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.

 

Israel, the cause of all Arab terrorism...

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 09:54 PM
link   
The country of "Palestine" never existed. But imagine, millions of zionists moving into your home, outnumbering your people and taking over your land. Honestly, I think thats got to suck.




posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
But Valhall, Israel is not occupying any neighboring states as of right now, the only time it did was when it occupied the Sinai Peninsula.

Palestine (West Bank and Gaza Strip) was never created as a state, and is not recognized as a state, it is literally free land for whoever wants to take it over, and currently Israel is firmly entrenched in that region.


Don't be disingenuous, FM. The lands were no-man's lands...which means they were no man's lands. They were a DMZ...and they were up for grabs by the Israelis no more than they were up for grabs by the Palestinians. That is no argument whatsoever.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Valhall, if what you were stating was "historical" fact, then why is it in 1952 Israel gave the right for all people's who lived in Israel before 1948 the right to be Israeli citizens? Who exactly were they trying to push out with Jews if they were allowing non-Jews citizen-ship by that criteria?

The 1948 borders are not defensible and after the 1948 war Egpyt occupied the Gaza Strip and Jordan occupied the West Bank. After 1967 Israel occupied these regions.

As previously stated those two regions have never been a recognized state and therefore it is not illegal by the UN for any nation to invade that region.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scat
But imagine, millions of zionists moving into your home, outnumbering your people and taking over your land. Honestly, I think thats got to suck.


Imagine being kept out of your home for nearly two millennia by one colonial power or another, then being denied a fraction of your historical homeland by squatters who mostly appeared on the scene after Zionists drained the swamps. That's right, the movement of so-called Palestinians into the area was just as contrived and recent as the entry of Zionists.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Scat, ironic you should mention that, considering that the Jews paid for all the land they took until they occupied the West Bank from Jordan and the Gaza from Egypt. The Palestinians that sold their homes were happy and moved to Egypt and Saudi Arabia and so forth and their children received educations there. Then when their children went back they were out-raged their parents sold their land and wanted it back. I think there's a term for that, "Indian Givers". hahahaha.

As for DMZ Valhall? No whatever gave you that idea? Look at the 1948 proposal, all that region is supposed to be two states, Israel and Palestine, only Palestine was never born. The region that was supposed to go to them is up for grabs and has been exchanged between regional powers over the past 5 decades.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
Don't be disingenuous, FM. The lands were no-man's lands...which means they were no man's lands. They were a DMZ...and they were up for grabs by the Israelis no more than they were up for grabs by the Palestinians.


Is that so? Under the writ of the particular occupying power of the time, or by what reasoning?



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:03 PM
link   
FM...there was a buffer zone between Israel and Palestine. You can pick one or the other...that Israel now occupies the buffer zone that was not granted them or the Palestinians, or that Israel now occupies Palestinian lands. There are no other options.

Which one are you going with?

You're the one talking two stories here.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
But Valhall, Israel is not occupying any neighboring states as of right now, the only time it did was when it occupied the Sinai Peninsula.


Just for the record Israel is still "occupying" the Golan Heights. But hey, as soon as Syria stops occupying Lebanon we can talk. Besides, at one time the Arabs said all of the Israel/Palestine region was part of "Greater Syria." They will say anything to illegitimately grab land.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by HeirToBokassa


Is that so? Under the writ of the particular occupying power of the time, or by what reasoning?


What are you asking?



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
What are you asking?


Who's to say what could be done with those lands if someone didn't already control them?



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Valhall you keep making the mistake of assuming there is a "Palestinian land". There isn't, there is the West Bank and Gaza strip which have a lot of people who call themselves Palestinians but is techincally anyone's land. The Palestinians rejected the UN creation, or at least the Arabs ruined it for them and would continue to ruin it for them if the Palestinians ever decided to say that there IS an Israel, it exists along such and such boundaries and there IS a Palestine that exists along these such and such boundaries.

Then you'd have Arabs trying to mess up the entire situation.

So all I'm saying is you can't say that history justifies Israel return to 1948, sure it is a good place to "start" new, because that was where the discussions were going on, but no one in the Arab world wanted an Israel then either. So first you can't go back to 1948, you just can't move all the business and equipment and infrastructure and people that belong to Israel to those borders.

