Can Someone Explain How Israel Was Created?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Gentlemen arguing whether a comment is racist or not does nothing to advance understanding of the history of Israel. Only an objective examination of the facts will do that.




posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   
The question was if someone could explain how Israel was created.

Quite a few people have posted replies explaining this in detail.

This is not a "who do you like better, Israelis or Palestinians" thread.

Thanks.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

1967: The Arabs attack again, resulting in the Six Day Smackdown. The West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Golan Heights of Southern Syria, and Egypt's Sinai Peninsula are all taken by Israel after the invaders are dealt a crushing defeat.


This simply is not true.

The 1967 war began when Israel invaded in a sneak attack. Flying low over the Med in a dawn raid the Israelies bombed the arab airforces as they sat on the ground.


You're ever so slightly near what happened, but by no means right. There were border clashes beginning in 1965, when Syria and Jordan began building a dam which would have diverted water which flowed into Israel, reducing the capacity of Israel's national water carrier by over 1/3.
Israel made airstrikes to prevent this.

The Syrians began shelling Israeli civilians from the strongly defensible position of the Golan Heights, which Israel occupied after the war for security reasons.

1966: Syria and Egypt sign a military alliance against Israel.

Early April, 1967: The Syrians repeatedly fire on Israeli tractors working in the DMZ on the border.

April 7, 1967: A minor confrontation in the air over the Golan Heights gets out of hand. Six Syrian aircraft are downed. The incident with the tractors repeats yet again. Israel bombs the positions which have been firing on Israelis.
The Syrians up the stakes again by shelling Israeli border towns heavily.

The UN Truce Supervision Organization tries to bring a cease-fire. The Syrians refuse to relent unless Israeli agricultural work in the region is halted.
How can you say that the side which is giving the ultimatums and refusing peace deals, not to mention which initiated hostile action by threatening Israel's water supply, is not the aggressor???

Early May: Israel decides to strengthen retaliations "of considerable strength, but of short duration and limited in area". Prime Minister Levi Eshkol works to limit the scope of Isaeli retaliations. Border incidents increase.

Egypt announces plans to remilitarize the Sinai.

May 18th, 1967: Egypt kicks UN Separating Forces out of the Sinai

May 23rd, 1967: Egypt illegally blockades the strait of Tiran and Gulf of Aqaba. They were already warned in 1957, when Israel withdrew from the Sinai and Gaza, that such a blockade would be a casus belli

May 30: Jordan signs a defense treaty with Egypt.
en.wikipedia.org...

President Nasser, who had called King Hussein an "imperialist lackey" just days earlier, declared: "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight."


Late May: Jordanian armed forces are placed under Egyptian command.

Army Commander-in-Chief General Sharif Zaid Ben Shaker warned in a press conference that "If Jordan does not join the war a civil war will erupt in Jordan".

So you tell me... who really wanted to fight? The Arab people will topple their government if they don't get a war!?

Iraq, Sudan, Kuwait, and Algeria begin mobilizing their armed forces. There is speculation that they will be transported to the Jordanian-controlled West Bank to participate in the brewing war.

After having been shelled, blockaded, and having 3 bordering nations which have publically declared their intent to destroy Israel, and formed military alliances for that purposes in the process of mobilizing their forces, Israel attacks. This can hardly be called either a sneak attack or starting the war. They merely took the initiative in a war which the Arabs had already decided to start.

Israel occupied strategically threatening positions after the war for their own defense, and eventually gave quite a bit of it back; they no longer occupy the Sinai and have been endeavoring to hand over the rest to the Palestinians. They'd have given it all back by now if the Palestinians would stop sabotaging the peace process with terrorism.

It's just as simple as what Nasser said, "The Arab people WANT to fight."



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 04:46 PM
link   

You're ever so slightly near what happened, but by no means right.


In that, you are wrong.

Every word I posted was, and still is 100% true.

It is not the complete story, but it was not my intention to write a historical brief on the 1967 war.

I was debunking the lie quoted in my post.

The previous poster had said that the Arabs started the 1967 war by attacking, which is not true.


How can you say that the side which is giving the ultimatums and refusing peace deals, not to mention which initiated hostile action by threatening Israel's water supply, is not the aggressor???


Please re-read my post.

