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.

 

Who lived where first ?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   
And how convenient it is, that the Palestinians can actually move their missil launchers to the Gaza Strip and be alot closer to Jerusalem... what a Geographic problem, huh ??

I dont know EVERY Arabic person, so I cant answer your question above




posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase
If the people of Hawaii, New Mexico or Texas launched an insurgency to demand independence, the rest of the world might take notice and take a position in favor or against independence for those regions. Just as they did with Croatia and Bosnia.


I'm getting the impression that you actually hope that happens some day.

If you are an American, what happened to you to make you hate this country (based on reading many of your posts) so much?



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   
The question of the Israeli settlers in the Gaza strip is a seperate one to the "who was there first" conundrum. The fact is that the West Bank and Gaza Strip were designated as Palestinian land with Israeli agreement in recent times, following the foundation of the Israeli state after the Second World War. Since then, Israeli settlers have moved in on land which belongs to the Palestinians, outwith the borders of Israel. The Israeli settlers who are currently being evicted have no right to be in Gaza, regardless of whether the rest of the state we call Israel is rightfully their homeland or not.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Do you really think that every Arab is a frothing at the mouth loony with the Koran in one hand and an AK47 in the other?

I don't think anyone here thinks that, however, it doesn't matter, because the existence of moderates and reasonable people doesn't stop the loons from going nuts. The papers have been reporting that the leaders of the islamic terror groups, like hamas, have infact been saying that this is a huge victory and a vindication of their methods, and that now they will indeed attack within israel greatly.

Which is assinine, because the terrorism has been going on for decades. Whats different today is that Abbas might be able to stop it, so long as reasonable conditions (like returning parts of occupied territories) are met.

Its not the terrorists that've won that land back, its the reasonable possibility that there might be peace that got it back and makes the withdrawl worth it. If the Abbas crumbles and the palestinians get really violent again, then the Israelis will just re-invade, and easily crush them, for, what, a third time in history right?



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by CiderGood_HeadacheBad
Since then, Israeli settlers have moved in on land which belongs to the Palestinians, outwith the borders of Israel

They hardly just walked over there. There was a war between israel and a pan-arab alliance. Two wars. Isreal won both. In doing so, they occupied lots of strategic positions, like golan, gaza, sinai, the west bank, etc. That land belongs to Israel, by right of conquest. They wisely realized that its simply not worth it if giving it up can result in peace. The israeli government, for all the criticisms made against it and being 'rough' with the people that are warring with it, is making a bold move torwards peace.

So what are the palestinians going to do in return, eh?



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Well than once Israel won both wars, than it is COMPLETLY their territory...Winners, Keepers.

Thats How EVERY country in this planet came to be.

If you go to war and loose your territory than there is no returning...

Otherwise we come back to what I said beofer...there are ALOT of countries that have ALOT of returning to do ...USA and Canada included.

This is all a dirty political game, to allow the Muslem extremist to be closer to Israel so their missils do a better job, and soon everyone will see it.

[edit on 18-8-2005 by BaastetNoir]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by BaastetNoir
Well than once Israel won both wars, than it is COMPLETLY their territory...Winners, Keepers.

Thats How EVERY country in this planet came to be.

If you go to war and loose your territory than there is no returning...


I agree and i think Israel should end this conflict once and for all with force. Pulling out of Gaza shows weakness and will only embolden the terrorists. Also I'm fairly certain that Israel didn't start the wars in which they gained this territory. The message should be, if you fight and loose you don't get back what you lost in the peace that follows. Maybe then they would be less eager to fight. I really do wish there was another way and hope that this move does work but i don't think that it will. Which is a pity since most people there probably do want peace.

[edit on 18-8-2005 by Trent]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Well the Palestinian case is not so much that Israel itself exists, but that in wars the Israels have illegally occupied and settled land with the idea of creating a biblical Greater Israel.


Palestinian Covenant

Article 15



Article 15: The liberation of Palestine, from an Arab viewpoint, is a national (qawmi) duty and it attempts to repel the Zionist and imperialist aggression against the Arab homeland, and aims at the elimination of Zionism in Palestine. .......


Article 19


Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and to their natural right in their homeland, and inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations; particularly the right to self-determination.


Seems to me that the problem is a little more deepseated than you imply.
And Israel still leaves the Gaza Strip while the Palestininians have yet to officially change their charter. Hmmmmmmmm..........................................