Second, if you did, the Arabs and Arab nationalists would attack and try to finish Israel off, rejecting the proposal anyways, and so the justification for Israel dominating the entire conflict region would be not hypothetical but a fact.

So there's just no assurance with the 1948 border...again this is why I created a post stating that Israel is being forced to become an Apartheid state.

Israel can't return to 1948 borders, or probably even 1967, and the Palestinians just wont' accept a state, especially with what land is "left" as of right now, and the Arabs just won't take in Palestinians into their lands.

Thus leaving the Palestinians in a limbo much like the Bantu of South Africa.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Happy? Happy to sell their homes and move to Egypt? What? If any of them were happy, then WHY IS THERE A WAR GOING ON?

True, the jews were pretty persucuted too. Honestly, I dont think theres any way you can side with one group or the other. Theres too much pain for everyone.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:10 PM
link   
The U.N.! for Christ's sake!

The partitioning plan of 1947!

Listen, if you haven't even looked into this situation and are doing nothing but talking at it from an unresearched bigoted position, you're probably not going to get much from the discussion.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:12 PM
link   
That is correct, I was leaving out the Golan Heights, which could be returned to Syria and it's such a small peice of land, but since it had nothing to do with Palestinians, I pretty much ignored it.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
The U.N.! for Christ's sake!


The UN didn't control the land. It can be your position that the UN had authority then, or has authority now, but don't expect that to be everyone's position.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
Valhall you keep making the mistake of assuming there is a "Palestinian land". There isn't, there is the West Bank and Gaza strip which have a lot of people who call themselves Palestinians but is techincally anyone's land. The Palestinians rejected the UN creation, or at least the Arabs ruined it for them and would continue to ruin it for them if the Palestinians ever decided to say that there IS an Israel, it exists along such and such boundaries and there IS a Palestine that exists along these such and such boundaries.


The record shows that the Arab side of the situation was noncompliant in every attempt prior to the partitioning. And it showed that they did not "accept" the partitioning. BUT, they did not act against the partitioning. And they were under no requirement to "accept" the partitioning in order to be recognized. The partitioning recognized them. They are recognized despite their own bull-headedness.

See, your comments are the type of twisted bull-crap statements that help keep this situation muddied. There is a Palestine. There is an accepted and issued U.N. Resolution saying so. That they have never gotten their act together and now the world community is in such a gimped up fashion that we don't even know we should have already recognized "their nation" the first time they requested recognition, is pretty much beside the fact, because the gimped nature of the world community comes from the fact the damned borders of screwed up!

The partitioning plan created "Palestine"...for the first time in history as a matter of fact. And if we went back to 1948, we could recognize the nation of Palestine and take it from there. I have little to no hope the Palestinians would handled it well, but at least we would be approaching the situation from the proper point.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by HeirToBokassa

Originally posted by Valhall
The U.N.! for Christ's sake!


The UN didn't control the land. It can be your position that the UN had authority then, or has authority now, but don't expect that to be everyone's position.


Well, I reject your stance completely, so we probably won't see eye to eye at all. You are speaking from a two-faced stance of saying that the Jewish Homeland should be there - which only happened by the U.N. resolution - but that the terms of the resolution don't apply...okay, that makes no sense whatsoever.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Valhall, was that directed to me? Did you not read anything I said? I have never said that the UN's original partitioning was a bad idea but that it is currently no longer an option. (I did get the date wrong but big whoop lol).

Because it's not an option for numerous reasons, mainly defense, that the hopes of creating a Palestinian state are all but shattered. Not that they ever really wanted that anyway, the idea of creating an independent Palestinian state was not again brought up after 1948 until the 1970s and 80s, and it was first brought up by more foriegners than by Israelis, Palestinians and never by surrounding Arab states. Maybe Egypt, since the return of Sinai Israel and Egypt's relations have improved, so I don't know their policy on a soveriegn Palestine.

Scat, did you not read anything I said?

The Palestinians that sold their land were happy, ecstatic, their children were pissed and returned to lead the refugees who were of course pissed.

The refugees are not Israel's fault but Jordan's, who gained control of the West Bank and completely displaced the Palestinians there and would not allow citizenship to them or to those fleeing the combat areas.

After several wars the Palestinians became nobody's people and Yassir became a greater unifier and the whole terrorism thing began budding.

But when the Israelis had legitimately been partitioned land, they had only purchased land from Palestinians to move in. All the violence and extremism on both sides is by younger generations.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:23 PM
link   
The UN Partitioned land, but Palestine is not recognized, when the voting for creating the states of Israel and Palestine broke down, with the Arab states leaving, Israel declared itself independent and the Arabs invaded the entire region regardless of the partitioning. Hence the current West Bank borders as opposed to the 1948 borders which were much different.

USA and Soviet Union immediately recognized Israel and no one today recognizes any existence of Palestine as a state, because there is no Palestinian government. If there were one government, negotiations would probably be much more productive.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeMason
The UN Partitioned land, but Palestine is not recognized, when the voting for creating the states of Israel and Palestine broke down, with the Arab states leaving, Israel declared itself independent and the Arabs invaded the entire region regardless of the partitioning. Hence the current West Bank borders as opposed to the 1948 borders which were much different.


This is not true.

Since you are hell-bent on speaking pre-conceived, non-factual statements, I will leave you with at least this list of HISTORICAL REFERENCE DOCUMENTS...maybe you'll take the time to read what really happened.

Balfour and the Mandatory Years

References:

1. Memoirs of the Peace Conference, Volume II

2. Balfour Declaration

3. Sykes-Picot Agreement

4. McMahon- Hussein Letter

5. An Interim Report on the Civil Administration of Palestine

6. Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations

7. The Palestine Mandate

8. Conferences on Palestine

9. British White Paper of June 1922

10. www.britishempire.co.uk...

11. www.yale.edu...

12. www.bartleby.com...

13. Report of the Peel Commission

14. British White Paper of 1939

15. Anglo-American Committee for Inquiry

16. Resolution 104


Zionism and Arab Nationalism

References:

1. "The Affair" - The case of Alfred Dreyfus

2. Theodor Herzl

3. World History Encyclopedia

4. First Zionist Congress

5. www.jafi.org.il...

6. The Uganda Proposal

7. The Zionist Congresses 1 Through 12

8. The Paris Peace Conference

9. Zionist Organization Proposal to Paris Peace Conference

10. Six Months in Paris that Changed the World

11. War World I and Arab Nationalism

13. www.oberlin.edu...

14. King-Crane Commission Report

15. www.alnakba.org...

16. The Birth of the Jewish Agency

17. The Biltmore Document

18. Balfour and the Mandatory Years


UNSCOP and the Partitioning Plan

References:

1. Cadogan Letter to U.N.

2. Letter from Iraqi Government

3. Telegram from Egyptian Government

4. Letter from Saudi Government

5. Telegram from Lebanese Government

6. Telegram from Syrian Government

7. Additional Item to Agenda

8. Background Paper No. 47

9. General Committee Decision on Considering Palestine

10. UNSCOP Report

11. U.K. ACCEPTS UNSCOP GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS

12. domino... .un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/a8c17fca1b8cf 5338525691b0063f769/$FILE/gapal03.pdf" target="_blank" class="postlink">The Arab Case Stated by Mr. Jamal Husseini

13. U.S. Position on Palestine Question

14. Resolution 181


The Buck and the Bulldozer

References:

1. Israel: U.S. Foreign Assitance

2. A Conservative Total for U.S. Aid to Israel: $91 Billionand Counting

3. Ariel Sharon

4. The Haganah

5. King David Hotel Bombing

6. Telegram to U.N. Dated 9 July 1948

7. Letter to U.N. Dated 10 July 1948

8. Letter to U.N. Dated 16 October 1953

9. electronicintifada.net...

10. U.N. Security Council Record of 29 October 1953

11. U.N. Resolution 101

12. Baltimore Sun Article of August 1995

13. The Crimes of Ariel Sharon

14. U.N. Resolution 521

15. Letter to U.N. dated 20 September, 1982

16. Resolution ES- 7/9

17. Transcript: "The Accused"

18. The BBC vs. Ariel Sharon

19. electronicintifada.net...




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join