I did not say that.

[edit on 20-10-2005 by ArchAngel]



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 04:57 PM
link   

May 18th, 1967: Egypt kicks UN Separating Forces out of the Sinai


Egypt requsted that the UN force leave the area, and the UN complied.

And its a good thing they did because soon after Israel invaded in a sneak attack.

Q: How many Arab tanks actually touched Israeli land in the 1967 war?

How many Arabs bombs fell on Israeli cities?

Who was the VICTIM?



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Shelling Israeli civilians from the Golan Heights is not an attack? Signing military alliances and mobilizing your forces for war is not an attack? Perhaps since that all happened years and months before the war you would argue separate incidents.

In that case my argument grows even stronger:
Tell me something, when does a nuclear launch become a nuclear attack? When the button is pushed? When the missile leaves the silo? Or when the missile impacts? I say it's when the button is pushed. The attack is then underway- it just hasn't arrived yet.
Or if I reach for my knife, and you knock me out before I get to it, did I attack you or did you attack me? I think I clearly would be the attacker there.

By the same token I argue that the Arab attack was underway and war declared all but on paper as soon as they stated their goal to destroy Israel and began mobilizing.

Furthermore, the Arabs were conducted the act of war which immediately preceeded the declaration of war. A blockade is an act of war. So yet a third argument exists that the blockade which Israel cited as its casus belli was the first act of war which can be directly tied to the Six Day War.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel
And its a good thing they did because soon after Israel invaded in a sneak attack.

Q: How many Arab tanks actually touched Israeli land in the 1967 war?

How many Arabs bombs fell on Israeli cities?

Who was the VICTIM?


Nations that did not border Israel were mobilizing their enemies, and Jordan, a traditional staging ground for outside armies attacking Israel (including Iraq in 48), had been placed under Egyptian military command. Nasser flat out said "Our basic goal shall be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight."

So let me answer a question with a question- how many Arab tanks would have touched Israeli soil if Israel had not beat Egypt to the punch. It's not a sneak attack when you hit somebody who is getting ready to hit you. To make that claim, you'd have to accuse the first fighter to swing in every boxing match of throwing a sucker-punch.

The VICTIM was clearly Israel. They were singled out for destruction by their neighbors simply because of their religion, and as a consequence they had to go to war, even though they had already repeatedly made attempts to accept compromises, only to have those compromises rejected by the Arabs, who would settle for nothing less than the anhilation of anyone who didn't believe in their God.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

May 18th, 1967: Egypt kicks UN Separating Forces out of the Sinai


Egypt requsted that the UN force leave the area, and the UN complied.



why did Egypt kicked the UN out? it makes me wonder. wat was Nasser's intentions after kicking the UN out?



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 05:36 PM
link   

It's not a sneak attack when you hit somebody who is getting ready to hit you.


Its a sneak attack when you attack without first saying "Hey guys, we're attacking you now."

The Israeli actions leading up to the sneak attack prove their intent to deceive.

On TV, and in papers they claimed that Military officers were given time off, and showed some at the beach enjoying themselves.

They bluffed the Arabs into complacancy.

Regardless of the many reasons on both sides for the war the RESULTS show that Israel was intent on taking land because that is what they did.

If they were truely defending themselves they would not have occupied land inhabited by more than Four million people for two generations.

But they are there because their intentions now, back in 1967, and even before have always been aggression.

[edit on 20-10-2005 by ArchAngel]



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 05:51 PM
link   
So the Israeli's are the bad guys because they performed a "sneak attack" on nations whose publicly stated goals were the elimination of Israel?

Wouldn't you be aggresive if all of your neighbors could only be satisfied with your complete annihilation?

I guess that D-day was bad too as it was an aggressive attack on a nation that had not attacked the US.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 06:05 PM
link   
remember the 1973 Yon Kippur War. the Egyptian and Syrian alliance with nations backing them up decided to do a preemptive strike and almost wiped out Israel. maybe the Israelis regret not doin another preemptive strike again before the Egyptians and the Syrians attacked them.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
So the Israeli's are the bad guys because they performed a "sneak attack" on nations whose publicly stated goals were the elimination of Israel?

Wouldn't you be aggresive if all of your neighbors could only be satisfied with your complete annihilation?


