Palestenian-Israeli Conflict

After the war, the world community decided that it was time for the Jews to once again have their homeland. The idea was not new, went back to the Balfour Declaration. Britain at that time controlled the part of the world that is the historic homeland of the Jews. Part of the Mandate was settled mostly by Jews, the other part by Arabs. It was decided to split the Mandate in 2 countries, a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted the UN resolution, the Arabs rejected it.

In 1948, as Israel proclaimed her independence, combined Arab forces attacked. During that conflict, a large number of Arabs relocated. The reason, whether told to by Arab leadership, expelled, or just decided to move, is moot at this point. Although the exact figures are not known, 750,000 is the gennerally accepted number. That population found itslef mostly in the WB and Gaza. During that conflict, Jordan invaded and took control of the WB, Egypt did the same with Gaza. Also during that time, there was a large movement of Jews from Arab land, again the exact reason, whether forced, coerced, or otherwise is irrelevant today, and the number quoted is generally 800,000. 80% of those Jews were absorded by the new State of Isael, with the remaining 20% going elsewere in the world. In contrast, Jordan and Egypt settled the Arabs of the WB and Gaza in refugee camps. The UN decided to create a separate refugee definition and buraucracy for them. They have been pawns of Arab politics ever since. It is noteworthy that more infracstructure and educational instutions were built in the territories between 1967 and the early 80s that any other time.

Discounting the far left and the far right, all the Intifada has succedded to do was to move the moderate Israelis further to the right. Arafat's reaction to Camp David erally deflated the moderates in Israel, leaving most of them to wonder 'what's the use'.
 
Slip, you seem to have a problem following discussions. This is the third post in this thread that I quoted you and replied to you and yet you take what I said out of context or asked what I was talking about? Why bother? Are you interested in a discussion or just trying to bait an argument? You asked what information I had that it was cultural or religious. I asked how far back you wanted to go and then proceeded to answer.


Slip, do you really think that what happened in the past has no bearing to either side in the conflict? Do you think that both sides only care about what has happened in their own lifetimes? I don't. Both sides claim a historical tie to that piece of land, i.e. the culture aspect. Do you think that if some country offered to give either side a bigger piece of land somewhere else and assistance to develop that land that either party would take up the offer? I doubt it, but if one side did agree to it, I would guess it would be Israel because they want peace.

You said that the issues of culture and religion and the issue of the land itself are not mutually exclusive and that it would be hard for Hamas to attack Israel if they were relegated to some tiny island in the pacific. Where did I ever state that they were mutually exclusive? I'll give you a hint, I didn't. I said that they were both issues but that I thought that the religion and culture were the bigger issues. Yet you seem to have a problem understanding that if something is a bigger factor than another factor in an issue, it must by definition not be mutually exclusive. So once again, is it that you just can't understand what people write or are you trying to argue for the sake of argument?

You say to stop making blanket generalizations and particularly making blanket generalizations about how Muslims treat other Muslims. Yet, you don't seem to understand that when I said repeatedly that I believe that most Jews and Palestinians want peace and an end to the fighting that I am not making a blanket generalization. When I state that some Muslim Clerics call for the death of others based upon their interpetation of the Koran, that is also not a blanket generalization. And you seem to also fail that understanding that some Muslim Clerics calling for the death of a Christian is not making a blanket statement about all Muslims treatment of Muslims. Did you miss that it was a Christian and not a Muslim? So once again, is it that you just can't understand what people write or are you trying to argue for the sake of argument?

To be honest, I quite resent the statement that you made about my prejudiced. Please show me where I have made a prejudiced or racist comment. I don't believe that you will be able to do so. So once again, is it that you just can't understand what people write or are you trying to argue for the sake of argument?

You laugh because I said that Israel developed the area that thy now control? Then you imply that I said they developed in Pre Roman days? Where did I say that? I'll give you a hint. Nowhere. I will give you another hint, anyone that thinks that Israel is not far more developed today than it was in 1945 is ignoring reality. But you seem to be good at that. So once again, is it that you just can't understand what people write or are you trying to argue for the sake of argument?

You seem to want Israel removed from it's existance in the world or at least removed from the Middle East. Yet you want to ignore the fact that the same issues are affecting what happens in other hot spots around the world. Only a fool would think that the other places in the world having similar violence and disputes are going to agree to just getting rid of one of the countries. Don't you think though that if Palestine wins the argument by having Israel removed as a nation that each of the other countries that you listed and I added to would be looking at that as a precedent and solution for their problem? So once again, is it that you just can't understand the issues or are you trying to argue for the sake of argument?

You say it isn't religion and culture that are the major factors. Try looking at the quotes Sankaku gave. How about the commentary in the USAToday, today's edition (6/5/06) that shows that the official Muslim textbooks in Saudia Arabia and are used elsewhere, refer to Jews as Apes and Christians as Swine and that Holy Jihad has to be used to remove them? So once again, is it that you just can't understand the issues or are you trying to argue for the sake of argument?
 
Try this: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/15E6BF77-6F91-46EE-A4B5-A3CE0E9957EA.htm

OK, it's not ALL of us. Just our country and half of the worldwide Jewish population.
 
still no mention of


in fact no mention of wiping anyone out.

meanwhile zionists are busy wiping palestine of the Map
 
The WB and Gaza have a birth rate around 30/1000 and a growth rate of over 3%. Yeah, we're wiping them out real good.

You are either a complete idiot, or a racist that is just a waste of oxygen.
 
Iran is not Nazi Germany
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/05/24/canada.iran.reut/index.html

but The Iranian President did take stance he would wipe Israel off the map. I am getting a link.
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4510922.stm



Israel has no intention of wiping the Palestinians off the map. If they did the Palestinans would have been gone long ago.
 
personal attacks are against the TOS for MAP, please desist
 
desist from using desist.

check this out while your at it. Both Hamas and Iran wnat to destroy Israel.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/15E6BF77-6F91-46EE-A4B5-A3CE0E9957EA.htm
 
here is an Al Jeezera story about Israeli independance day and the debate about Jewish and Arab populations in "Palestine"

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/2127BFB9-AAFB-486F-9F64-F19BA8C0547C.htm
 
Yeah, that's why that Zionist Israeli news source called Aljazeera says:


Those quote marks mean that they are saying that is a direct quote of what he said. (Well, obviously translated.)

They also quote him as saying:


He wants to wipe Israel as a nation off the map, not move it. You can decide if you think he means just ending the country or killing all the Jews in it. You can also see clearly that he views this as a historical struggle and not just the 60 or so years that Israel has existed in modern times.
 
There are many Jews living happily within in Iran, if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wanted to exterminate all Jews then this would not be the case.

Mean while, Palestine as a nation is being wiped of the map.
 
Of the 100,000 Jews in Iran in 1948, about 10,000 remain.

Palestine was never a nation. Care to elaborate how it is being wiped of the map? The size of the territories have not apprecibly changed since 1948. Only control of them has changed in 1967.
 
There was never a country called Palestine.

Until 1948, Palestinians erfered to the Jews in that region. Arabs identified as either Syrians or Jordanians. The term Palestinian refereing to Arabs did not come into use until the mid 1960s, by Arafat, an Egyptian.
 
Back
Top