General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[Matt Giwer]

do you REALLY think Obama expects Israel to take back even 1 million Palestinian refugees?

come on now. let's get real here.

Germany agreed to take back an unlimited number of jewish refugees from Russia and they were never Germans and made no pretension of being German.

All population arguments are based upon the presumption that Israel has the right to be a jewish supremacist state no different from those run by Orvil Faubus and George Wallace. Does one have to ask why this plays to Republicans and not to Obama?

 

[Matt Giwer]

A minor observation

When I first posted to JREF on this subject I observed how simple it was to sum up the entire issue in a few words. Those words are in my sig, nine words in two sentences.

In all the thousands of posts that have been made since then not a one has gone beyond the bounds of those nine words.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

Matt Giwer,

It is a heck of a lot more complicated than that. It has many of its roots in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, when the British Empire promised an independent Jewish State in what would be Israel today. under the Treaty of Severes in the aftermath of WW1, Britain got Transjordan and the Palestinian provinces of the old Ottoman Empire. However, they had also promised the Arabs an independent state, which left britain in a catch-22.

 

[Thunder]

under the Treaty of Severes in the aftermath of WW1, Britain got Transjordan and the Palestinian provinces of the old Ottoman Empire. However, they had also promised the Arabs an independent state, which left britain in a catch-22.

many right-wing Zionists throughout the world will deny this, you know.

but it should also be stated that the British & French not only promised the people of Palestine, but indeed all the peoples of the Middle East then under Allied occupation, of a democratic state. clearly, this promise was utterly broken.

 

[mortimer]

many right-wing Zionists throughout the world will deny this, you know.

but it should also be stated that the British & French not only promised the people of Palestine, but indeed all the peoples of the Middle East then under Allied occupation, of a democratic state. clearly, this promise was utterly broken.

I think it's been shown over and over again how difficult it is to force a democratic state on peoples who don't want it. The failure was to make the promise in the first place.

 

[Thunder]

I think it's been shown over and over again how difficult it is to force a democratic state on peoples who don't want it. The failure was to make the promise in the first place.

what evidence do you have that the Arab peoples of the Ottoman Empire did NOT want a democratic state?

or are you simply assuming that since they were largely Arabs and Muslims, they wanted a dictatorship instead.

 

[Matt Giwer]

Matt Giwer,

It is a heck of a lot more complicated than that. It has many of its roots in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, when the British Empire promised an independent Jewish State in what would be Israel today. under the Treaty of Severes in the aftermath of WW1, Britain got Transjordan and the Palestinian provinces of the old Ottoman Empire. However, they had also promised the Arabs an independent state, which left britain in a catch-22.

And there was a garment workers fire in NYC. All of it is certainly incredibly interesting to historians and occupy those easily distracted.

If jews had NOT stolen the land there would be no problem. No one forced the jews to steal the land. No one is preventing jews from giving it back. All the problems began as, are and continue to be problems freely chosen and accepted by jews.

 

[mortimer]

what evidence do you have that the Arab peoples of the Ottoman Empire did NOT want a democratic state?

The number of democratic states in the Arab areas of the former Ottoman Empire, compared to the number of dictatorships/monarchies/etc. I thought that would have been obvious.

 

[A'isha]

The number of democratic states in the Arab areas of the former Ottoman Empire, compared to the number of dictatorships/monarchies/etc. I thought that would have been obvious.

I'm pretty sure the post-Ottoman monarchies were not established via popular acclaim from the citizenry.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

And there was a garment workers fire in NYC. All of it is certainly incredibly interesting to historians and occupy those easily distracted.

If jews had NOT stolen the land there would be no problem. No one forced the jews to steal the land. No one is preventing jews from giving it back. All the problems began as, are and continue to be problems freely chosen and accepted by jews.

Lol wut at the first part,

Er, no. The land was not stolen. The land was granted to them by the British Empire per the Balfour Declaration. Israel's foundations did not rely on theft in any form by the Jews.

And many of the Jews that came to Israel came after WW2, when 2/3rds of all European Jews were slaughtered. Most of Eurasia was wrecked, Britain was a mess, America was still under Jim Crow at the time, and a lot of Jews had suffered attacks from anti-semites in Europe, so they decided to head to the Holy Lands, which was effectively last chance saloon for them.

 

[stokes234]

Lol wut at the first part,

Er, no. The land was not stolen. The land was granted to them by the British Empire per the Balfour Declaration. Israel's foundations did not rely on theft in any form by the Jews.

And many of the Jews that came to Israel came after WW2, when 2/3rds of all European Jews were slaughtered. Most of Eurasia was wrecked, Britain was a mess, America was still under Jim Crow at the time, and a lot of Jews had suffered attacks from anti-semites in Europe, so they decided to head to the Holy Lands, which was effectively last chance saloon for them.

While I think the formation of Israel was a mistake, I wouldn't call it theft either. That said, I take issue with the idea that it was britains land to give in the first place. And the actual method by which the first Israeli settlers claimed the land from the British occupiers didn't exactly entail a friendly handover by (what was left of) the British empire.

Outside of Germany, the Jewish communities in europe would have been fine had they stayed, as shown by the remaining communities in europe today.

 

[a_unique_person]

The number of democratic states in the Arab areas of the former Ottoman Empire, compared to the number of dictatorships/monarchies/etc. I thought that would have been obvious.