There are always reasons for conflicts.

The Arabs slung hostile words, and so did Israel.

Before Israel bombed the Arab Airforces as they sat on the ground there was not a war.


I guess that D-day was bad too as it was an aggressive attack on a nation that had not attacked the US.


The Nazis were not occupying the land Israel occupied in the 1967 Sneak Attack.

If you want to use a WWII analogy Israel is the one that fits Nazi.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
remember the 1973 Yon Kippur War. the Egyptian and Syrian alliance with nations backing them up decided to do a preemptive strike and almost wiped out Israel. maybe the Israelis regret not doin another preemptive strike again before the Egyptians and the Syrians attacked them.


www.worldhistoryplus.com...

You will understand the true nature of the war by simply looking at a Map.

In 1967 When Israel invaded in a sneak attack they did not withdraw behind the pre-war borders.

SIX YEARS had passed without a solution, and millions of Arabs were now under hostile occupation[Insert WWII Analogy here].

The Arab nations united together in a sneak attack to liberate the land and THE PEOPLE.

They did not attack Israel the nation, they attacked the illegal occupiers.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 06:47 PM
link   
You could argue about Israel's wars with its neighbors all day if you wanted to because both Israel and its Arab neighbors share partial responsibility for all of their conflicts. I don't agree with Israel's occupation of the West Bank, but I do support their occupation of the strategic Golan Heights where in the past Syria launched several attacks against Israel. To me it looks like neither side is willing to compromise any further then they already have. If all Israel wanted is land then they could have alot more considering it has the best military in the middle east with a possible exception being Irans military but who knows what kind of weapons Iran has. Israel could still kick every one of its neighbors butts and they know it.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 06:53 PM
link   
The British are mostly responsible for what goes on in the world today. It is them that:

a) divided Pakistan and India, but somehow 'forgot' Kasmir

b) drawn the borders of several new Islamic countries in 'peculiar' ways: instead of draw a line between two races/tribes, they split them in half. It happened in Arabia and in Africa.

c) arranged for Turkey to invade Cyprus

d) decided to steal the land from Arabs and offer it to the Jews

The British tactic behind all this is the tactic of 'divide and conquer': by dividing people in opposing forces, sooner or later war will errupt, so as that the British can come as the negotiators and apply their terms.

Let's not forget that the true center of command and control on Earth is in London: all the great economic decisions are taken there.

EDIT: I forgot to add that the so called 'Jews' that are everywhere are actually frontmen for the British. The true Jewish people live scatterred around the world.

And USA never stopped being Britain's dog.



[edit on 20-10-2005 by masterp]



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   

The British tactic behind all this is the tactic of 'divide and conquer': by dividing people in opposing forces, sooner or later war will errupt, so as that the British can come as the negotiators and apply their terms.


They laid it out for all to see a long time ago.

If you really believe that you MUST read this....

www.wealth4freedom.com...

1784-1796

Organizing the New Nation

Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc.

Philip Freneau
Rules for Changing a Republic [into a Democracy, then] into a Monarchy



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

Originally posted by deltaboy
remember the 1973 Yon Kippur War. the Egyptian and Syrian alliance with nations backing them up decided to do a preemptive strike and almost wiped out Israel. maybe the Israelis regret not doin another preemptive strike again before the Egyptians and the Syrians attacked them.


www.worldhistoryplus.com...

You will understand the true nature of the war by simply looking at a Map.

In 1967 When Israel invaded in a sneak attack they did not withdraw behind the pre-war borders.

SIX YEARS had passed without a solution, and millions of Arabs were now under hostile occupation[Insert WWII Analogy here].

The Arab nations united together in a sneak attack to liberate the land and THE PEOPLE.

They did not attack Israel the nation, they attacked the illegal occupiers.


The problem with your assertions are that they are historically innacurate. They follow the tradition of replacing true history with fantasy. The goal of the PA and at least a majority of the palestinians is the destruction of the state of Israel. After 1948 it was not Israel that occupied the Gaza Strip and West Bank. It was Egypt and Jordan. Were was the anti-fada against those two occupiers of palestinian lands. Oh, I forgot, there wasnt any. those terretories were used as bases by the two governments and palestinian terror groups to conduct attacks on Israel. There were some very heinous attacks including two when schools were taken over, Beslan style. During the 20 years of the Egypt/Jordan occupation there were only attacks on Israel, the palestinians cared nothing for there homeland then.

