posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 09:58 AM
In the Arab-Israeli conflict, both sides have different stories regarding the history of the conflict. Some so different that it seems that they are
not talking about the same region, One thing that both sides agree on is the UN partition plan of Palestine was rejected by the Arabs and after the
Jewish .declaration of independence the war officially began.
With the plight of the Palestinians in mind I ask the following:
If the Arab countries did not attack Israel, if there were no subversive attempts by Palestinians against Israel and they accepted the Jewish state,
where would the Palestinian have been today?
1-The Palestinians would have had their own country on the Partition plan borders.
2-The Palestinian refugee problem would have been non-existent.
3-Israel would have had a homeland on a much smaller segment of land partitioned to the Jews than today's borders.
Quite an interesting scenario! Arab aggression throughout the 1900s has led to consistent Arab losses. It is almost as if Arab tactics serve
Israel's interest. Instead of the annihilation of Israel, Israel has become a major military and economic power in the middle east – And of course
the most developed and only true democracy in the middle east as well.
I therefore propose that, in contrast, to the Arab rhetoric the Palestinian refugee problem was not created by Israel but rather created by the Arab
states and the Palestinians themselves who insisted on annihilating the Jews rather than accepting them on the small strip of land partitioned to
As a consequence, I also propose that all parties involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict be held responsible for the compensation of the Palestinians
with regards to their plight as well as the Jews displaced from Arab and Muslim lands as a consequence of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Any thoughts on the matter.