It doesn't seem obvious to me. The British and other colonialists set the states up. The mess that is Iraq is one result of the errors they made. The current unrest sweeping the area is an indication to me that the people do want democracy.

 

[mortimer]

It doesn't seem obvious to me. The British and other colonialists set the states up. The mess that is Iraq is one result of the errors they made. The current unrest sweeping the area is an indication to me that the people do want democracy.

I guess we'll see. I think it's more likely that these countries with the current unrest will fall back to dictatorships, just under new strongmen. But that's just speculation.

 

[Thunder]

The number of democratic states in the Arab areas of the former Ottoman Empire, compared to the number of dictatorships/monarchies/etc. I thought that would have been obvious.

Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, are all still dictatorships...as they were set up that way by the Brits & French.

Unfortunately, unlike in Eastern Europe, the United States and other Western powers were unsuccessful in starting and assisting democratic movements and regimes to take control away from the dictators.

...or maybe the Americans, Brits, and French simply liked it this way, as long as that good ol' oil kept on flowin'.

 

[Matt Giwer]

Truer words were never spoken

"In a world which is demonstrably on the side of the Palestinians and Arabs - where Israel stands virtually alone - the United States has a special role to play,"said the AIPAC director. "When the United States is even-handed, Israel is automatically at a disadvantage, tilting the diplomatic playing field overwhelmingly toward the Palestinians and Arabs."

 

[NWO Sentryman]

While I think the formation of Israel was a mistake, I wouldn't call it theft either. That said, I take issue with the idea that it was britains land to give in the first place. And the actual method by which the first Israeli settlers claimed the land from the British occupiers didn't exactly entail a friendly handover by (what was left of) the British empire.

Outside of Germany, the Jewish communities in europe would have been fine had they stayed, as shown by the remaining communities in europe today.

It was britain's land after they had defeated the Ottoman Empire. It was handed to them by the LoN as a mandate, and after some political chicanery that would make the Byzantine Empire proud, the State of Israel was formed.

And you seem to think that the Jews were having it fine in postwar Europe. Remember, many of them had been handed over to the SS by French or Italian or even Polish collaborators, and they felt that there was nowhere else to go. America had the Klan waiting for them, Britain was a mess, and for many, Israel presented the last opportunity. After all, it was nowhere near as worn out by WW2 and had a significant Jewish community, as well as the fact that it wasn't as far away as America. However, settling in there wasn't helped by the fact that the Grand Mufti there had helped form not one, but two Waffen SS units during the war.

 

[a_unique_person]

I guess we'll see. I think it's more likely that these countries with the current unrest will fall back to dictatorships, just under new strongmen. But that's just speculation.

But would that be because of the strongmen who take advantage of the chaos, or the people who live in the country?

 

[Matt Giwer]

Lol wut at the first part,

Er, no. The land was not stolen. The land was granted to them by the British Empire per the Balfour Declaration. Israel's foundations did not rely on theft in any form by the Jews.

I do get tired of repeating the obvious to people who are obviously knowledgeable and intelligent enough to know better. The land was NOT Britain's to give nor did Britain ever claim ownership of the land. Obviously you know that. The UN gave the Jews the authorization to form a government over the land not ownership of the land nor did the UN every claim ownership of the land. Obviously you know that also.

Israel did rely upon theft as witnessed by the absentee owner laws which caused ownership of the land to be forfeit to the state. This applied to both internal and external refugees. As you also know, for both internal and external refugees for attempted not to be absent was to be murdered by Jews. The external refugees were often given the opportunity to dig their own graves which were of course unmarked.

That constitutes theft under color of law. It stole land based upon criteria imposed by the thieves which the victims could not remediate as attempted remediation resulted in death.

But you know that.

Sovereignty is not ownership nor did Israel ever claimed it was ownership.

But you know that too.

And many of the Jews that came to Israel came after WW2, when 2/3rds of all European Jews were slaughtered. Most of Eurasia was wrecked, Britain was a mess, America was still under Jim Crow at the time, and a lot of Jews had suffered attacks from anti-semites in Europe, so they decided to head to the Holy Lands, which was effectively last chance saloon for them.

Poverty can always be used to excuse theft which is why it is never accepted.

Theft remains theft regardless of the color of law or the excuses for it. The thief always chooses to be a thief. Jews chose to be thieves.

The second url in my sig is an entire thread devoted to this matter. If you think you can claim it is not theft I suggest you review the material there before you repeat more things you know are not true.

 

[Thunder]

America had the Klan waiting for them,

seriously?

the USA in 1946 was bastion of anti-Semitic hatred and discrimination?

there is one, and only one reason why the Jews of Europe went to Israel and not the USA, and that is the very discriminatory nationality quotas that were set up in 1926 and were not finally overturned until 1968.

 

[Matt Giwer]

It was britain's land after they had defeated the Ottoman Empire. It was handed to them by the LoN as a mandate, and after some political chicanery that would make the Byzantine Empire proud, the State of Israel was formed.

It was not the LoN's to give either. The terms of the mandate were to prepare the ex-Ottoman territories for self-rule. You can read the mandate if you wish. It does not confer ownership, sovereignty or perpetual governance.

The first order of business for the region for the UN, the successor to the LoN was to establish the ground rules for the first self-governance.

BTW: Lebanon became the first democracy in the region in 1943. I guess you know that too.