It was the Arab invasion of 1948 that prevented the partition plan in the first place. There was never any historical palesine. The land belonged to the Ottoman Empire for 500 years. It was practically empty, either swamp or desert before 1890. The turks began to sell large chunks of practically empty swamp to jews. The immigrants from Russia, America, and other parts of Europe came flooding in to drain the swamps and and begin a harvest. These were not generally religious jews, they were socialist who created the kibbutzum. The jews built infastructure, and created towns and cities. Arabs from other areas came there to work(thats not to say that no Arabs lived there before, just that there was a large influx during the 1910's and later 20's. The jews had bought a large portion of current day Israel from the turks. while arabs lived in the galilie and near the jordan river before 1890, it is a fact that practically no one lived within 30 miles of the coast were most of Israels population reside today.

The original partition plan gave far more to the Arabs of palestine then the west bank and gaza strip, it gave them a continuos state. The original plan was based on demographics, giving the jews the ashdod, tel-aviv, hiafa coastline, and the negev/western galalie. The arabs got the land around the eastern galalie, the entire current westbank and more, and a larger gaza strip. That was forfeit when the 1948 war began. So the jews had every right to create a jewish state in Israel.

The 1967 borders should only be returned to when the palestinians have given up violence. Israel did not occupy the palestinian state it occupyed territory used by Jordan and Egypt to launch attacks into Israel. Jerusalem should remain a part of Israel. Under arab control the cities holy sites were off limits to jews and christians. Israel should continue building the wall, which saves lives both Israeli and palestinian, casualties on both sides have gone down since construction began.

So ArchAngel enough with your twisting of the facts, the only land Israel has "occupied" for 50 years is pre 1967 Israel. Thats obviously what you want the Israelis to give up since your certainly a believer in the myth of historic palestine.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 07:54 PM
link   

The problem with your assertions are that they are historically innacurate.


I was speaking about the motives for the 1973 war which you seem to have missed in your reply.

There are far too many inaccuracies in your post for me to address without going way off topic so maybe it would be better to save it for another thread, and change from spinning what happened to the real question.

Where is Israel?

Where is the border?

Do the Palestinians deserve Equal Rights, Independence, Expulsion, or the more of the same?



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

The problem with your assertions are that they are historically innacurate.


I was speaking about the motives for the 1973 war which you seem to have missed in your reply.

There are far too many inaccuracies in your post for me to address without going way off topic so maybe it would be better to save it for another thread, and change from spinning what happened to the real question.

Where is Israel?

Where is the border?

Do the Palestinians deserve Equal Rights, Independence, Expulsion, or the more of the same?


What innaccuracies exactly, I really would like to know?

As for where is Israel and where are the borders? The borders should be the current walled off Gaza Strip, and the West Bank inside the secuirity barrier, those are secure borders which prevent suicide attacks on Israel.

The Palistinians deserve equal rights like any group of people. But it is not Israels job to give it to them. It is the job of the PA and the various Arab states(the true historic oppressors of the paestinian arabs) to end the policy of using the palestinian people to wage a war on Israel.

They began this policy after not being able to destroy Israel themselves. They kept the palestinian arabs isolated in camps, perhaps the longest standing, completely unassimilated refugee population. The refugee's problem was created by the arab states in 1948 and continues because of them.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 08:35 PM
link   

As for where is Israel and where are the borders? The borders should be the current walled off Gaza Strip, and the West Bank inside the secuirity barrier, those are secure borders which prevent suicide attacks on Israel.


I would agree that a wall is a good idea, but I do not agree on where the wall is.

Israel is not building a wall around itself.

Israel is building a wall around the Palestinians.



That is not an equitable solution.

And we all know the center of it is Al Aqsa.

Israel wants it, but its not for sale, and stealing it means Final Jihad.

Technically under international law the Jerusalem district is under UN administration until final settlement is reached by both parties, but currently under Israeli occupation.

Palestine was not split into two, or even three parts.

It was four, Trans-Jordan, Israel, Palestine, and the Jerusalem District.

[edit on 20-10-2005 by ArchAngel]






top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join