Israel: Commandos seize huge Iranian arms shipment

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Much of Jordan's population are Palestinians who were ethnically cleansed from what is now Israel or descendants thereof, Jordan's queen included. Regardless, there are millions of Palestinians living in the West Bank as Israel continues to expanding their colonization of that same territory. How do you figure that is not their homeland?

Was the west bank their homeland before Israel took control of it? NO. Trans Jordan was the original Arab Palestinian nation.

Who was it that rejected the The 1947 U.N. Resolution 181 partiton plan, you know, the one that proposed the creation of a second Arab Palestinian homeland. Was it the Palestinian Arabs, or the Palestinian Jews?
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
Was the west bank their homeland before Israel took control of it?NO.
How do you figure the land wasn't the homeland of the people who's homes were there and were decended from generaltions of the same?

Trans Jordan was the original Arab Palestinian nation.
Nonsense. Transjordan was simply incorporated into the League of Nations mandate of Palestine as an autonomous area in 1921, and gained independence in 1946, as explained here.

Who was it that rejected the The 1947 U.N. Resolution 181 partiton plan, you know, the one that proposed the creation of a second Arab Palestinian homeland. Was it the Palestinian Arabs, or the Palestinian Jews?
Neither got a vote, as neither were UN member states. The vote went as noted here:

voting for approval: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Byelorussian soviet socialist republic, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, library, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Ukrainian soviet socialist republic, union of south Africa, union of soviet socialist republics, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela.

Voting against approval: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen.

Abstaining from the vote: Argentina, Chile, china, Columbia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, united kingdom, Yugoslavia.
And the resolution was adopted, leaving the West Bank as part of the Palestinian homeland.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
So it is OK for the Palestinians to have wanted it all, but not the Israelis?

The Arab Palestinians were willing to exterminate the Jews in Palestine.
The Jews are not willing to exterminate the Arabs. This has been show again and again. The Israelis are willing to take on what every land they can until told to stop.

The Israeli government has no desire to stop without a guarantee of peace which has not been provided by the Palestinians and their leadership/sponsors.

And the Palestinians state that they will not allow peace until their demands are met.

Catch 22 and that attitude of my way or the highway is preventing anything from going forward.
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
Much of Jordan's population are Palestinians who were ethnically cleansed from what is now Israel or descendants thereof, Jordan's queen included. Regardless, there are millions of Palestinians living in the West Bank as Israel continues to expanding their colonization of that same territory. How do you figure that is not their homeland?


how do you figure they were all "ethnically cleansed?"


I am sure the Israelis did some disturbing things, but im am more certain more of them left because of the war happening and because their "brethren" in the surrounding countries invited them in until they "won" the war
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
This shipment was likely meant to be caught.

Drug runners do the same thing. Offer up a load to be "caught" while many others slip by undetected.
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
How do you figure the land wasn't the homeland of the people who's homes were there and were decended from generaltions of the same?

by that logic,
w040.jpg

should be Israel's borders. dont like it do you?

Israel was happy with the land they had. the arabs attacking it didnt. the arabs lost more land because they wanted war.
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
So it is OK for the Palestinians to have wanted it all, but not the Israelis?
I never suggested anything of the sort.

The Arab Palestinians were willing to exterminate the Jews in Palestine.
The Jews are not willing to exterminate the Arabs. This has been show again and again.
Please present whatever evidence you belive best exemplfies what you claims.

The Israelis are willing to take on what every land they can until told to stop.

The Israeli government has no desire to stop without a guarantee of peace which has not been provided by the Palestinians and their leadership/sponsors.

And the Palestinians state that they will not allow peace until their demands are met.

Catch 22 and that attitude of my way or the highway is preventing anything from going forward.
It's allowing Israel's conlonization of the West Bank to go forward, which prevents any chance of peace, and the Israeli government contenues that colonization even after Obama told them to stop, because the Israeli government wants the land more than they want peace.

how do you figure they were all "ethnically cleansed?"
Not "all", but the fact that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from hundreds of localities across what became Israel is well documented, as summarized here.

I am sure the Israelis did some disturbing things, but im am more certain more of them left because of the war happening and because their "brethren" in the surrounding countries invited them in until they "won" the war
The ethnic cleansing started in 1947, months before the war of 1948, and the claims of invitations is a myth.

There is no logic in basing territorial claims on Biblical mythology.

Israel was happy with the land they had. the arabs attacking it didnt. the arabs lost more land because they wanted war.
More myth.

What date does YOUR version of history start?
I don't cling to any version of history, but rather take the historical record for what it is. That said, I ask again; how do you figure the land wasn't the homeland of the people who's homes were there and were decended from generaltions of the same?
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
I never suggested anything of the sort.


Please present whatever evidence you belive best exemplfies what you claims.


It's allowing Israel's conlonization of the West Bank to go forward, which prevents any chance of peace, and the Israeli government contenues that colonization even after Obama told them to stop, because the Israeli government wants the land more than they want peace.


Not "all", but the fact that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from hundreds of localities across what became Israel is well documented, as summarized here.


The ethnic cleansing started in 1947, months before the war of 1948, and the claims of invitations is a myth.


There is no logic in basing territorial claims on Biblical mythology.


More myth.


I don't cling to any version of history, but rather take the historical record for what it is. That said, I ask again; how do you figure the land wasn't the homeland of the people who's homes were there and were decended from generaltions of the same?

Historical record shows Jews in the area present on my map way before any records of Palestinians you may have.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/694726

facts are facts are facts


ofcourse you think anything that prove's israel's side is a myth.

Here is what wiki says on the matter of the "exodus"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_1948_Palestinian_exodus

The "Arab leaders' endorsement of flight" explanation

The first explanation published of what caused the 1948 Palestinian exodus was that the Arab political and military leaders within Palestine and in surrounding countries actually told Arab civilians in Palestine to leave their homes so as to avoid any casualties of war with the expectation that they would return to their homes once the Arab armies destroyed the Yishuv. In subsequent studies of radio broadcasts and Arab newspapers no such orders have been found. To the contrary orders were issued for the Palestinians to stay in their homes.[132]
[edit] Claims that support that the flight was instigated by Arab leaders

Israeli official sources, foreign press, and officials present at the time, and historians have claimed that the refugee flight was instigated by Arab leaders.[citation needed] For example, Yosef Weitz wrote in October 1948: "The migration of the Arabs from the Land of Israel was not caused by persecution, violence, expulsion [but was] deliberately organised by the Arab leaders in order to arouse Arab feelings of revenge, to artificially create an Arab refugee problem."[citation needed] Israeli historian Efraim Karsh wrote, "The logic behind this policy was apparently that 'the absence of women and children from Palestine would free the men for fighting', as the Secretary-General of the Arab League, Abd al-Rahman Azzam put it." In his book, The Arab-Israeli Conflict: The Palestine War 1948, Karsh cited the substantial, active role the Arab Higher Committee played in the exoduses from Haifa, Tiberias, and Jaffa as an important part of understanding what he called the "birth of the Palestinian refugee problem."[66]
Morris[133][134] concludes that this support extended still farther:
"During the early 1940s, against the backdrop of the Holocaust and official British deliberations about a postwar solution to the Palestine problem based on partition, all understood (as had the Peel Commission) that any partition not accompanied by a transfer of Arabs out of the territory of the Jewish-state-to-be would be unstable or pointless, as the large Arab minority, if left in place, would be disloyal and rebellious, and would inevitably enjoy the support of the surrounding Arab world. ... British officials and Arab heads of state (who, of course, feared to state these views in public) shared this view. That is why the British Labour Party Executive in 1944 supported partition accompanied by transfer, and that is why Jordan's Emir Abdullah and Iraq's prime minister Nuri Said, among other Arab statesmen, supported such a population transfer if Palestine was to be partitioned.
Morris also documented that the Arab Higher Committee ordered the evacuation of "several dozen villages, as well as the removal of dependents from dozens more in April-July 1948. "The invading Arab armies also occasionally ordered whole villages to depart, so as not to be in their way." [135] The Near East Broadcasting Station in Cyprus declared that "It must not be forgotten that the Arab Higher Committee encouraged the refugees&#8217; flight from their homes in Jaffa, Haifa and Jerusalem."[136] Evidence such as this led Shmuel Katz to conclude in his book Battleground "that the Arab refugees were not driven from Palestine by anyone. The vast majority left, whether of their own free will or at the orders or exhortations of their leaders."[137] He explains, "The Arabs are the only declared refugee group who became refugees ... by the initiative of their own leaders."[138]
[edit] Claims by Arab sources that support that the flight was instigated by Arab leaders

Former Prime Minister of Syria Khalid al-Azm recalled in his memoirs, "We brought disaster upon one million Arab refugees, by inviting them and bringing pressure to bear upon them to leave their land, their homes, their work and their industry."[139] Abu Iyad made similar observations in his own memoirs.[140]
After the war, a few Arab leaders tried to present the Palestinian exodus as a victory by claiming to have planned it. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Said was later quoted as saying: "We will smash the country with our guns and obliterate every place the Jews shelter in. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down."[141]
Contemporary Jordanian politician Anwar Nusseibeh believed that the fault for the exodus and military loss was with the Arab commanders: "the commanders of the local army thought in terms of the revolt against the British in the 1930s. The rebels had often retreated to the mountains .... But the Jews were fighting for complete domination, so the fighters had erred in withdrawing from the villages instead of defending them [&#8230;]."[142]
The Arab National Committee of Haifa, the Arab leadership in Haifa in 1948, wrote and delivered a report on the flight of roughly 60,000 Arabs from Haifa. The report said, "[T]he removal of the Arab inhabitants from the town was voluntary and carried out at our request."[143]
"Brotherly advice was given to the Arabs of Palestine to leave their land, homes and property and to stay temporarily in neighboring, brotherly states, lest the guns of the invading Arab armies mow them down," wrote Habab Issa of Al-Hoda, the leading newspaper for Lebanese Maronites in the United States.[144] A Muslim weekly newspaper in Beirut similarly reported, "Who brought the Palestinians to Lebanon as refugees, suffering now from the malign attitude of newspapers and communal leaders [&#8230;]? The Arab States [sp], and Lebanon amongst them, did it!"[145]
Mahmoud Abbas, at the time Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, would later recall: "The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live."[146]
Jamal Husseini, the brother of Palestinian military and religious leader Hajj Amin Husseini, wrote to the Syrian UN representative, "The regular [Arab] aremies did not enable the [Arab] inhabitants of [Palestine] to defend themselves, but merely facilitated their escape from Palestine."[147] Palestinian military leader Emile Ghoury expressed similar views. Furthermore, Palestinian Arab protesters in the West Bank took to the streets on the occasion of "the first anniversary of Israel's establishment" to place blame on "the Arab states for the creation of the refugee problem."[148]
 
Last edited:

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,321
126
Quote:
Originally Posted by kylebisme
Much of Jordan's population are Palestinians who were ethnically cleansed from what is now Israel or descendants thereof, Jordan's queen included. Regardless, there are millions of Palestinians living in the West Bank as Israel continues to expanding their colonization of that same territory. How do you figure that is not their homeland?


how do you figure they were all "ethnically cleansed?"


I am sure the Israelis did some disturbing things, but im am more certain more of them left because of the war happening and because their "brethren" in the surrounding countries invited them in until they "won" the war

You must remember that Kylebisme routinely uses those words for pure shock value with no proof whatsoever...that is the way kylebisme operates.....
Also you need to remember that Kylebisme is the nutcase who started the WTC7 thread....need I say more???
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
Your partisanship is an exhibition of willful ignorance, Ozoned, or pure propagandizing. If it's the latter, then you serve your cause not at all, and should leave it to those better at it than you are.

In modern times, prior to 1897, Jewish populations in Palestine were vanishingly small. That largely continued into the 1920's, when the British rulers allowed additional Jewish immigration. The vast majority of modern Israelis are descendants of Jews who arrived after WW2.

Prior to that, the vast majority of the population of that region were Christians and Muslims, who'd been there for hundreds of years, under both Egyptian and Ottoman rule.

Simple facts. In terms of ancient history, Jews were led to the region by Moses, and they took the land by force from those already living there. Their fortunes waxed and waned until most were ejected by the Romans, although they thrived under muslim rule prior to the Crusades, when they were slaughtered along with their muslim compatriots defending Jerusalem. Some returned under Ottoman rule in 1492, when they were welcomed after being ejected from Spain... not just in Palestine, but all across the Ottoman empire and North Africa.

Whatever "Right" they feel to the land isn't rational, at all... nor are you, if you think it is...
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
Your partisanship is an exhibition of willful ignorance, Ozoned, or pure propagandizing. If it's the latter, then you serve your cause not at all, and should leave it to those better at it than you are.

In modern times, prior to 1897, Jewish populations in Palestine were vanishingly small. That largely continued into the 1920's, when the British rulers allowed additional Jewish immigration. The vast majority of modern Israelis are descendants of Jews who arrived after WW2.

Prior to that, the vast majority of the population of that region were Christians and Muslims, who'd been there for hundreds of years, under both Egyptian and Ottoman rule.

Simple facts. In terms of ancient history, Jews were led to the region by Moses, and they took the land by force from those already living there. Their fortunes waxed and waned until most were ejected by the Romans, although they thrived under muslim rule prior to the Crusades, when they were slaughtered along with their muslim compatriots defending Jerusalem. Some returned under Ottoman rule in 1492, when they were welcomed after being ejected from Spain... not just in Palestine, but all across the Ottoman empire and North Africa.

Whatever "Right" they feel to the land isn't rational, at all... nor are you, if you think it is...


you forgot the part where the Jewish people lived in C'naan before they came after Egypt. the only reason they went to egypt was because of a famine.

so technically they only kicked out people who took their land. similarly like today, except there arent so many BS groups out there complaining at every step israel makes.

although they thrived under muslim rule prior to the Crusades, when they were slaughtered along with their muslim compatriots defending Jerusalem.

guess what? there was peace. that is another historical fact that Jews and Muslims can live in peace and the whole problem that is happening today is because of Islamic extremists who think everyone should die with them so they can get their virgins in heaven.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
guess what? there was peace. that is another historical fact that Jews and Muslims can live in peace and the whole problem that is happening today is because of Islamic extremists who think everyone should die with them so they can get their virgins in heaven.

Yup- willful blindness.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I totally agree the the Holy land of Israel, claimed by three major religions, can be peacefully shared.

The problem is and remains, it can't be the property of only one of the three groups.
And in the larger history of the region, the hegemony over Israel has shifted, between
those three major religions and more, but no lasting peace has ever resulted, and the most war like footing has always been when only one group dominates.

Any historical claims Jews have to Israel are simply bunk, because we must consider the original groups the 10 tribes of Israel forced out.

We also now have to consider that both Israelis and Palestinians have legitimate grievances, and if nothing else, Israeli dominance of Israel will never lead to peace.

So the real questions, are we going to have a bloody shift in dominance of the holy land of Israel, or will we, for the first time in world history, can we learn to share the holy land of Israel? Or will bloody, senseless, and unfair violence again instead rule the day? The odds against the Jewish people are long, about 275 million to four in the longer sweep of history.

So tell me again, in a land of endless smuggling, how will any Israeli arms seizures matter?
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
[snipped the diatribe]

In modern times, prior to 1897, Jewish populations in Palestine were vanishingly small. That largely continued into the 1920's, when the British rulers allowed additional Jewish immigration. The vast majority of modern Israelis are descendants of Jews who arrived after WW2.

Prior to that, the vast majority of the population of that region were Christians and Muslims, who'd been there for hundreds of years, under both Egyptian and Ottoman rule.

Simple facts. In terms of ancient history, Jews were led to the region by Moses, and they took the land by force from those already living there. Their fortunes waxed and waned until most were ejected by the Romans, although they thrived under muslim rule prior to the Crusades, when they were slaughtered along with their muslim compatriots defending Jerusalem. Some returned under Ottoman rule in 1492, when they were welcomed after being ejected from Spain... not just in Palestine, but all across the Ottoman empire and North Africa.

Whatever "Right" they feel to the land isn't rational, at all... nor are you, if you think it is...

Palestine has never been the name of a nation or state. It is a geographical term, used to designate the general region at times in history when there was no nation or state there. The use of the term "Palestinian" to describe an Arab ethnic group is a modern political creation which has no basis in fact and it never had any international or academic credibility before 1967.

In the periods when no nation or state existed in "Palestine"
All sorts of ethnic and religious peoples inhabited the area, including the Jewish. There were not any people that referred to themselves as Palestinians.


The Jewish people are the only people that have ever had a national homeland in "Palestine"

In 1890 the jewish population in "Palestine" was around 50,000 as compared to around 120,000 Arabs

If the Arabs want to lay claim to "Palestine", let them go again against the Jewish people take it by force. That is the Rationale that has drawn every enduring border on every map through-out history.
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
I totally agree the the Holy land of Israel, claimed by three major religions, can be peacefully shared.

The problem is and remains, it can't be the property of only one of the three groups.
And in the larger history of the region, the hegemony over Israel has shifted, between
those three major religions and more, but no lasting peace has ever resulted, and the most war like footing has always been when only one group dominates.

Any historical claims Jews have to Israel are simply bunk, because we must consider the original groups the 10 tribes of Israel forced out.

We also now have to consider that both Israelis and Palestinians have legitimate grievances, and if nothing else, Israeli dominance of Israel will never lead to peace.

So the real questions, are we going to have a bloody shift in dominance of the holy land of Israel, or will we, for the first time in world history, can we learn to share the holy land of Israel? Or will bloody, senseless, and unfair violence again instead rule the day? The odds against the Jewish people are long, about 275 million to four in the longer sweep of history.

So tell me again, in a land of endless smuggling, how will any Israeli arms seizures matter?

If You ignore and dismiss any significance of the arms seizures, you also dismiss Israels right of self defense.
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
I totally agree the the Holy land of Israel, claimed by three major religions, can be peacefully shared.

The problem is and remains, it can't be the property of only one of the three groups.
And in the larger history of the region, the hegemony over Israel has shifted, between
those three major religions and more, but no lasting peace has ever resulted, and the most war like footing has always been when only one group dominates.

Any historical claims Jews have to Israel are simply bunk, because we must consider the original groups the 10 tribes of Israel forced out.

We also now have to consider that both Israelis and Palestinians have legitimate grievances, and if nothing else, Israeli dominance of Israel will never lead to peace.

So the real questions, are we going to have a bloody shift in dominance of the holy land of Israel, or will we, for the first time in world history, can we learn to share the holy land of Israel? Or will bloody, senseless, and unfair violence again instead rule the day? The odds against the Jewish people are long, about 275 million to four in the longer sweep of history.

So tell me again, in a land of endless smuggling, how will any Israeli arms seizures matter?


Hasnt israel already offered land for peace? Yes. rockets are continuously being lobbied at israel? yes. when Hamas and hezbollah stop launching missiles, acknowledge israel as a country, and talk peace with israel IN THE SAME ROOM, then and only then will we have peace.

When will hamas realize that launching rockets into israel isnt going to solve the problem, but only make it worse. (Operation Cast Lead only happened to stop missile and mortar attacks. If they truely cared about their own people, would would realize this)

AND

according to Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_organizations#cite_note-0

Canada, USA, and the European Union consider Hamas a terrorist organization. Australia and The United Kingdom has designated the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, as a terrorist organization.


Hezbollah is considered a terrorist organization by the USA and Canada. Australia has designated the Hizballah External Security Organisation as a terrorist organization. The UK has designated the military wing of Hizballah as a terrorist organization.



So if you are so right, terrorist sympathizers, how come Israel isnt labeled the same?

How could one logically think that a terrorist organization is doing the right thing. unless you believe in their crazy ideology.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
Palestine has never been the name of a nation or state. It is a geographical term, used to designate the general region at times in history when there was no nation or state there. The use of the term "Palestinian" to describe an Arab ethnic group is a modern political creation which has no basis in fact and it never had any international or academic credibility before 1967.

In the periods when no nation or state existed in "Palestine"
All sorts of ethnic and religious peoples inhabited the area, including the Jewish. There were not any people that referred to themselves as Palestinians.


The Jewish people are the only people that have ever had a national homeland in "Palestine"

In 1890 the jewish population in "Palestine" was around 50,000 as compared to around 120,000 Arabs

If the Arabs want to lay claim to "Palestine", let them go again against the Jewish people take it by force. That is the Rationale that has drawn every enduring border on every map through-out history.

straight hogwash, particularly the population numbers- not surprising

In reality, Jewish population grew, but Arab population grew more rapidly. By 1914, there were over 500,000 Arabs in Palestine, but only about 80,000 to 100,000 Jews.

http://www.mideastweb.org/zionism.htm

I hadn't expected historical accuracy from you, but now you're just pulling numbers out of your nether regions to suit your purposes...
 

SamurAchzar

Platinum Member
Feb 15, 2006
2,422
3
76
Why do these threads always degenerate to biblical arguments? Don't you have anything better to do? Israel is a done deal, there's no force on earth that can make it disappear (at least not without putting the continuation of the human species at risk). Now instead of thinking arguing about a better way to the future, you're digging through history to see who was wrong.

Yes I'm the first one to admit putting Israel where it is was not the brightest of ideas. I'm also amused by the contradiction between the entirely secular Zionist movement and their choice of the biblical "promised land" for settling down following the European antisemitism (it started way back before the Holocaust). But Israel is there.

You see, this is part of the reason there's no practical solution to the problems of the Palestinians, or the quarrel of the Arab world with Israel. It has taken the Arabs more than 30 years and 6-7 wars to begin a painfully slow process of acknowledging the existence of Israel, it has taken 20 more years until talks of normalization began to surface and it will probably take 10-20 more years until these talks come to fruition.

As long as you doubt Israels legitimacy, you're just wasting your time. It's like arguing over the legitimacy of Greece.
 

Red Irish

Guest
Mar 6, 2009
1,605
0
0
Why do these threads always degenerate to biblical arguments? Don't you have anything better to do? Israel is a done deal, there's no force on earth that can make it disappear (at least not without putting the continuation of the human species at risk).

Israel as a potential global threat?
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
Why do these threads always degenerate to biblical arguments? Don't you have anything better to do? Israel is a done deal, there's no force on earth that can make it disappear (at least not without putting the continuation of the human species at risk). Now instead of thinking arguing about a better way to the future, you're digging through history to see who was wrong.

Yes I'm the first one to admit putting Israel where it is was not the brightest of ideas. I'm also amused by the contradiction between the entirely secular Zionist movement and their choice of the biblical "promised land" for settling down following the European antisemitism (it started way back before the Holocaust). But Israel is there.

You see, this is part of the reason there's no practical solution to the problems of the Palestinians, or the quarrel of the Arab world with Israel. It has taken the Arabs more than 30 years and 6-7 wars to begin a painfully slow process of acknowledging the existence of Israel, it has taken 20 more years until talks of normalization began to surface and it will probably take 10-20 more years until these talks come to fruition.

As long as you doubt Israels legitimacy, you're just wasting your time. It's like arguing over the legitimacy of Greece.

now explain that to the arabs :)

they wont listen
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
Historical record shows Jews in the area present on my map way before any records of Palestinians you may have.
Palestinians are largely descended from the Semitic peoples who lived in the region as far back as the historical record goes, Jews included.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/694726

facts are facts are facts

ofcourse you think anything that prove's israel's side is a myth.
First, it seems you lack comprehension of the meaning of the term "myth":

a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, esp. one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
Put simply, while the archaeological evidence like the carving you mention proves a history of Jewish population in region, the evidence comes far short of proving your map.

Here is what wiki says on the matter of the "exodus"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_1948_Palestinian_exodus
You can find what an actual academic investigation into the "invitated to leave" myth reveals here.

Simple facts. In terms of ancient history, Jews were led to the region by Moses, and they took the land by force from those already living there.
That is just more biblical myth, which the many archaeologists who have attempted to substantiate it have utterly failed to do, as explained here.

Palestine has never been the name of a nation or state. It is a geographical term, used to designate the general region at times in history when there was no nation or state there.
Sure, and the Deep South has never been a nation or a state. Does that mean that it isn't the homeland of Southerners and it is rightly mine and my my brother of Cherokee ancestry to take by force?

As long as you doubt Israels legitimacy, you're just wasting your time.
Rather, you are arguing a strawman. No one here is arguing over the existence of Israel itself, but rather pointing out the sheer illegitimacy of Israels ongoing conquest of what little is left of Palestine.

It's like arguing over the legitimacy of Greece.
No, this discussion is like ones arguing over 1939 Germany's assumed right to annex Poland. Would you have been taking the side of the conquers on that one too?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Freshgeardude said:
Here is what wiki says on the matter of the "exodus"

Link.

You can find what an actual academic investigation into the "invitated to leave" myth reveals here.

Many also expected to return as conquerors and have their choice of the land that the Jews originally were on.

It was expected that the Arabs armies would push the Jews into the sea and all of Palestine would belong to the Arabs.

That assumption turned out to be false.
And now the Palestinians expect to be rewarded for siding with the losing team?

Note that in the Wiki reference it is acknowledged upfront that there is disagreement as to what was said and meant by historians themselves.
 
Last edited by a moderator: