It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Isreali cage

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
For a country to become "economically viable" it needs foreign investors and foreign investors will NOT invest in a country that they see as a risk and its a fact that MOST countries with a Muslim majorities are unstable and are high risk.


The problem would be less "investors shunning muslims", as there are also rich investors in Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia for example. As a matter of fact, Israel would probably also try to thwart those payments, under the pretext of antiterrorism struggle. The real problem is that the geography of the palestinian territories, as well as the existence of the separation wall, effectively prohibits trade with any would-be palestinian industry, as well as boost costs for transactions inside the territories.


Who in their right mind would invest in Palestine? Can you imagine what the stock-holders would do to you if you suggested it? Its an unstable country, run by THUGS and MURDERERS.


Well yes, instability is also a problem, the instability created by the Bush-Sharon policy.



[edit on 21-6-2005 by Moretti]




posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   
[edit on 23-6-2005 by asala]



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 05:33 PM
link   
History would indicate that your assertion over the cause of "instability" [Bush and Sharon policy(s)] is incorrect. "Instability" began long, long before Bush and Sharon were even political pundits, let alone born.






seekerof



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
History would indicate that your assertion over the cause of "instability" [Bush and Sharon policy(s)] is incorrect. "Instability" began long, long before Bush and Sharon were even political pundits, let alone born.
seekerof


Well yes, i agree with you that Bush and Blair's "gift" to the israelis is somewhat poisoned, as was the handling of early palestine/israel under imperial mandate, if that is what you mean. Divide and Conquer, imperial creed.





[edit on 21-6-2005 by Moretti]



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
Actually the British Granted this land to the Israelis only due to the fact that there was no other "people" who had established a home nation. This was done even though the land was occupied by Palestinians. The British saw that the Israelis had "owned this land some 2000 years ago. By that thinking, Then ANY goverment can give the land that you occupy simply because someone claimed the land 2 centuries (or more). Forget teh part that you family is living there now. Forget the fact that your family may have occupied the land for generations. Out you go, you are now a nobody with no rights even to appeal to the UN!

I don't know whether you have doen enough research on this or not because the English didn't give it because "no other people had established a home nation" they did it becasue of the Jewish persecutions around the world and Nazi germany's policy towards the Jews. Also the state that was to be Isreal was not going to be exclusively for the Jews, it was going to incorporate the exsistent Arabs that lived on that land and also the Jewish people.
The Fact that the Jews lived there soem 2000 years ago was a secondary consideration that the British thought of to promote Jewish immigration to Isreal! Because in those days the Isreal as we know it was just a desert and the Jews of Europe who were used to the luxuries of mordern cities were hesitant, to say the least, about moving to Isreal.
The Arabs initially welcomed the Jews and thought it would be best for the the entire region as the Jews would bring with them their expertise and thus would be possible to develope their land, only after the British started playing politics did the situation get out of hand and result into what is well know today!



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by IAF101
The Arabs initially welcomed the Jews and thought it would be best for the the entire region as the Jews would bring with them their expertise and thus would be possible to develope their land, only after the British started playing politics did the situation get out of hand and result into what is well know today!


When you say that the Arabs initially welcomed the Jews, how far back are you going? I know there was resistance going back at least to the 1917 Balfour Declaration.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 08:19 AM
link   

1. The Isreali's aren't provoking violence


The treatment of Palestinians by Israel is grossly hypocritical and the only way they will stop is by pressure from the US and the threat of withdrawal of the billions they receive in funding. Israel only has itself to blame for the attacks on its people. They use Palestinians for what can only be described as slave labour. They have repeatedly ignored UN resolutions. They brand any opposition as anti-Semitic, which is very easy to say the least.

Israel shows complete disregard for international law, having, for over 30 years violated United Nations Resolution 242, which clearly calls for "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict".

All these actions are not only in violation of international laws and UN resolutions, but are clearly a form of state terrorism.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 08:20 AM
link   
IAF101
You might want to recheck history




Creation of the State of Israel

The modern state of Israel

Forced displacement of 750,000 people

Zionism and the creation of Israel




British Zionism - The idea of a Jewish restoration also took the fancy of British intellectuals for religious and practical reasons. The restoration was championed in the 1840s by Lords Shaftesbury and Palmerston, who in addition to religious motivations thought that a Jewish colony in Palestine would help to stabilize and revive the country, Jewish national stirrings were also voiced by novelists and writers such as Lord Byron, Benjamin Disraeli, George Eliot and Walter Scott. ( for a detailed discussion of British Zionism click here ).