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by BaastetNoir
If you go to war and loose your territory than there is no returning...

Well, you can keep bitching about it and causing trouble until you eventually get your way.

Obviously the palestinians aren't all that intersted in 'getting their land back'. I have yet to see the Army of Palestian cross the border and wage total war on israel, rather, all we see is a very, very weak minority amoung the palestinians terrorise them into kow-towing to them, and then launching terrorist attacks in order to advance political action.



there are ALOT of countries that have ALOT of returning to do ...USA and Canada included.

Well, hell, england was invaded by anglos, saxons, jutes, Danes, and Normans, so maybe someone can claim to be the native britoners and get it all back. Heck the Scots had to invade scotland, they're not native. They drove off and pretty much wiped out the Picts (it used to be Pictland).
I don't think that there's really anyone anywhere that can really claim to be 'native'. The yehudis were given israel by the world, by the UN. They expanded in two wars with teh arabs, that land is theirs, the palestinians don't have a real right to it, not as a seperate or sovreign nation.



This is all a dirty political game, to allow the Muslem extremist to be closer to Israel so their missils do a better job, and soon everyone will see it.

I seriously doubt that that is why sharon is pulling them out. Why would anyone who has any influence with the Israeli government want them to be attacked by the palestinians more ferociously, realistically?



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Sometimes, just sometimes, I think, irrationally, that we should just nuke the place from orbit. There. No one gets the holy land. Because, that's what this is all about, religion and racism, and there will never be an answer. Nothing will ever be enough for either side, there is no compromise that will not simply be accepted as anything but defeat from both sides. They don't want it to work out.

I don't truly mean we should do that, let me make that very clear. It's more an absolute, to make a point.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
I seriously doubt that that is why sharon is pulling them out. Why would anyone who has any influence with the Israeli government want them to be attacked by the palestinians more ferociously, realistically?


Becasue Bush threatned to remove the 4 MM dollars help... Without that money they cant really get much weapon defense against terrorism...



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Okay, this is interesting. I look at map of Israel and it has parts of white: including the Gaza strip. I agree this is all about the “holy land”. We have the top 3 major religions of the world there: Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. We have the Qods Mosque, the place Jesus was born, and the Ark of the Covenant ( I actually want to see that!). Most of the wars in the world is over, power, religion, or race. Let’s turn to ancient history now…

Abraham was the first Hebrew, and was born in Ur to later travel to Canaan (Palestine). Famine drove the Hebrews to seek refuge in Egypt, again then Moses brought them back to Canaan…

Ok, what happens then, I dunno all I know is that Hitler shows up and tries to kill them all. Then what the Palestines then said, they were kicked out by force, the Israelis say the land was given. Here’s something useful!
Did The Balfour Declaration in l9l7and the UN Partition Resolution In 1947 Give Zionists a Legitimate Claim to Palestine?

It is difficult to imagine how a letter from a British Foreign Minister, Lord Balfour, to a British Zionist leader, Lord Rothschild, could be the legal basis for dispossessing an indigenous population in the Middle East. If anything, Balfour's letter was a political maneuver meant to further British imperial interests in the Middle East during World War II by rallying Jewish support for the Allied effort.

According to the American diplomat Sol Linowitz, "Great Britain had no sovereign rights over Palestine; it had no proprietary interest; it had no authority to dispose of the land. The Declaration was merely a statement of British intentions and no more." [See C. Wright, Facts and Fables: The Arab Israel Conflict, Kegan Paul, 1989, p. 159.1

Nor does the U.N. Partition Plan of 1947 give Zionists legal claim to Palestine because:

(1) the U.N. Plan, which granted 55% of Palestine to the Jews, who were then 30% of the population and owned 6% of the land, violated Article 1 of the U.N. Charter. This is the Article that sets forth the principle of self-determination for all peoples on earth, including the 70% of Palestinians who then owned 94% of the land;

(2) the Resolution was not binding since it was not passed by the Security Council but by the General Assembly, which can only recommend rather than legislate;

(3) the Resolution, like the Balfour Declaration, was a product of great power machinations, orchestrated by the United States, rather than the result of political idealism. [See A. Lilienthal, The Zionist Connection: What Price Peace?, Dodd, Mead, 1978.]


My solution is make Palestine a country!



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Just to make my point a litle clearer... The palestinian voices already scream "it'sn not enough"... of course this as got ZERO to do with housing, and building comercial building or offices, or whatever excuses they're giving... This has ONE single pint in mind..."get ridd of the jews...push them all the way to see if possible"... and as time goes we will all realize that,... This is not a plan or a Road map to Peace... its a "Road map to pieces"...
(The Jewsih people pieces), no Wonder Koffe H., and Hitlary Clinton are so quiet ... they ARE LOVING IT !

and so are the So-Called Christian Leaders such as Billy Graham , Pat Robertson, and off course Pope Bendict, who hasnt made one sound about this...in fact he is celebrating "german Histroy"... in Germany... what a coincidence ...



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 01:31 PM
link   
If this has to do with religion, then why is Israel considered a secular state? It can't be about race, because the overwhelming majority of Jews in the world are not Hebrew.

Of course it's easy to play the race/religion card. We hear about that card all the time over here in America.

I think the problem that some people have with the Israeli occupation is the timespan. Time is a factor here. The occupation of land happened around the last 50 years. In Tibet, we see a similar situation. The chinese have been in Tibet for around 50 years as well, and we see mass protesting to Free Tibet.

So it's ignorant to think that Israel is the only country where people are protesting it's occupation of another land.

As well, it is the Israelis who decided to pull out of Gaza, so I guess they must hate their own country as well.

There are many circumstances that don't add up to the whole "Anyone who doesn't believe everything Israel does is right must be a Nazi" theory.



posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   
This thread rests on top of a misunderstanding. The Israelis aren't pulling out of Gaza in response to international indignation. They are pulling out because otherwise they would have 1.3 million palestinians added to their own population, thus diluting Israel's character as a Jewish state. It's easier to deal with the Palestinians outside their territory, to avoid the problems inherent in apartheid.

"Disengagment" has long been a policy of many in the far right in Israel. Notice this is happening under Sharon and not a Labor government

Also, it's not just Israel. There is/was uproar against the Americans in Iraq, the Russians in Afghanistan, Argentina in the Falklands (or Britain, depending on how you look at it), Iraq in Kuwait, and plenty of other recent occupations.

-koji K.

[edit on 21-8-2005 by koji_K]



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Any human living outside Africa is not native to their lands. The extinction of large mammals in other continents around about the time man first arrived there is evidence that they did not evolve alongside man and thus we are not native to these areas. Should we all go home, to Africa?

[edit on 26-8-2005 by Sabre262]



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sabre262
Any human living outside Africa is not native to their lands. The extinction of large mammals in other continents around about the time man first arrived there is evidence that they did not evolve alongside man and thus we are not native to these areas. Should we all go home, to Africa?

[edit on 26-8-2005 by Sabre262]


No, Africa sucks balls. There is a reason that a vast chunk of the population left for 'greener pastures'.


[edit on 26-8-2005 by Captain_Sensible]



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 12:18 PM
link   
My first post here, so bare with me.

We are talking about "Palistine" as though there ever existed such a nation. There didn't. Try to find some history about the nation of Palistine. It doesn't exist! We can talk about how 'new' a country Isreal is, but what about Palistine? It still isn't a nation.

When Isreal took land in the '67 war, they took it from Jordan. They are not giving it back to the 'rightful owners' or even the previous owners. It is simply their attempt at a possible peace. I don't see it happening though.

The media has totally screwed up history on this story. Don't believe me, do a little research for yourselves. Who first called this land Palistine? And why? Where did the name derive from? When is the first mention of a Palistinian people?

The answers to these questions shed tremendous light on this subject.



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 08:36 PM
link   
9/10 Of The Law

Having followed and studied the matter for several years, my conclusion is rather simple.

It doesn't matter who lived there first, it only matters who lives there now.

People can complain about one thing or the other all they want, but the bottom line is that whoever can defend their land will keep it, and whoever can't will lose it.

There has never been a time in all of human history when it was any different, and there is no reason to expect that to magically change.



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stone Mason
The media has totally screwed up history on this story. Don't believe me, do a little research for yourselves. Who first called this land Palistine? And why? Where did the name derive from? When is the first mention of a Palistinian people?


I'm not sure of the first time it was mentioned but the newspaper articles on the site below date back to the 1800's and they refer to it as Palestine.

shalomjerusalem

I think Napoleon also referred to it as Palestine during his campaingns in the 1790's.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join