Forums | MacLife

bratboy wrote:

resedit wrote:

We don't only communicate with friends.
We held diplomatic relations with Russia during the cold war. We still hold diplomatic relations with China.

We do not hold diplomatic relations with such blatant supporters of terrorism.

You're ignoring any distinction between the past and present and introducing an artificial difference to explain away the change in behavior.

I'm not saying that the U.S. has always behaved in this way.  "Terrorism" has become a incredibly amorphous term lately, but we have certainly communicated (and even funded or armed) unsavory characters when it suited us.  There's no moral distinction here.

I believe we broke off relations with Iran during the hostage crisis when they took some of our people hostage - which is reason enough to break of relations, no?

resedit wrote:

IIRC, they objected to anything that established a Jewish nation.

See:

The Arab leadership (in and out of Palestine) opposed the plan, arguing that it violated the rights of the majority of the people in Palestine, which at the time was 67% non-Jewish (1,237,000) and 33% Jewish (608,000). Arab leaders also argued a large number of Arabs would be trapped in the Jewish State as a minority. While some Arab leaders opposed the right of the Jews for self-determination in the region, others criticised the amount and quality of land given to Israel.

Link.

I believe Jordon is quite a bit larger than Israel, and is populated primarily by Palestinians, thus other than its government, it pretty much is a palestinian state. It's not governed by palestinians though.

See:

Jordan has a population of 5.8 million. Most of the Jordanian population descend from a bedouin[6] or tribal origins and they account for around 40% of the population[7]. However, 55% of Jordan’s population are from Palestinian origins who fled Palestine or came as refuges to Jordan and gained citizenship after the Arab Israeli war in the year 1948 and 1967[8][9]. The rest 5% of the population come from different ethnic minorities these include Syrians Chechens, Circassians, Assyrians, Armenians, and Kurds, some of whom have adapted to Arab culture.

Link.

resedit wrote:

Do any of those links show arabs willing to have an Israeli nation?
Sure - they have reasons they objected. That does not equate to willingness to have one but of a smaller size.

Did you read my post?

The Arab leadership (in and out of Palestine) opposed the plan, arguing that it violated the rights of the majority of the people in Palestine, which at the time was 67% non-Jewish (1,237,000) and 33% Jewish (608,000). Arab leaders also argued a large number of Arabs would be trapped in the Jewish State as a minority. While some Arab leaders opposed the right of the Jews for self-determination in the region, others criticized the amount and quality of land given to Israel.

Of course many were resistant to taking a mass of land with a minority Jewish population and handing over more than half of it, including control over a parcel of land with a large arab population...but in no way were all completely opposed to absolutely any deal based upon everything I've read on the subject.

resedit wrote:

Criticizing the amount and quality does not mean they would have supported any plan to give Israel any land.

As a law student, I'm sure you are aware that when rejecting a solution, you don't want to make it obvious to the other parties that you are unwilling to budge even an inch.

Let me give an example.
Abortion debates. The pro lifer wants to ban abortion.
Many in the pro choice group will bring up some specific issues - such as rape, incest, and medical cases. Just like some arabs brought up the issue of proportions.

However - if the pro choice individual is willing to make concessions for those cases, the people making those arguements suddenly find new reasons to object.

This has been demonstrated here at MacAddict - where I have stated I would be willing to make concessions for those cases, yet those arguing those points then just moved on to argue other points. The only solution they are willing to take is legal abortion for all, even teenagers w/o parental notification. When they make arguements about specific issues, it is not because they would be willing to come to a compromise.

Last edited by resedit (2006-11-14 7:16 pm)

resedit wrote:

This has been demonstrated here at MacAddict - where I have stated I would be willing to make concessions for those cases, yet those arguing those points then just moved on to argue other points. The only solution they are willing to take is legal abortion for all, even teenagers w/o parental notification. When they make arguements about specific issues, it is not because they would be willing to come to a compromise.

I guess you could point it out next time it happens.  I've never argued that abortion should only be allowed in certain cases and then suddenly changed my mind.  I can't recall others doing such a thing, either.

resedit wrote:

They don't argue that it should only happen in certain cases.
They do the same thing some arabs did - argue against a position based upon certain cases, yet they would be unwilling for it to be legal even if consessions for those cases were to be made (IE - those cases are not the real reason they are pro choice, they are just good arguing points).

Okay, let's assume that 100% of the Arab leaders in 1948 actually believed that the Jewish people should be given 0% of the land.  What's the relevance?  I'm not claiming that the Arab leaders of the time had any true desire to do what was best for the Palestinians in the region.

bratboy wrote:

resedit wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_exodus

It's wikipedia - but is probably as decent of a short summary of the exodus as you will get.
It should be read - so that the contributing circumstances of the exodus won't be swept under the carpet.

I don't understand what you point is...are you claiming that civilians fled Israel proper somehow due to their own fault?  Are you claiming that a 'right-of-return' was never warranted?

I'm sorry.
I did not see this post.

The wikipedia link was in response to this:

JakeTheTall wrote:

To Mister Resedit:

JakeTheTall, on the previous page wrote:

And the estimated 400,000 Palestinians who were driven from Israel in 1948, at the threat of violence and death ?  Was Israel just defending its nation ?

Note:  apologies, my number was off, I think it was closer to 800,000 Palestinians who were driven from Israel.

Basically - the wikipedia link demonstrates that the 800,000 palestinians driven from Israel in '48 were driven out for a variety of reasons, pretty much all of which were related to the invasion of Israel by her arab neighbors - and that in fact, quite a few palestinians left no because of Israeli "threat of violence and death" but because Arab nations requested that they evacuate.

Certainly some were driven out by Israel, but it was the actions of the Arab nations in their attempt to destroy Israel that created the palestinian refugee crisis.

btw - I'm of the utmost opinion that Israel not only could be doing a lot more to resolve it, but SHOULD be doing a lot more to resolve it. I think palestinians and Israelis are actually the same people, and (religious talk here) I think God has gathered them BOTH to land of Israel, so that the two sticks can once again become one (a prophecy in Ezekiel that I don't believe has been fulfilled at any point in history).

Anyway - back to the entire reason I brought this up - I do think there is a dis-proportionate dislike of Israel amongst many people here. Their neighbors don't get a complete pass when they pull smurf, but Israel just gets completely slammed time and time again, and is blamed for things that would not have happened if they had not had to defend themselves against those who wish to wipe them out.

The Palestinian Refugee problem - caused by Arab attacks on Israel in 57-59.
The Golan Heights - taken from Syria in the '67 war. Syria had been shelling Northern Israel from them since '57 and was not stopping. Shelling was increasing by a signifigant amount leading up the the '67 war. Syria claimed it was not their government doing it, and they couldn't stop the groups that were - yet Israel had no problem stopping them when they took possession of the land in '67.

The west bank. Jordan and other Arab nations were massing troops in the west bank in '67. Arab Leaders, like Iran is doing now, were starting to noisy about the destruction of Israel and pushing them into the Sea. Egypt ran a blockade on the canal, a clear act of war. Yes, Israel struck first. War was certainly imminent, when it is imminent and you are able to strike first, that gives you an advantage. However, the shelling from Syria and raids on Israel from the west bank in my book certainly seem like provocative acts of war, even if they weren't carried out by "uniformed" military personal.

The gaza strip - Egypt was putting troops there, and had blockades the canal.

I was accused of the "poor Israel" routine earlier in this thread - well, isn't there a "poor palestinian" routine going on right now?

The palestinians have had it bad, but it has been arab aggression towards Israel in an attempt to destroy them that has resulted in all of this mess.

So when Iran opens their mouth and talks about destroying Israel, and it is dismissed as hot air - don't be so naive - especially not if you are then going to condemn Israel, who has had muslim nations calling for their destruction attempt it numerous times.

You want peace - it's not going to happen as long as countries like Iran continue to incite violence against Israel and call for its complete destruction.

You want to give the palestinians a homeland of their own - fine. That is not going to bring to peace as long as there are nations funding terrorists acts against Israel.

Israel could be doing more to find the solution. However, they are NOT the problem. Iran and Syria are the two biggest obstacles to peace in the middle east right now. They are also the biggest obstacle to a palestinian homeland being created in the west bank, because Israel is not going to have it as long as the palestinian terror groups, who get their funding from those countries, continue to attack Israel.

resedit wrote:

[Certainly some were driven out by Israel, but it was the actions of the Arab nations in their attempt to destroy Israel that created the palestinian refugee crisis.

False. 

Read the 1948 section of Benny Morris' Righteous Victims- the vast majority of Palestinians displaced were displaced by Israeli militias.  The Arab states role in the refugee crisis occured after 1948 when the displaced Palestinians were treated as second class citizens (see, Lebanon and in Gaza under the Egyptians) and after 1967 when their interests were totally ignored by the Arab states.

Also, your characterization of the Jordanians as some major threat to Israel's existence.  PLEASE. The Jordanians and Israelis were acting in collusion with each other throughout the worst times of Arab-Israeli relations.  The regime in Jordan was NOT going to bite the American hand that kept it in power but it also had to save face.  Israel knew that, accepted it, and negotiated with them over it.

Read Righteous Vicitms.  It pulls no punches on either side.  Great balanced approach of the entire conflict from the 1880s through Taba.

resedit wrote:

Basically - the wikipedia link demonstrates that the 800,000 palestinians driven from Israel in '48 were driven out for a variety of reasons, pretty much all of which were related to the invasion of Israel by her arab neighbors - and that in fact, quite a few palestinians left no because of Israeli "threat of violence and death" but because Arab nations requested that they evacuate.

Certainly some were driven out by Israel, but it was the actions of the Arab nations in their attempt to destroy Israel that created the palestinian refugee crisis.

Many simply left in fear.  For whatever reason they fled their homes, most weren't allowed to return to them.

Anyway - back to the entire reason I brought this up - I do think there is a dis-proportionate dislike of Israel amongst many people here. Their neighbors don't get a complete pass when they pull smurf, but Israel just gets completely slammed time and time again, and is blamed for things that would not have happened if they had not had to defend themselves against those who wish to wipe them out.

The neighbors don't get any "pass" in my mind.  They're simply irrelevant to Israel's treatment of the Palestinian refugees.

Israel is also a close ally of my country, and receives a ton of money and weaponry from us. 

The Palestinian Refugee problem - caused by Arab attacks on Israel in 57-59.
The Golan Heights - taken from Syria in the '67 war. Syria had been shelling Northern Israel from them since '57 and was not stopping. Shelling was increasing by a signifigant amount leading up the the '67 war. Syria claimed it was not their government doing it, and they couldn't stop the groups that were - yet Israel had no problem stopping them when they took possession of the land in '67.

Doesn't excuse the treatment of the refugees or the settlements, in my opinion.  I'm certainly not going to defend Syria.

I was accused of the "poor Israel" routine earlier in this thread - well, isn't there a "poor palestinian" routine going on right now?

Well, they're an occupied group of refugees who has existed for decades without autonomy. 

The palestinians have had it bad, but it has been arab aggression towards Israel in an attempt to destroy them that has resulted in all of this mess.

I don't see why I should associate Palestinian civilians with the past aggression or rhetoric of nearby Arab nations.  A good number of them weren't even alive when Israel was created, or even during the '67 war.

So when Iran opens their mouth and talks about destroying Israel, and it is dismissed as hot air - don't be so naive - especially not if you are then going to condemn Israel, who has had muslim nations calling for their destruction attempt it numerous times.

You want peace - it's not going to happen as long as countries like Iran continue to incite violence against Israel and call for its complete destruction.

You want to give the palestinians a homeland of their own - fine. That is not going to bring to peace as long as there are nations funding terrorists acts against Israel.

You assume that it's the rhetoric or support that is fueling terrorism, not the situation that has existed for decades in the region.  Palestinians are not space aliens.  They want the same basic things that people anywhere want––security, food, and a way to make a living and support their families.  The vast, vast majority of them have never taken up arms against Israel.

The situation as it exists is a perfect breeding ground for extremism.  Why do you believe that Iraq has been labeled a 'cause celebre' for terrorists, breeding greater extremism and actually making us less safe?

Israel could be doing more to find the solution. However, they are NOT the problem. Iran and Syria are the two biggest obstacles to peace in the middle east right now. They are also the biggest obstacle to a palestinian homeland being created in the west bank, because Israel is not going to have it as long as the palestinian terror groups, who get their funding from those countries, continue to attack Israel.

Israel is certainly part of the problem.  I believe the situation could be greatly improved by taking a more proactive approach (as suggested in the article I linked to).  We cannot control Syria or Iran, but we can work with Israel, the Palestinians, and other countries in the region.

resedit wrote:

Basically - the wikipedia link demonstrates that the 800,000 palestinians driven from Israel in '48 were driven out for a variety of reasons, pretty much all of which were related to the invasion of Israel by her arab neighbors - and that in fact, quite a few palestinians left no because of Israeli "threat of violence and death" but because Arab nations requested that they evacuate.

Certainly some were driven out by Israel, but it was the actions of the Arab nations in their attempt to destroy Israel that created the palestinian refugee crisis.

btw - I'm of the utmost opinion that Israel not only could be doing a lot more to resolve it, but SHOULD be doing a lot more to resolve it. I think palestinians and Israelis are actually the same people, and (religious talk here) I think God has gathered them BOTH to land of Israel, so that the two sticks can once again become one (a prophecy in Ezekiel that I don't believe has been fulfilled at any point in history).

Good.  I guess we more or less agree on that point (right of return).

Anyway - back to the entire reason I brought this up - I do think there is a dis-proportionate dislike of Israel amongst many people here. Their neighbors don't get a complete pass when they pull smurf, but Israel just gets completely slammed time and time again, and is blamed for things that would not have happened if they had not had to defend themselves against those who wish to wipe them out.

More accurately, its a dislike of Israel's actions against the neighbors in the past ten years.

But I do think Mr. Arafat was a large roadblock to any deal between the Palestinians and Israel.

So when Iran opens their mouth and talks about destroying Israel, and it is dismissed as hot air - don't be so naive - especially not if you are then going to condemn Israel, who has had muslim nations calling for their destruction attempt it numerous times.

Israel could be doing more to find the solution. However, they are NOT the problem. Iran and Syria are the two biggest obstacles to peace in the middle east right now. They are also the biggest obstacle to a palestinian homeland being created in the west bank, because Israel is not going to have it as long as the palestinian terror groups, who get their funding from those countries, continue to attack Israel.

Ah, but with the world's superpower, the United States, not really talking to either country, how will progress be made ?


And I disagree where the problem lies...not with Syria or Iran, but with the corrupt and fractured political organizations in Palestine (i.e. Gaza Strip and the West Bank).  They seem to be more interested in power, than their own people, and have fought gun battles against each other.  I think Israel has fueled this to some degree, but its lack of viable politicans the Palestinians have.

gas huffer wrote:

KHannon wrote:

resedit wrote:

[Certainly some were driven out by Israel, but it was the actions of the Arab nations in their attempt to destroy Israel that created the palestinian refugee crisis.

False. 

Read the 1948 section of Benny Morris' Righteous Victims- the vast majority of Palestinians displaced were displaced by Israeli militias.  The Arab states role in the refugee crisis occured after 1948 when the displaced Palestinians were treated as second class citizens (see, Lebanon and in Gaza under the Egyptians) and after 1967 when their interests were totally ignored by the Arab states.

Also, your characterization of the Jordanians as some major threat to Israel's existence.  PLEASE. The Jordanians and Israelis were acting in collusion with each other throughout the worst times of Arab-Israeli relations.  The regime in Jordan was NOT going to bite the American hand that kept it in power but it also had to save face.  Israel knew that, accepted it, and negotiated with them over it.

Read Righteous Vicitms.  It pulls no punches on either side.  Great balanced approach of the entire conflict from the 1880s through Taba.

I'm sorry, exactly "what" were the Palestinians displaced from?  Neither Palestine nor Isreal can make a justified argument for their existence imho.

I suppose you'll not want to tell me Jerusalem should be Islamic because its got a Mosque, eh?

I am referring to the forceful evacuation of Palestinian civilians from their homes throughout what is now Israel.

And contrary to your implication, I am on neither side of this divide.  I believe that Israel has the right to exist and I also think Palestinians should have the right to self determination.

bratboy wrote:

resedit wrote:

IIRC, they objected to anything that established a Jewish nation.

See:

The Arab leadership (in and out of Palestine) opposed the plan, arguing that it violated the rights of the majority of the people in Palestine, which at the time was 67% non-Jewish (1,237,000) and 33% Jewish (608,000). Arab leaders also argued a large number of Arabs would be trapped in the Jewish State as a minority. While some Arab leaders opposed the right of the Jews for self-determination in the region, others criticised the amount and quality of land given to Israel.

Link.

I believe Jordon is quite a bit larger than Israel, and is populated primarily by Palestinians, thus other than its government, it pretty much is a palestinian state. It's not governed by palestinians though.

See:

Jordan has a population of 5.8 million. Most of the Jordanian population descend from a bedouin[6] or tribal origins and they account for around 40% of the population[7]. However, 55% of Jordan’s population are from Palestinian origins who fled Palestine or came as refuges to Jordan and gained citizenship after the Arab Israeli war in the year 1948 and 1967[8][9]. The rest 5% of the population come from different ethnic minorities these include Syrians Chechens, Circassians, Assyrians, Armenians, and Kurds, some of whom have adapted to Arab culture.

Link.

That last part makes no sense.

Earlier in the same article (and as historical fact) All of Jordan was once a a part of Palestine, therefore all jJordanians are "Palestinian".

Granted, one of the tough issues here is "what is a Palestinian?", as until recently Arabs rejected the term "Palestinian" outright.

The fact is, whatever we have called Palestine Historically has included all of Jordan and Israel and some other areas, making all the Jews, Druze, Arabs and Bedohins "Palestinian".

80% of what was once "Palestine" was East of the Jordan river.

Also someone earlier claimed that Arabs were expelled by the Israeli government, whic is historically innaccurate, as these peoples were urged to leave by Egypt, Jordan, Iran, Syria and Arab League states - and were promised large tracts of land after the Israeli army was vanquished.

However the figure of 400,00 that this person cited was very interesting as that was the number of Jews expelled by Iran, Morroco, and other Islamic states in 1948.