Zionism - Definition and Early History

Note, I do not agree with some of the radical statements that some of the above sites make but the information on the history of the creation of the State of Israel is true and pertanent.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
IAF101
You might want to recheck history


Well, No! Because I have been to Israel and have discussed it with many scholars there about Israel, its birth and how the present problem has come to be!
When I say that the Arabs were initially welcomed the Jews that is true, the Jews were seen as the force of Modernization to the entire area, after all they were some of the most brilliant minds of that time! The Arabs welcomed the Jews to come and develop that land and so did the British support the Idea, infact it was the British that sold the idea to the local Arab incharge at that time and they agreed. The British then to lure Jews into Israel then spread the message of a Jewish homeland.
When the Jewish immigrants came to Palestine in the late 19th and early 20th century, they found it as backward and neglected as every other territory of the Ottoman Empire. But after the Jews arrived the Arabs were getting worried about the numbers that arrived and the amount of land they needed, after that things began to worsen as the Jewish numbers increase and the Arabs feeling more and more threatened by the increased Jewish presence. Also the Jews had set up well-planned colonies and other amenities with British help that the further infuriated the Arabs. The major reasons that the Jews were welcomed in Palestine by the British AND the Arabs was that they brought money and skills - and improved health care - to an area that was grossly deficient in every modern aspect of those things. Now it was the turn of the British to use politics to ruin a region, they set up a council that would govern the whole area and it consisted of a majority of Jews and a minority of Arabs the whole region was governed by a overseeing British official. The Arabs opposed this bitterly and wanted to have a majority of Arab representatives and sent a delegation to Britain where the issue was protracted further by internal politics and other external politics. The British wanted to establish a state in the Middle East that was a puppet nation and would effectively control the entire Middle East; this was their plan for domination in the Middle East. To satisfy this end they used diplomacy and politics amongst the setters and the Arabs to maintain effective British control!
After the Peel commission and the separation of Transjordan from the Palestine State it was the Jews turn to get infuriated for they were going to get a country that was less than a fourth of what was promised. The Arabs meanwhile forged an alliance with the British to help them get their land back with force, this is not to say that the British would openly attack the Jews but would turn a blind eye to the Arabs. This was done mostly during the tenure of the legendary anti Nazi cum anti Semitic hero Winston Churchill as Secretary. He encouraged the Arabs to make increasingly high demands that he knew the Jews would protest and on the other hand reassured the Jews of full co-operation, this had its expected repercussion and the Jews retaliated against the Arabs, the conflict was then at its onset, the violence increased as the Arabs attacks got more and more viscous as the British failed to maintain order and thus anarchy, in the end it was the British who were the targets and thus led to the violent formation of the state of Israel.
The six day war was another matter, that aggravated the entire problem, with the Jews taking control all wealthy Arabs left Palestine and emigrated to other Arab nations, while the poorer were displaced as the result of war, these poor are the now so called "Palestine refugees".
It was a series of bad event all together that caused these problems. Also another important fact to remember and Know
is about the shepardic Jews of Turkey that were the first people to arrive and develop Israel as we know it now!
That is the history!



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 10:18 AM
link   
IAF101,
I can see by your response that you decided that you know better than I and that you did not need to research the links that I have provided.
You might be surprised to find that even the ADL (Anti-Defamation League) actually contradicts your claims that the israelites were welcomed by the Arabs.
Just a quick quote from their site which is also backed by history books.




Following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, the British assumed control of Palestine. In November 1917, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration, announcing its intention to facilitate the "establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people."ind_montage.gif (8054 bytes) In 1922, the League of Nations granted Britain a mandate over Palestine which included, among other things, provisions calling for the establishment of a Jewish homeland, facilitating Jewish immigration and encouraging Jewish settlement on the land.
The Arabs were opposed to Jewish immigration to Palestine and stepped up their attacks against the Jews. Following an increase in Arab attacks, the British appointed a royal commission in 1936 to investigate the Palestine situation. The Peel Commission recommended the partition of the country between Arabs and Jews. The Arabs rejected the idea while the Jews accepted the principle of partition.


If you wish to deny this history, then that is your right. Does either this rendition of history or even the one that you have presented change anything on the premise of my first posting? That the land was stolen from the Palestinians, the various incidents that I also mentioned such as the soldier murdering the girl?
Sorry, I do not see how your history or argument negates this?



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
I haven't read where Israel took it. More like given by UK/US interests.

They were definitly given israel proper by the US/UK/UN. But things like gaza and the west bank, they won't it thru war for territory, a reactionary war too.

I mean, I can understand the palestininas being upset at being occupied. Occupation must be pretty horrible. But they don't seem to be willing to actually do anything about it. Rather there are elements within their society that uses the occupation to build a powerbase to rule them. Al-aqsa and Fatah never marched on Israel. They never stormed the Knesset with their commandos. And for all the arms dealing that goes on between iran, syria, Hizbolah and the palestinians, I haven't seen too many actual palestinian armies crossing the border, or even razing any of the settlements. Sure, they're not going to have tanks and apcs and airforces, but if they can fight with small sporadic bombers, then certianly they can accomplish more with massed infantry and riflemen.

But they don't. When the americans wanted to get rid of the anglos, they formed militias, and took towns, stormed tax offices, and fought the british army in the field, even tho they were far 'inferior' to them, on paper. When the boers lost the main battle phase of the anglo-boer war, and their presidents were captured and their republics made part of the british commonwealth, the didn't disband their armies, they took the the high veld and attacked the british columns, logistics lines, and everything else. They didn't send lone bitterenders to set fire to an office or poison a school's water well. Their commandos sloged thru the worst, harrased the kahki-columns, and only stopped fighting when they were actually caught or killed. Heck, one of the boer leaders and some of his confederate spent the rest of their lives in a prison camp on the other side of the world, because he refused to capitulate, even after capture, years after the war was over.

But the palestinians? Nothing of the sort. All we see is very sporadic fighting. There's allways talk in the pan-arab community about defeating the isrealis, but none of them seem interested in actually fighting the yehudis, so why should any land claim be accepted? The israelis took palestine in war. It belongs to them. The palestinians gave it up, they don't get to keep a claim to it.


Two sides to every coin.

I agree, and I can undersand the palestinian concerns, but ultimately, they fall very flat. If the yehudis are an intolerable burden, then destroy them, get them out. They can't honestly expect a political process to win their land for them.


moretti
As a matter of fact, Israel would probably also try to thwart those payments, under the pretext of antiterrorism struggle

Since the organization that runs the palestinian territories for the palestinians is a group that uses terrorism and is but an off-shoot of things like fatah and al-aqsa, well, yeah, funding that would be funding terrorism.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 12:55 PM
link   
We always tend to forget that the British were essentially bombed out of Palestine in the late 1940's, incidents included the murder of a United Nations mediator (the Swedish Count Folk Bernadotte) by a jewish extremist. Also the bombing of Arab buses in 1947 by the Irgun terrorist group.

Alot of nasty acts have been perpetrated by all sides in Palestine, let's just not forget that the Israelis did some pretty unpleasant stuff before they were officially given the land once the British mandate ended.

I don't believe that you can hold an entire community or nation responsible for the actions of a few, and this applies to all sides.



posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Well, my two cents on this whole thing is like this. I am not a Jewish person and I am not a muslim either but its sure seems to me that a few facts cannot be overlooked.


The Palestinians were not forced to leave. They left because of the coming war from the Arab nations on Israel. Jews were forced out of Arab countries and were absorbed into Isreal. If the neighboring Arab states care so much for the Palestinian people, why not allow them to be absorbed in their population?

I think the answer is because they need them to be the reason to exterminate the Isrealis and all the canned garbage spewed all over this board will not answer that accusation. To anyone who hasn't taken a look from a geographic standpoint and just believes that the Palestinian people are being kept in cages might side with them. But, when I look at a map of the middle east the true nature of the tiny piece of land all these people have been kept camping out to take all these years is so minute the only answer for this can be the racism and bigotry of the Arab nations. They are the people who have prospered from this issue and they are the ones who refuse to allow Palestinians into their lands as well.

There is plenty land in the middle east, there is just no room for jews is the message I'm getting and if the jewish state was established in Antartica, I'm sure we'd have Palestinians camped out freezing their rears off yelling, thats my land. Look, turn around, look behind you. You are so concerned over 20% of a whole continent you could assimilate into. Duh!

Third, folks from an outsider's standpoint once again. This will never ever end with a peaceful negotiation. Why the hell are we trying? In all of human recorded history has any conflict ended without a clear and evident winner and loser? NO. Nuf Said.

