politix of the week: Israel court bans 'human shields'

[Mac_Bug]

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/10/06/israel.shields.ap/


Israel's Supreme Court on Thursday banned the military's practice of using Palestinian civilians as "human shields" in arrest raids, saying it violates international law...

The human shield practice became an issue in the spring of 2002, when the Israeli military carried out a major offensive in the West Bank in response to a series of suicide bombings by Palestinian militants.

During arrest raids, soldiers would sometimes force Palestinian civilians to approach the homes and hideouts of wanted people.

In August 2002, a 19-year-old Palestinian student, Nidal Daraghmeh, was killed in such an incident in the West Bank town of Tubas.

At the time, troops called Daraghmeh out of his house and forced him to knock at the door of a neighboring building where a senior Hamas fugitive was hiding out. Gunfire erupted and Daraghmeh was killed....

Effie Eitam, an Israeli lawmaker and a former general, lambasted the judges.

"This ruling ties the hands of the army," Eitam told Army Radio. "The judges are cut off from reality since we are located in the center of the world struggle of terror groups against free and democratic societies."

[Da_Fish]

Effie Eitam, an Israeli lawmaker and a former general, lambasted the judges.

"This ruling ties the hands of the army," Eitam told Army Radio. "The judges are cut off from reality since we are located in the center of the world struggle of terror groups against free and democratic societies."


What an asshole. Basically he's saying to the judges:

OMG HaXx0rz!!!1 We cant use teh IMBA nemore!

Well, at least the judges made the right decision.

[MusedMark]

"This ruling ties the hands of the army," Eitam told Army Radio. "The judges are cut off from reality since we are located in the center of the world struggle of terror groups against free and democratic societies."

I'm sorry, but someone needs a reallity check, Eitam is in need of some serious prison time.

I'm too mad to say how annoying and narrow minded this all is, good on the judges, the world is one small step closer to being civilised.

[Alliance]

Ok, that article kinda makes it look as if human shields are used on a day to day basis, which is completely wround and if personaly plain offensive.

While the idea of using someone as a "human shield" is horrible and groteste at best, the term is being used in an unjust manor. the woman was not sent out there to be used as a lead spong, but to try and take said terrorists guard down so forces could take him down easier, with less possible damage, hopefully. this method has been used several times and it usually works well, unfortunatly o nsome occasions it did not. while im not condeming the use of such methods or the court for making such rules, i think it shoudl be clear what is truely happening, since what i've heard from most people abotu the country is total BS.

[ChunkyMrEvil]

Yeah but still, armed soldiers with training and lots of their buddies hiding behind unarmed, innocent civilians. It's just not right.

[Shas'ui]

^^I agree^^
It just isn't right for professionally trained military soldiers to even think about let alone actual use people as a shield.

[Alliance]

Its funny that when the US does it every day in iraq nobody complains, but once israel does it, its the bigest disseaster since humpty dumpty fell off the wall.
the troops arent using the people as direct shields, they are using them to try and take over the situation in a calmer manner than a firefight, which like i stated before, usually works.

[Mac_Bug]

Just ask yourself this Alliance:

Would the IDF do the same thing if they have to bust a Jewish terror cell?

[Alliance]

I cannot answer such a question, and you know that.

[Mac_Bug]

Why not?

[Alliance]

If i was to say yes, you would'nt belive me, saying that the county would never do such a thing to its own citizens, or some the likewise answer.
If i was to say no, they would not do such a thing, you would go on to try and proove that we are being unjust and racist in our fight. and while such things are true to a degree and im ashamed of it, I cannot answer such a question with a true belive in it, becuase A. I do now know what our doverment would do, and B. I dont know what I would do.

[Mac_Bug]

if you said yes, I would ask whether you would volunteer for the job.

[Alliance]

thats a complicated question. I would of vonunteered for the job if i knew the person that they wanted to arrest, and i knew that i could somehow save both his and other innocent people's life, because i belive that the risk is worth it in such a case. It would be much harder for me to convince myself to act in such a mannor if i did not know the terrorist. i guess its a matter of cirtumstances.

[Rincewind]

So, tying up kids on the hood of a jeep to stop them thar evil terrorists from using their "Slingshot 3000" WMDs is all just and good? Take a reality check, Alliance. You can't defend horrible, barbaric acts no matter who they are commited by, and to be honest soldiers usually fill that "horrible and barbaric" category pretty well.

Besides, it's "Freedom Fighter", not "Terrorist". ;)

[Alliance]

first of all, i have no idea where you got that first question from, second of all, i called both the israely and the arab terrorists, because that what they both are.

[Rincewind]

It was in the article on Yahoo! news. I'll try to find a link.

EDIT: Found it.

link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051006/ts_nm/mideast_shields_dc;_ylt=AnLbDDh930fw0E8TNBtV_ehZ.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl)


Rights activists deplored the "shields" practice, giving an example of a 13-year-old Palestinian boy caught on film in 2004 tied to the hood of an army jeep during rock-throwing protests by Palestinians in a West Bank village.

Rights groups said the army had repeatedly violated the earlier injunction because it left leeway for field commanders to press Palestinian civilians into service with their consent by persuading them their lives would not be endangered.

"I am concerned that when an army unit comes at night, no one would refuse to cooperate out of fear," Barak wrote. "Ninety-nine times out of 100, it is not free will."

I wouldn't trust CNN on any Mid-east related coverage...

[Alliance]

never heard of such a thing, and personaly i refuse to belive that article.

[Rincewind]

Figured you would. Too bad there's the needle of video evidence to pop the bubble of your self-delusion.

[Scribble]

Calm Rince. Everyone defends their own military to a point.

I suspect alliance will admit this tactic is ultimately immoral, yet eminately understandable on the ground.

However, I firmly believe that such moral descisions should not be taken by soldiers. In a similiar vein cluster munitions, land-mines and DU shells make tactical sence. But are not perhaps worth their ultimate humanitarian and moral impact.

[Mac_Bug]

mine the palestinian/israeli border, now there's an idea, coming soon DMZ 2

[Rincewind]

He didn't say that. He said they are useful, but unethical, which I agree with.

There's a difference in defending your countries actions and burying your head in the sand.

[Tails]

mine the palestinian/israeli border

Oh yeah, that would work since the Great Wall of Israel was an idea embraced all over the world. :rolleyes:

[Mac_Bug]

:hippy:

[trebmal_ca]

I find it ironic that israel's, treat palestiniens, the sameway the nazi treated them.

[Starfisher]

So far as I'm aware, the Jews didn't suicide bomb anywhere in Germany.

[trebmal_ca]

no, but the nazis did round up people they didnt like and put them in a ghetto, where they had no chance of a future, under military rule, sound familliar?

[Hablacraja]

Not especially.

[trebmal_ca]

so you never heard of the warsaw ghettos?

hab, learn some history

[Mac_Bug]

I think he should refer to the whole bit about Jews ruining Germany or whatever rhetoric Hitler used, the bottom line was it was all done for a good cause in the eye of the beholder or something.

[motiv-8]

You cannot compare Israel with Nazi Germany. Not only is that factually incorrect, it's morally wrong to make such a connection.

[Ishaar Niirfa]

I hardly think the Israelis treat the Palestinians as badly as the Nazis did the Jews. Neither did Jews go and blow themselves up in the middle of a German crowd. Nevertheless, there is an uncanny similarity between Israel and Nazi Germany. Both are very authoritarian and militarily based. Both oppress a minority (which in the case of Israel isn't likely to remain a minority for long) within their borders. Both have shown they have little regard for human rights. But there is no reason to say that Israel is exactly or even half as bad as Nazi Germany in its human rights violations.

It is bad though, and I wouldn't say that Palestinian reactions (which I also incidentally disagree with) justify Israeli tactics (after all, the Israeli conquered the Gaza Strip and the West Bank before the Palestinian resistance existed).

Furthermore (and forgive me for saying this) Israel doesn't really have a legitimate reason to exist. Don't look at me like I'm crazy. It doesn't. It was born out of colonialism and even has less of a reason to exist than other colonial-born nations such as the United States. Essentially, the British simply handed it over after World War II in compensation for the tragedies of the Holocaust.

And don't tell me that the Israelis have ethnically inherited the "holy land" either. They didn't. The large majority of Jews in Israel are descended from European or American Jews and are not (ethnically speaking) semetic. In fact, the Arabs are more semetic than they are. The majority of Israelis can trace their ancestry back to the Khazar Turks of Russia whose descendants later would migrate into Eastern Europe. The idea that Jew is an ethnicity is a myth built out of the Jewish tradition of passing on the heritage of Judaism through the mother of a child, hence giving it a tribe-like culture. This is similar to the Mormons, who are similarly treated as a group that passes as more than a religious group which stems from their tradition of genealogical studies and baptizing their dead.

The Arabs on the other hand are descended from the same Semites that came into Mesopotamia several thousand years ago and conquered it from the native Sumerians. From there the Semites spread in many directions, becoming the Hebrews, the Arabs, the Babylonians, the Assyrians, the Syrians, and the Caananites. Today these groups make up most of the population of Iraq, the various Arab nations, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Kuwait. In fact, the so-called Palestinians are most likely descended in part from the Hebrews.

That does not mean I hate Jews. Hardly. I think Judaism is a great religion and bears many similarities to Islam (which I also incidentally think is a great religion) and Christianity. I know many Jews who are some of my best friends. But strictly speaking, I don't think that Isreal is in the right and I don't think it ever was (also don't mistake this for me thinking that the way the Palestinians are fighting back is right, because I don't). I do think this is an improvement.

And alliance, to answer your question: yes, I would be outraged if I had heard about the United States using human shields and as it is I oppose many policies of the United States military. Don't assume that an American citizen, no matter if he is a loyal citizen or not, will just stand down and go with the policies of his nation. If you truly are patriotic it is your duty to condemn Israel for its actions. Nothing justifies human shields, not even if you think the opponent won't fire on you or if they'll become demoralized and confused. It is the duty of the military to keep civilians out of warfare.

Show me one documented incident of human shield tactics by the US and I'll lombast my government's military decisions abroad even harder than I already do.

[Mac_Bug]

Sometimes i wonder why we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq to restore a democratic government but nobody bothers to 'free' the Palestinian people and clean out that terror camp.

[Tails]

...but nobody bothers to 'free' the Palestinian people and clean out that terror camp.

http://www.microframecorp.com/images/tick_disp+ticket.jpg

[General Nuke Em]

...but nobody bothers to 'free' the Palestinian people and clean out that terror camp.
The Israelis have been trying for a generation. But don't worry, we'll get around to them eventually. After the places that pose a greater threat to the United States are freed first.

[Tails]

Unless the United States frees itself.

[Starfisher]

Heh. Freed.

[molo]

Unfortunately, Israel's idea of "cleaning out that terror camp" involves killing and/or bulldozing the camp and the surrounding five blocks or village, rather than actually fixing the problems the formation of Israel caused.

I'm inclined to agree with Ishaar regarding the validity of the Israeli state. The mideast was unstable before Israel was created, sure, but it's become a disaster since. Justifying ridiculous and disgusting military tactics simply can't be done here or ever. The Jews in Israel are so terrified of being slaughtered again that they're attempting to eliminate their neighbors; this is understandable but unacceptable. If Israel had been created in Harlem (for example: it's absurd, but you get the picture) the same thing would be happening, except the terrorists wouldn't be Palestinian.

[Alliance]

@Ishtar: I DO condeme the actions that the military use, BUT I am trying to explain to those of you who dont see this happening, and only hear it from biased sources(the pro phalestinian CNN, or the anti-war BBC), what actually happens, and why, while foul, the actions done are explainable, unlike other actions that our troopers have took during the prolonged fight between the laft intifada and this one.

also, before (well, after) someone says that israel is'nt trying to progress freedome, I notice you take a look at the 16th last month in your local news archive, since thats the date when the gaza strip was returned to phalestinian managment, and hopefully full autonomy in the coming years.

[General Nuke Em]

If Israel had been created in Harlem I doubt Israel would have suffered as many suicide bombings as it has. New York City doesn't exactly have the same level of hatred for the zionist infidels as the Arabs do.

Starfisher, my bad. Of course I meant liberated. ;)

[Tails]

Saying that Israel doesn't have a right to exist makes no sense. Why would ANY country have a right to exist? I don't think any treaty or document from a third party justifies putting a stopper in an entire nation's existence.

[Ishaar Niirfa]

@Ishtar: I DO condeme the actions that the military use, BUT I am trying to explain to those of you who dont see this happening, and only hear it from biased sources(the pro phalestinian CNN, or the anti-war BBC),

You know, if this situation wasn't so serious and tragic I'd probably have burst out laughing when you said that. I mean seriously, CNN, pro-Palestinian? BBC, anti-war? Sure, they're more left-winged than FOX news but I'd hardly say either of those apply. When I was in Britain I was astounded by British media's outright conservatism considering the great reputation it has amongst lefties here in the US. They even had a news report where they got two guys to dress up like a Scotsman and a Frenchman and show signs over them displaying the "British model of economy" and the "French model". They looked more like laundry detergent commercials than a real effort at journalism.

In addition, it seems to me that CNN often seems pretty impartial and general US opinion is pro-Israel believe it or not. It's just that more lefties hang out on forums. As this is so it would be pretty stupid for CNN to outright support Israel and I'm sure they don't (I haven't seen any evidence in all the time I've lived here - which is incidentally ALL MY LIFE).

Perhaps the international versions are more liberally inclined. If so, don't base your opinion of American and British policy on it. The US at least is very much pro-Israel.

Also, about the progress of freedom - yeah, I'm happy the Israelis finally withdrew from the Gaza Strip. But if you recall much of the government and Israeli citizenry were anti-withdrawl. That says something about Israel's desire (aside from Sharon) to "free the Palestinians". Also, from what I've heard the Israelis aren't letting go of the West Bank (the most populous and economically rich Palestinian region) any time soon. I wouldn't call the Gaza Strip withdrawl particularly generous in that context, much as the US's concessions to Amerindians to live in Okhlahoma (at least for a while) wasn't exactly kind-hearted.

[Mac_Bug]

Israel as a whole to the outside world seems oblivious to the needs and sufferings of the Palestinians in the region, anything can simply be justified in the name of security for Israelis, so excuse anyone who might want to speak against it, even the likes of CNN. Why would a country with a GDP rivaling Spain need billions of dollars in 'aid' every year? Israel likes to play the role of the victim; Israel likes to keep itself a Jewish state so it gets to call anyone who oppose it antisemite, and for the only country in the whole neighborhood to have proclaimed democracy, it sure enjoys shaping its own borders and choose who gets to participate in it. In fact if you ask most Israel supporters, Palestine shouldn't even exist (sounds familiar?), the whole farce about recognizing Palestinian authority is merely convenient to keep Palestinians from becoming Israelis and having someone to blame whenever a suicide bomb goes off, which of course, are the results of terrorists who hate freedom and hate Jews because they are Jews.

Moving ten thousand Israeli this summer required billions of dollars (from the US, no less), and yet destruction of Palestinian buildings under the same banner of security for Israel goes unprotested and uncompensated. Critics of the withdraw argue that it'll only boost terrorism and perhaps they are right: because if it weren't for 'security', Israel would've never given up that piece of Gaza.

[Progenitor]

all kinds of media are biased one way or another.

and if israel was to give in to palestinian demands and return them what was rightfuly their's, the whole of israel would be gone.

the fault doesn't lie with israel as a country, it's WHO made israel exist. which i think points to the british who relocated and gave the jews israel as a state in time long since passed.

[Mac_Bug]

I don't subscribe to the whole Israel shouldn't exist thing as I don't think it solves any problems... it makes as much sense as kicking Canadians out of Canada so the natives can self destruct by sniffing glue without their casino income. Land or no land, holy ground or not, at its core I think the problem is still one of class struggle. Help the Palestinians prosper and nobody will whine about this or that strip. Seriously, you think those suicide bombers actually believe in the virgin in heaven crap?

[TheDeadlyShoe]

I'm sure some or even most do.

[Mac_Bug]

Must be pretty rare then otherwise them Palestinians would be lining up at Israeli checkpoints with bombs

[molo]

You haven't seen the photos? It's like that one scene in Life of Brian where the guys are waiting in line for crucifixion.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

you said the suicide bombers, not the ones throwing rocks, mac.

[Vijil]

They believe it.

You think the 9/11 pilots actually believed it? You think the London bombers believed it? Of course they did.

I believe in my own faith enough that I'd happily die for it; fortunately that's not a part of my faith. Be pretty meaningless if I only half believed in it. These guys are much the same, the difference being that a conservative translation of their holy book gives far more justification for suicide stuff.

That's part of Israels problem. Mohammed himself said something along the lines of "kill the Jew and the Infidel wherever you find him". Now I don't know about the context there, or whether most normal Muslims would consider that to be a passage which should be followed nowadays... but you can see how some Islamic folk could interpret it in a bad way. The same thing happens in Christianity often enough, leading to various cults and sects and such.

Yasser Arafat, bless his heart, was a radical Muslim and believed a literal interpretation of that passage so how the hell he got that Nobel prize I have no idea. He is quoted as saying on many occasions that he would not rest until the nation of Israel ceased to exist. It's good that he's gone. Til he was out, that was the sort of enemy Israel was facing. As far as I can tell the current situation isn't much better.

[Moe]

no, but the nazis did round up people they didnt like and put them in a ghetto, where they had no chance of a future, under military rule, sound familliar?

I was under the impression that the nazis rounded up people they didn't like and put them in labor camps before killing them.

[molo]

Well, there was this place called Warsaw (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto), see. The Nazis had to crawl before they could walk.

[Bonnet]

Actually vijil that is not true, you are only supposed to kill infidels. Jews and Christans are considerd "People of the Book", which means we are actually protected by the Koran because Muslim faith originated from them, and both infact all worship the same god. Infact it directly violates the Koran to kill people of the book.

[WalkerK19]

Heck, some muslim populace in a local forum that I active in, really hate Israel. Maybe it's just me, but I grew tired reading their comments (yes, some of them just rant about it and typing JIHAD and like that, mostly they just refer from Mohammed's passage.) in my Fight Club subforum. I really enjoy the debate here since I can find usefull informations from your point of views.
:read:

Reading Ishaar's post about the country SHOULDN'T have existed is pretty interesting.

The suicide bomber's do believe in heavenly virgin (more likely they will be going to hell and get spank). Aside from that, it's the idea of defending religion (propaganda, suppression) that really give them motivation to blow their own guts... and brains. Like what uncle Sam would say ,"... ask what you can do for your country".

zbobet2012: I haven't heard/read that passage from the Koran. Most radical muslim in my fight club think otherwise.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

I think Islam in general views Christians and Jews in a similar way to the way the different Christian Churches view each other. They're not true believers but at least they've got the general idea, sort of thing.

[Vijil]

I'm pretty sure that's not the case noze. Perhaps the more liberal ones yeah, but not normally.

I for example don't believe that 90+ % of Catholics are in fact Christian, and I'm not *that* conservative.

zbobet, you must be reading a different version than the one I've heard quoted heh

[Ishaar Niirfa]

I hardly think that getting rid of Israel nowadays would do any good, Mac_Bug, I agree with you on that point. But my point is that Israel's continuous claim of "inheriting" the area is delusional at best and an outright lie at worst.

Also, vijil, from what I've seen of your posts on Christianity, you are pretty conservative, you're just not at the end of the spectrum. Most theologians consider Catholicism to be a branch of Christianity and it is in fact one of the older forms, Protestantism is a pretty recent development (and really there is no such branch of Christianity as Protestantism anyway).

[molo]

I for example don't believe that 90+ % of Catholics are in fact Christian, and I'm not *that* conservative. um.

[SquidDNA]

Vijil, did you know that 118% of statistics are made up on the spot?

[Harmanoff]

The solution to the entire problem has already been posted:
Help the Palestinians prosper and nobody will whine about this or that strip.This is obviously much easier to say than to do but ultimately, if the conflict is to be solved, which both israelis and palestinians say they desire, you're going to have to take away peoples motivation to fight. This cannot be done with force and never could be. You don't blow yourself up if you look at yourself and your life and figure you have more to lose than to gain.. presently alot of people don't see it that way.

[molo]

while foul, the actions done are explainable, unlike other actions that our troopers have took during the prolonged fight between the laft intifada and this one.
Going back up the thread a bit, this makes me extremely uncomfortable. You're saying that the use of civilians in raids (including tying them to jeep hoods) isn't the worst of what's going on? I'd kind of like to know what other fucked-up atrocities have been taking place.

[motiv-8]

Squid, that didn't appear to be a statistic; it was an estimated opinion.

Personally molo, I find suicide bombing to be more atrocious than tying someone to a car. However, I would understand if you don't to play weights&measures with crimes.

[molo]

motiv - he specifically said "our troopers", which I'm taking to mean Israeli soldiers. Technically the terrorists will always be more atrocious, but the Israel conflict has always seemed to draw a very thin line.

Still, I can see how a suicide bomber could 'outweigh' tying someone to a car. Keep in mind however that someone is being tied against their will to a car driving through a war zone.

[Scribble]

Going back up the thread a bit, this makes me extremely uncomfortable. You're saying that the use of civilians in raids (including tying them to jeep hoods) isn't the worst of what's going on? I'd kind of like to know what other fucked-up atrocities have been taking place.

It involves naked hooded people tied to a chair, being asked very serious questions by very very serious people.

Which all in all I consider perhaps the worst part of it all. But thats another topic for another time.

Regarding Isreals Right to exist: Its got a damn site better case than Canada, Australia or the US. Both sides have a very distorted view of the picture, There was an Isreal in waiting in 1940, just as there is a palastine in waiting now.

...Furthermore the suffering of the palastinians is sadly paled by that of the Nubians in Sudan, who have a genocidal campain waged against them by Arabs (who are not native to the region). Just like Anglo-Saxons cmmited Genocide against the aboriginal peoples of the Americas.

Back to the original question. IS tying people to the bonnet of your car justifiable? No. Is it understandable? Yes. Hell, even as a paid up member of Amnesty International (http://www.amnesty.org/) I cant say what I would do if a I had to confrount a people trying to kill me, shouting how they would like to kill my family and exterminate my nation. Would I care enough not to tie one of those people to the bonnet of my car in the hopes his brother wouldnt shoot me? I dont know, do you?

[motiv-8]

Why does Israel have more of a right to exist than Canada or the United States? As Ishaar has shown, the religious/cultural ties are in actuality not there (assuming that the information is correct, as I believe it to be). Therefore what you have left are political and militaristic reasons for the existence of Israel. The Zionists declared Israel an independent free state and won the proceeding wars to cement their declaration. The United States declared itself independent from the United Kingdom and fought two wars to prove it. Both nations came to being as the result of colonialism. I'd say they're on pretty even footing for the right to exist.

[Ishaar Niirfa]

[Scribble], I disagree. True, I wouldn't say that the United States or other colonial nations have a legitimate right to exist, neither that matter do any other nations, which are essentially all formed on conquest. I mentioned this in my earlier post. What makes Israel more illegitimate is the fact that it was set up as a Jews-only nation and was built as a way of compensating for a problem that had been ignored for too long by the European continent - that of anti-Semitism. Hence Israel was built out of guilt, not out of economic or political reasons.

It was set up on top of an unwilling Arab population, who had existed there far longer than the Israelis, who were, as previously mentioned, ethnically not Semites and hence did not "inherit" Israel. Israel was created from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire out of the British colony of Trans-Jordan and it was only after World War II that the British and UN decided to finally create a Jewish state within a Muslim world. All in all, it was irresponsible and a easy way out of the Holocaust's aftermath. It neither solved the problem of anti-Semetism nor did it make a smooth transition from colonialism to independence.

The Arab population has since then viewed Israel has a continuation of the occupation forced on them by the British after the Ottoman Empire's collapse. They justifiably view Israel as a symbol of Western imperialism and have fought back. That is why Israel is not legitimate, not because it was created colonially but because it greatly intensified the already fragile geopolitical structure of the Middle East and because it is a state made specifically for a religion rather than a people.

And to answer your question - yes. I'm sure there are plenty of Iraqis right now who would like to kill me and my family simply for being Americans, a nation they know by its occupation of their country. Would I tie an Iraqi to the top of my van and drive like that into Iraq? No. I would not.

[motiv-8]

Ishaar, where did you find your information on the ethnic makeup of Jews in Israel today. Was it a book or online source? I'd like to study that further.

To be fair, the '47 UN Mandate was supposed to divide British Palestine into two separate countries, one for Jewish Palestinians and one for Arab Palestinians. The Jews agreed, the Arabs rejected the plan. This could be countered by the above points, I suppose.


[EDIT] found this information on Wikipedia :
"Current genetic studies show that "Jewish Y-DNA tends to come from the Middle East, and... studies that take into account mtDNA show that many Jewish populations are related to neighboring non-Jewish groups maternally". While these studies also show that some Ashkenazim have non-Jewish, Eastern European ancestors, they contradict claims that the Ashkenazim were primarily descended from Khazars."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars
Then again it's wikipedia so I guess take it at face value

[n0z3k1ll3r]

Israel may or may not have a right to exist, but removing it now is going to cause more problems. What is a far more reasonable idea is moving it's borders back to those originally layed out by the UN in the late 40s. That's still far from a perfect solution (the Arabs really got the short end of the stick there), but it'd be a damn sight better than the current situation.

Unfortunately I don't see the Israeli Revisionists accepting such a move...

[TheDeadlyShoe]

The Arab population has since then viewed Israel has a continuation of the occupation forced on them by the British after the Ottoman Empire's collapse. They justifiably view Israel as a symbol of Western imperialism and have fought back. That is why Israel is not legitimate, not because it was created colonially but because it greatly intensified the already fragile geopolitical structure of the Middle East and because it is a state made specifically for a religion rather than a people.

Israel is at least as legitimate as many of the states that declare their opposition to it. Also, it's easily argued that Jew is an ethnicity as much as a religion. The last point also puts an unreasonable standard up- would Israel be fine if there were other Jewish states? If not, then why are other religiously based states acceptable? In any case, Israel has shown at least a general tendency to prevention of governmental religious oppression.

Noze: Well, the problem there..have you seen the lines?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fe/1947-UN-Partition-Plan-1949-Armistice-Comparison.png/213px-1947-UN-Partition-Plan-1949-Armistice-Comparison.png

Maybe that would be workable in the future, but with attacks still ongoing, it doesn't seem like it would work out now.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

I know it looks utterly utterly stupid on a map... but it was at least at the time based loosely on the ethnicity of the areas, so there was a reason behind it. Said ethnicity of the areas has changed since then so a redrawing of the borders might be in order, but suffice to say the current ones are pretty bad...

Palestine by and large had nothing to do with any of the Arab Israeli wars, so I fail to see why it should suffer for them.

[Nurizeko]

"This ruling ties the hands of the army," Eitam told Army Radio. "The judges are cut off from reality since we are located in the center of the world struggle of terror groups against free and democratic societies."

Dick, this guy needs a good slap and a prison sentence so he can contemplate why he's such a dick and doesnt deserve human freedoms.


never heard of such a thing, and personaly i refuse to belive that article.

So your saying that isreali's and everyone else rightfully so should dislike halocaust deniers but, when isreali troops use civilians as sheilds, middle-men, whatever, when the role of civilians in modern war is strictly considored in its most lamen sense, a neutral position that shouldnt be involved, thats its perfectly okay to deny these happenings?.

Talk about out there alliance...


...or the anti-war BBC

Wow, anti-war, evil bias news-source with its own agenda, right :rofl: , im sorry alliance, i just dont get what your smoking, of course the BBC is anti-war, if more news agencies were in general anti-war, then maybe, just maybe, the world would be a better place, of course the BBC wants to see the palistinians and isreali's find peace, i mean, do you WANT isreal to continue its opression of a people?, do you think that the current system of occupation, raids and other opressive activities of an ethnic group make isreal look like the good guy in all this?.

I dont like Hamas, and how some palistinians want to handle the problem but saying that, where im from, its hard to see isreal as the poor beseiged dears fighting for freedom and democracy, when its palistinian homes getting bulldozed, and palistinians costantly putting up with military tactics that frankly, are considored near or above extreme, in my country.



And to answer your question - yes. I'm sure there are plenty of Iraqis right now who would like to kill me and my family simply for being Americans, a nation they know by its occupation of their country. Would I tie an Iraqi to the top of my van and drive like that into Iraq? No. I would not.

Hear, hear.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fe/1947-UN-Partition-Plan-1949-Armistice-Comparison.png/213px-1947-UN-Partition-Plan-1949-Armistice-Comparison.png
Okay, now this just convinces me further that the UN werent paying attention, if the map looks that stupid an un-weildy in plan, it should have convinced them that a jewish state was a bad idea, nazism was defeated, the western world was protecting the jews, the call for a jewish state was silly and the UN sillier for listening to it.

Maybe we should give scientologists their own state?.

My point being that unless a religion already had a state (the vatican) and so forth, then creating one purely for religious reasons on other peoples land is always gonig to cause trouble, and as we can see, its only given us decades of muslim distrust and even hate towards the west, and remains a constant thorn in the side of world democracy and peace.

I wouldnt agree with disolving the isreali state now, it exists, for better or for worse, but i do think the isreali's can do much more to helping creating a palistinian state, and i think other countries should get more involved, i would actually like the idea of isreali returning to its original border (outside west bank and gaza) and UN forces patrolling it.

I dont have the perfect solution but, i can emagine a situation becomming better if people on both sides would learn some fucking human compassion and empathy, but lets not be niave, people on both sides would rather see both of them die in a total war and ethnic cleansing then find a common peace and prosperity.

[Harmanoff]

I for one feel that a one state solution is the only way looking at those maps and even more so if you look at maps of the israeli highway net(which i can't find of course :/). Every palestinian area is crossed with dozens of highways they have no access to and the israelis control most of the water supply.

But of course, i realise none of the parties want that. The israelis want a jewish state, the palestinians.. well, don't want to be governed by the israelis at least. My hope is that if the conflict is indeed settled and things actually remain peaceful for decades now, tensions might ease up so much that one state becomes an option allthough one being faaar into the future.

[No Surrender]

It takes far more courage to be a suicide bomber than it does to tie a civilian up to a hood of a car and drive around a warzone. I find the Israeli tactics cowardly and detestable. A soldier's job is to risk their life for their country, not to force civilians into doing so.

[Ishaar Niirfa]

No Surrender has touched on the issue at hand better than i think anyone.

EDIT: By the way, I found some sources (incidentally not my orignal sources). They are here:

Ashkenazi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi)
Khazars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars)
Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel)

Also, since I last learned about this (about two or three years ago) it appears new information has come out in genetic studies that suggests that modern Jews are mostly descended from both regions (Eastern Europe and the Middle East), but mostly from their mother's side (the side from which Jews traditionally inherit their "ethnicity") they are descended from Eastern Europeans such as the Khazars.

[General Nuke Em]

Fanaticism does not equal courage. Courage means overcoming fear. If you already have no fear of death via suicide bombing (in their belief system where you get to go to heaven and have 72 virgins yadda yadda, at least), there's nothing for you to overcome.

I will agree, however, that tying civilians to a car to be cowardly and detestable.

[Caesar]

The only person here that is qualified to speak on this whole topic is Alliance. He's actually there. All of us outsiders don't live in a warzone with the constant threat of Katusha rocket attacks, suicide bombings, helicopter strikes, air force bombers, and fanatical terror groups. We may view what both sides do as immoral, but we don't have the right to judge. They're both trying to survive. Israel has to fight a horrible enemy that kills civlians or military without discrimination, and the Palestinians have to fight against a superior army that is armed and trained a hundred times better than they can ever hope to be. We're not there, we don't see things happen, we can't judge.

[Dimension]

for one thing, alliance may not be the only one there. I actually personally know of several people who live there, though I'm not sure if they still frequent the boards, had their nicks changed or something.

furthermore, just because he's in Israel doesn't mean he's in a warzone. I've talked to people who live in certain cities or regions where nothing ever happens, and they say its life as usual, like you would have in any civilized country.

then, just because alliance is in israel doesn't mean he's better informed than us. he may in fact be biased, as has been shown in this thread, and disbelieve legitimate sources (as far as any of us can tell), and not know about certain things such as the guy tied to the jeep's hood.

furthermore, I'll judge all I want. And I wouldn't forbid other people to do it about anything going on in germany. if their judgement is based on wrong facts, or if they don't have the big picture, I'll tell them about it, but otherwise I cannot and will not disallow others to form their own opinion instead of nodding to anything I say because "I'm there".

[No Surrender]

caesar, your logic is flawed. It's like saying that we can't comment or critisize the use of Heroin becuase we've never tried it. Or saying that we can't say that AIDs is bad without actually having it.

[Mac_Bug]

so really, the suicide bombers are in a better position to judge than us, and they decided Israelis should die so who are we to disagree.

[Caesar]

They're living in a completely different world was what I was trying to convey. I want to say it's along the lines of "the end justifies the means" but that somehow doesn't encompas the whole thing.

[molo]

that somehow encompasses the whole thing with a nice soviet flavor.

[Progenitor]

the point of view from someone who lives in a country which bombings and other forms of conflict are commonplace, is vastly and guaranteed to be different from us - "civilised" people who live in peaceful neighbourhoods and countries [figuratively speaking].

so who are we to judge that being inhumane is not the only way of surviving in a country torn apart by violence.

it's like saying for example:
person A points a gun at person B. person B has no right to take another person who's related to person A if that can prevent person B from getting shot.

when peaceful solutions are met by violence, violence must be met by violence. it sounds barbaric and uncivilised, but that's what survival is about.

[ceejayoz]

when peaceful solutions are met by violence, violence must be met by violence. Yeah, 'cause non-violent resistance didn't work for Martin Luther King, