Bitter Harvest: A Modern History of Palestine (1989), by Sami Hadawi (official land valuer during the British Mandate)
Click to expand...
You start off by saying that people are under the impression that the "modern state of Israel has been in existence for thousands of years, populated by mainly Jews..". How can a modern state be 1000's of years old?

Then you start off your argument with an article that only begins in the 20th Century.

Come now. How far back do you want to go. Why not just look at the historical evidence such as Temples and so on? Do you deny that there were Jews in Jerusalem thousands of years ago? I didn't think so.:rolleyes:
 
Claymore said:
I was thinking of a period of centuries before 1948...
Click to expand...

Yes. This bit of the debate started with marine1's statement "It is for survival of the Jewish people". As you pointed out, that is patent cr@p, as the majority of said "Jewish people" are not in Israel - in fact the majority lives in that wealthy well-off country the USA, under very few threats to their "survival", if any. The argument also once again falls prey to that propaganda lie propagated by Israel that Israel = the Jewish race.
 
Sackboy said:
You start off by saying that people are under the impression that the "modern state of Israel has been in existence for thousands of years, populated by mainly Jews..". How can a modern state be 1000's of years old?
Click to expand...

I think you missed this emphasis:

"many people are under the impression"
 
Garyvdh said:
So Palestine belonged to the "Palestinian people" before 1947 according to that map? That is complete bull. It was a British mandate. There were Jews AND Palestinians living there... but there was no sovereign state. Your map is complete propaganda.
Click to expand...

It should have said Zionist.. to say jewish is an insult to jews.
 
krycor said:
how long u going to flog a dead horse?? I don't see other people throwing up the same israeli offenses over and over again .. do you?
Click to expand...

You mean like Aperio? And the crap that rwenzori and aqua-lung keep vomiting up?
 
krycor said:
how long u going to flog a dead horse?? I don't see other people throwing up the same israeli offenses over and over again .. do you?
Click to expand...

As dead as the horse that you guys flog - the doff claim that Hamas isn't a terrorist organisation.
 
rwenzori said:
Oh OK then - we can both cherry pick which ones we like then. 181 is trash, as I have said. ;) They ARE in breach, and you are arguing petty semantics.

Chapter VII. In this conflict, the UN would not in any way be able to afford to send in enough neutral troops to guarantee the peace - be practical. The massive US influence would also prevent it. So, not a real option in the real world.
Click to expand...

Please post which resolutions you feel they are breaching because I'm having difficulty finding any.

Regardless of whether you feel Resolution 181 is trash or not is irrelevant. Israel is recognised by 136 countries, as such it is an independent state.

If you tell me it is a de facto state then so are 19 of the Arab League nations. You have yet to tell me what exactly your definition of de facto is, as such.

EDIT: the words used:
'takes note'
'strongly deplores'
'deeply regrets'
'strongly condemns'

How can you breach a resolution that states it 'takes note' or 'deeply regrets'? This pertains to events that have already occurred!

I do notice where the UN 'demands' Israel has given their full cooperation. Of course in the next sentence you then claim the Security Council is protecting Israel.

You can't pick and choose when to follow the UN and when not, because then it would apply to both sides.
 
Last edited:
rwenzori said:
Yes. This bit of the debate started with marine1's statement "It is for survival of the Jewish people". As you pointed out, that is patent cr@p, as the majority of said "Jewish people" are not in Israel - in fact the majority lives in that wealthy well-off country the USA, under very few threats to their "survival", if any. The argument also once again falls prey to that propaganda lie propagated by Israel that Israel = the Jewish race.
Click to expand...

Sure there are many Arabs living peacefully in Israel, as full Israeli citizens, and they're quite happy to continue doing so. Its only the Palestinians that are causing the problems.
 
timgaul said:
Sure there are many Arabs living peacefully in Israel, as full Israeli citizens, and they're quite happy to continue doing so. Its only the Palestinians that are causing the problems.
Click to expand...

There's the key word. Hamas is not interested in peace. They are murderers and love to spill innocent blood... even that of their own families. Devils and dogs. That's what they are. :)
 
Aqua_lung said:
There is only one solution(IMO):
One state with one man one vote, create religious municipalities(legally) instead.
Click to expand...

Interesting solution.. would work somewhat with religious areas.. however there is thing about how many Jews living there are from the region. Its something that just can't get over looked as it skews things drastically in elections and comes with other problems such as deciding what happens migrants, how land is given back/redistributed, and how to handle Israeli terrorism/uprising.. don't forget the much like in SA black people had/have stereotypes worthiness issues to break thru, AA and BEE type scenarios will definitely happen as a way to rapidly integrate Palestinians. This creates a lot of animosity

The latter being a MAJOR concern as you have a military trained populous who will not take to kindly to suddenly having to give up on ideology. Settlement uprising was nothing compared to what would happen.

Even if those things are over come, heck maybe even have a divided government with rotated presidency even(EU style?), then there the whole Jewish immigration problem.

All in all it can work, but a lot of sacrifice will have to be made and more so would appear on the Israeli side as they have to give up control of the region(somewhat), and their populous will have to contend with pretty much the issues white people in Sa have to deal with. For the Palestinians it would be a big change as there is almost nothing but positives for them since they currently have little to nothing left.
 
Garyvdh said:
There's the key word. Hamas is not interested in peace. They are murderers and love to spill innocent blood... even that of their own families. Devils and dogs. That's what they are. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I should rather mention Hamas and Palestinian terrorists. I'm sure there are many Palestinians that just want peace!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X