And finally, when you make the decision to go to war as the Arabs have a few times with a country on adjacent soil, you risk losing ground every time. Once you get your rears kicked good, the enemy usually takes some if not all your land because really, they can..why..because they just did.


So, the real solution to all this for the best of the Palestinian people is for them to be allowed to assimilate into the other 80% of the continent into one of the many Arab nations with whom they share so much interest. Why have they not? Well, its really not their best interests thats driving this situation. Its whats in the Isrealis worst interests that is being considered as the leading motivation. So long as this mentality is used, I really don't see any resolution for the Palestinians themselves.

Anything done out of raging hatred and animosity such as the Arabs have will never ever bring the result they seek.



posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
I can see by your response that you decided that you know better than I and that you did not need to research the links that I have provided.
You might be surprised to find that even the ADL (Anti-Defamation League) actually contradicts your claims that the israelites were welcomed by the Arabs.

Actually I do know it better! But I also went through the link from the ADL site and found that it was lacking. That is the ADL view, not history. History of Paelstine is not so black and white, they start off from thr Balfour declaration, which is very recent and doesn't present the entire picture! To understand the Palestine conflict it is very important to understand the revival of Zionism.
But as you need 'documented proof' here you go :
www.mideastweb.org...

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
Just a quick quote from their site which is also backed by history books.


Following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, the British assumed control of Palestine. In November 1917, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration, announcing its intention to facilitate the "establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people." In 1922, ...................


Kenshiro,
This is the history as written by the "British" who were the one politicing in the back and messed up the region into the chaos it is in now, this doens' t give you the complete picture, just the British view!
Also as most of history hs been taken from the British hence you find that most sites give out such abstract information and pass it off as History.
Also this history doesn't make sense, if it was the British who made the Balfour Declaration and thus the Jews immigrated then why would the Arabs not attack the British for giving away their land to somebody else? Instead they attack the immigrant Jewisg families? Also if so many attacks were going on how come their were more than 600 000 Jews in Palestine before WW2 broke out? Did the Jews wantedly emmigrate to a hostile land, why would they do some thing so stupid? Why would so many people leave their home to come to a hostile plaec without any cooperation from the locals? Especially to a land which is a barren desert and they a place where they would have to face a hardship which was even greater than war!
All these things prove that the history as presented by the British is incomplete and onesided, to cover up British politicking that was done in the back, to get the Arabs against the jews and thereby maintaining effective control!

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
If you wish to deny this history, then that is your right. Does either this rendition of history or even the one that you have presented change anything on the premise of my first posting? That the land was stolen from the Palestinians, the various incidents that I also mentioned such as the soldier murdering the girl?

I do not deny that sadly this is history for most people but what I want to emphasise is that this is "a" history and not what actually happened. The emmigration of Jews to Palestine happened much before the Balfor Declaration(I'm not talking about 4000 years ago! But more recent history.) and this is well known. Actually Palestine as we know today was just a barren desert until 500 years ago when the Jews of the Ottaman Empire along with the Shepardic Jews of Arabia moved to Palestine to set up home in the holy land, this was during the Brith of Early Zionism, the Arab bedouins of that area also settled as trade with the Jews was very profitable and the as the region developed. The Ottaman Empire enchoraged Jewish immigration and thus allowed Jews to move freely inside the Empire, most Jews in the Empire moved to Palestine during this period. As word caught on about a Jewish city comming up at the holy land Jews from Russia flocked in large number, the Ottamand Empire worried that this would lead to Jewish domintaion of that region i.e. near Palestine, and this would lead to instability in the Empire and maybe a split. They immediatley stopped immigration and displaced the Jews already settled there to other parts of the Empire and forcefully deported them back to Russia. But they kept Jewish scientist and other Jewish scholars whom they thought were important! Now as the region was prosperous, many Arabs and Bedouins came and settled in Paesltine thus their number grew due to their non-nomadic lifestyle and greater availability of resources.
This region was also holy to the muslims and thus this created a greater appeall for Muslims to come to Palestine, their is real Arab people who had lived in those lands as the Palestinians claim now, most are bedouin tribes that have settled down in Palestine due to favorable economic conditions set up by the Jews. Also even though the Ottaman empire tried to evict all the Jews a lot of them stuck around and were still present after WW2 in Palestine, though they were a very small minority they coexsisted peacefully with the Arabs till more Jews appeared later in the early 1920's. Some of them can be still traced now in Isreal . Thus no reasonable person would say that Jewsih immigration into Palestine in the 1920's was occupation, as the Arabs themselves welcomed the Jews to Palestine and thought that this would help build economic recovery in that region. Also one of the First Hospitals in the middle east was built by the Jews in Jeruselum!
Comming to the present and your idea that the Jews are oppressing the Palestinians and that all the Jews are rich and comfortable while the Palestinians are the epitome of squaller and depravity, that Jews carry out genocide and resort to NAZI methods to deal with the Palestinians and so on is nothing more than shear fallacy. The Jews of Isreal do not have a very cushy life let me assure you! The Jews are compassionate people and their are many amongst the Jews who do a lot of Social Service in the Paletinian areas, providing food, health care, sanitation and spreading education. These things are not reported as they are everyday activites and they are just shrugged off as small matters but this just shows that the Jews know what is compassion and are compassionated people, their are many among the Jews who have faced worse persecution than the Arabs will ever face, suffering is not new to the Jews it is their curse and they bear it willingly. The PLA which claims to be some messaiah of the 'poor', 'oppressed' Palestinians has in its founding charter that their soel purpose is the Destruction of the Jewish state and to liberate Isreal from the Jews by force yet they are the people whom the Jews want to head Palestine. The problem arises when people refuse to compramise, like the arabs in Palestine have been doing, thats when people see no way out, you can't have your cake adn eat it too kind of situation.
About the girl killed by the soldier, that is understandable, you try combing through Hamas infested localities with kids no older than 18 shooting AK47's at you and poping out from alleys! The Isreali's are all trained in Basic Combat due to their very meger millitary strenght, many have families and military service is compulsory, so the instinct of self preservation can take precedence in situations of high tension, as the case with the girl. I am sure the Isreali's reported it as they saw it and didn't try to cover it up also I am sure that the soldier who fired it was very sorry. Thats why the Isreali government with great cost has introduced the use of rubber bullets and other non leathal weapons in such situations but accidents do happen still. Also HAMAS is to blame as they use only kids to do the fighing while all the big wigs hide out in the saftey of their hideouts! Isreal also spends an incredible amount on its intelligence service to see that innocent lives are never lost and only the guilty be punished.
The common portrayal as Isreali's as some tyranical oppressors of pious people is the most succesful weapon of the Arab militia and their sponsored nations. This fallacy of thought must be removed about the Jews and a proper understanding along side critical thinking is required to sort the truth from the propaganda! Hope you find the truth Kenshiro.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by Nygdan

2. why build the wall on palistinain land why not their own?

It is israeli land, the palestinians have no land.


I'm sure they did 60 years ago in the same neighborhood.


I haven't read where Israel took it. More like given by UK/US interests.

Again,


Two sides to every coin.


The Palestinians still had land though, until they supported Israel's neighbors in an attempt to wipe Israel off of the map because they worship the wrong god. Israel should have exiled every one of them after the war of independence and there would be no terrorism in Israel.

Oh well, that opportunity was missed, so now Israel has to go ahead and find a way to make up with the Palestinians. One of the ways that Israel is doing this is to build a wall that will keep terrorists from entering Israel so that Israel wont constantly have to bomb the Palestinians. Take your pick Palestine- bricks or bombs.

[edit on 6-7-2005 by The Vagabond]



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by LA_Maximus

For a country to become "economically viable" it needs foreign investors and foreign investors will NOT invest in a country that they see as a risk and its a fact that MOST countries with a Muslim majorities are unstable and are high risk.



The risks lie's in the fact that Israel cannot be trusted. They have stabbed EVERYONE in the back they have done business with. This is not a racist
comment rather a observation of history. I find LA_Maximus to be a disturb individual with an extremely distorted view on reality



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 09:12 AM
link   
I guess if I were an Israeli and Palestinian suicide bombers were infesting my countries streets, I'd expect some cooperation from the 'peaceful' and 'innocent' Palestinians. Instead, they choose to ignore what is happening. They are sympathysizers. How can you allow your neighbor to dress himself in C-4 and cross the border into Israel to harass your other neighbors? Their actions are no better than allowing a person by pretending to not see them to die on the side of a street who is begging for your help.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sand_man

Originally posted by LA_Maximus

For a country to become "economically viable" it needs foreign investors and foreign investors will NOT invest in a country that they see as a risk and its a fact that MOST countries with a Muslim majorities are unstable and are high risk.



