-
04-22-2009, 10:40 AM #41
Exactly. And everyone agrees that it was an atrocity what the Europeans did to the Native Americans.
who occupied that land first? Jews or Palestinians?
I really don't see why this is unacceptable only in the case of Israel.
48volts hit the nail on its head!
No. Even though this is a pathetically weak line of argumentation, even this argument fails, since the ancestors of the Arabs were already in the land before the Jews came from Egypt. Again, mentioned in the OT itself.
Detailed censuses were done by the Ottomans, the British, and the French. The British especially took great pains to document this, when they were discussing the issue of what was to be done of the British mandate of Palestine. The British Survey of Palestine Department had at least 55 detailed charts and tables on this issue.
The statistics are accepted by the Israeli government, and are even available on the official Israeli website. I've already posted this before. If you want, I can search my previous posts to find it again.
The fact is that the Israeli government admits that only 6% of the land was owned by Jews up until 1948. Keep in mind that this was after decades of illegal Jewish immigration and Zionist terrorist squads. Even with all that, only 6%. In the early 1900s, it was way less than that.
These facts cannot be denied, and whoever denies them doesn't know what he is talking about.
They came in and started killing and destroying and treating Palestinians like subhumans...care to back that up and share a source since after all it is fact.
There is in fact every indication there was net Arab immigration into Palestine in the period of 1900-1948, and that the economic situation of Palestinian Arabs improved tremendously under the British Mandate relative to surrounding countries. According to the Ottoman census there were 414k arabs in Palestine in 1893. By 1948, there were approximately 1.35 million Arabs and 650,000 Jews living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, more Arabs than had ever lived in Palestine before, and more Jews than had lived there since Roman times.
Real people are suffering and dying by the hands of blood thirsty racist Palestinians too. That's a fact.
If you're going to get all dramatic with your "that's a fact" statements, try to make some of them facts rather than bias perspectives.
-
04-22-2009, 12:52 PM #42
-
04-22-2009, 12:54 PM #43
-
04-22-2009, 12:58 PM #44
-
04-22-2009, 01:03 PM #45
i think buffed explains well...
-
04-22-2009, 01:28 PM #46
Haganah, was only a paid gaurd force for Jewish settlements, they consisted mainly of Jewish farmers who took turns guarding their farms and didn't number more than 100 people. This didn't change until after 1929 riots.
Stern Gang not founded until 1940
Irgun 1931
I said prove Israeli's started migrating in 1900 and started killing and treating Arabs like subhumans. Buy the era of these organizations much conflict already.
Tel Hai March 1, 1920
Nebi Musa riots April 4- April 7, 1920 Arabs
Jaffa riots and attacks on Rehovot, Petah Tikva, Kfar Saba, Hadera May 1- May 7, 1921
Hebron massacre August 23- August 26, 1929
Safed massacre August 29, 1929
All of the above massacres started by Arabs
can you provide me with a list of massacres incited by jews prior to 1929 please?
-
04-22-2009, 02:17 PM #47
Just to clarify, I didn't mean that jews migrated and immediately began killing and destroying. I may have worded it incorrectly. What I meant to say is that they did in fact migrate, and did in fact kill and destroy, but more recently than they did in the begginning. Of course they had to get the numbers in order to have power to start taking over land. Arabs and jews got along very well prior to migration, and even during the migrations. My grandpa told me stories of how the kids in the neighborhood didn't know what religion each person was, and everybody celebrated everyone's holidays. It is not until jews started migrating in crazy numbers, and began to terrorize the palestinians, that there true invading motivation became clear. That's when the arabs started revolting. As soon as the jews grew in power and numbers, the real killing and destruction began. But again, just to clarify, i didn't mean it was immediate, I'm more saying that the majority of killing and destruction, and all of the illegal land grabbing done today, and for about 60 years now, is at the hands of the Israelis.
-
04-22-2009, 03:41 PM #48
^It's a mess, and it's hard to fault one side or the other, things have snowballed to the point of being out of control, and nobody thinks the current situation is good.^
-
04-22-2009, 04:07 PM #49
It is a mess, but I do think the solution is simple..well, in theory. The balance of power in the middle east is all out of whack right now because of Israel's nuclear arsenal and the billions in US aid. I think a cut off, or massive reduction in aid (coupled with an unlikely, but beneficial, nuclear disarm) will significantly reduce the might of Israel to the level of its arab neighbors. At that point, Israel will be forced to come to the negotiation table without the over-sized upper hand they currently have. They will be obligated to make a peace deal that is fair to both sides, since they do not control the entire situation.
-
04-22-2009, 04:16 PM #50
^^Very simple solution indeed, but too simple, IMO. I'm sure the thoughts of Isreali's and most of the western world would be, are the Arabs willing to negotiate fairly. Because if we cut off aid to Isreal and disarmed their nuclear arsenal, they would be at a sever disadvantage to the multiple Arab states that surround them.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not on either side. I'm just saying there is no clear solution to this problem. Sad situation indeed!!!
-
04-22-2009, 04:29 PM #51
what you're saying is the excuse for the western world (US mainly) to support Israel's power, and its unfair negotiations and land grabs is that if they don't have the power to do that, then the arabs will be the unfair ones. And since one side is bound to be unfair, then we might as well continue the support of Israel's unfair deal making, since.....we like 'em better? I may think its because their lobby in the US is much more powerful and influential than all others...but I could be wrong.
I know you probably don't mean to say that, but that's basically what it sounds like.
-
04-22-2009, 08:04 PM #52
I think BgMc's point is a valid one...if Israel were at a severe disadvantage would there be any negotiations at all? Or just a war?
The US is getting a raw deal by supporting Israel, and they will have support as long as they appear by law makers to be in good faith in peace negotiations. So far, law makers must be somewhat satisfied.
-
01-10-2013, 09:31 PM #53
All kinds of old threads in the vault
Loving these threads on here...didn't expect to find old israel-palestine threads on here. Arguing the history is relatively easy, despite the propaganda that exists the history books don't lie. For a brief glimpse of the origins of Zionism I'd recommend a book by Margaret MacMillan (a Canadian lass of course) Paris 1919...
-
01-11-2013, 03:54 PM #54
Its funny 'cause there's a word floating around. Its goes like "america isnt israel's protector, israel is america's protector".
Keep in mind that israel is a nuclear power.
Moreover, the USA gets its weapons from israel. Israel makes and tests all the prototype weapons that afterwards will be army standard issue.
Need i say more about mossad ?
Iseriously doubt that it will fall. At most, it will shape-shift into something else, more covert. The "fall" will be just a curtain pulled down on the public eye.
-
01-12-2013, 01:20 PM #55
good reads. agree with "not a simple solution"
and the "curtain to the public eye"
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
First Test-E cycle in 10 years
11-11-2024, 03:22 PM in ANABOLIC STEROIDS - QUESTIONS & ANSWERS