The risks lie's in the fact that Israel cannot be trusted. They have stabbed EVERYONE in the back they have done business with. This is not a racist
comment rather a observation of history. I find LA_Maximus to be a disturb individual with an extremely distorted view on reality


Well its called "common-sense". I look at most Muslim countries and I see poverty, corruption, religious violence and over-crowding AND Israel always seems to be blamed.

You can't blame Israel for the Hindu-Muslim problems can you?

You can't blame Israel for the Muslim problems in the Phillipeanes or Thailand can you?

Course not, Israel has NOTHING to do with those countries, but the point of my post is: If the MUSLIMS want out of this "cage" their gonna have to act like HUMAN-BEINGS and make their countries more safe for foreign investment. Except for oil, investors shy away for Muslim countries because they are a great risk.

So open your eyes and quit with the personal insults (disturbed Individual). I don't have time to dig up the economic info on all the oil-less Muslim countries, but Im sure my comments match up with reality.

Maximu§



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Its quite humorous to see the pro-Israel crew calling the Palistinians Thugs/murderers/Wild dogs. The jews pretty much acted the same at the time of the British mandate in the area, they were the pioneers of terrorism, so please take a balanced look. The way i see it, there should not be a jewish state on somebody elses land, what exactly is your claim?



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImmortalTechnique
Its quite humorous to see the pro-Israel crew calling the Palistinians Thugs/murderers/Wild dogs. The jews pretty much acted the same at the time of the British mandate in the area, they were the pioneers of terrorism, so please take a balanced look. The way i see it, there should not be a jewish state on somebody elses land, what exactly is your claim?


The Jewish people have been there and have been the rulers of the land whenever there wasn't a foreign empire occupying their land for a couple of thousand years. Does that little fact do anything for you?

I'll put it to you this way. Suppose you lived in California, USA. China invades and occupies for a few centuries. You resist so bad that the Chinese rename California to Atzlan, just to tick you off. Finally you are exiled because you keep making trouble. China fades, Mexico occupies when they leave. Canada and Mexico go to war- Canada wins, California is under Canadian rule for a few centuries, then they decide to leave. You descendents come back to California to reclaim their birthright, but it's not called California- it's called Atzlan because your enemy arbitrarily renamed it to punish you for rebelling. Now the descendents of Mexican-Americans try to tell your descendents that it's not American land- it's Mexican land- it's Atzlan- it's theirs and you don't have any right to it. Nevermind that those Mexican Americans who lived there always lived under the American flag.

That's roughly what's going on in Israel. Another race of people who never actually controlled the land are claiming ownership on the basis that they weren't forced out by foreign powers because they weren't stirring up as much trouble, and they are racists- they will not have another race entering what they now consider their land.
AT BEST the Palestinians are equally at fault here. I'll grant you that both sides could occupy a single country and have no problem if it weren't for the fact that they're both a bunch of religiously fanatic racists. However, if that's what it's going to come to, the group with the most legitimate historical claim to governance is the Israeli people.

On top of that, lest we forget, the Palestinians had a pretty decent state for a few hours. It wasn't enough. They couldn't handle the thought of being neighbors to a bunch of infidels, so they started a war and they got walked on. Now, Israel is in the process of giving them back what they lost as a consequence of their own aggression! I can't even imagine how there is any doubt in anybody's mind that within 20 years of Palestinian statehood, Israel and Palestine will go to war again, but for some reason the Israelis are willing to give them another chance. Let's hope the jihadists are still as inept on the battlefield then as they have been in every previous war with Israel.


Also, just to clarify, I for one am not calling the Palestinians murderers or anything else. God can decide if its murder. All I can tell you is that everytime progress is made between the Palestinians and the Israelis, Palestinians go to Israel and target civilians. Now maybe it's just me, but is anybody else confused as to why a freedom fighter whose actions are analogous to what the Israeli militias were trying to do during British occupation would want to sabotage the peace progress everytime their side is offered something that they want? All I can guess is that maybe it's not freedom they want- maybe it's dead Israelis that they want.

And here comes the part where you tell me that I can't blame them all for the actions of a few. True. What I CAN blame them all for is tollerating a government which allows and even facilitates such things. And what I CAN blame them all for is opposing a wall that is designed to preclude the need for Israel to keep bombing them in retaliation for terrorism. If they don't want to be blamed for terrorism, let them stop the terrorists. You don't see hardline Israelis sneaking into Egypt trying to start a war to expand Israel- Israel doesn't put up with that. But you do see hardline Palestinians sneaking into Israel trying to perpetuate a war for the expansion of Palestine- because Palestine DOES put up with that.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join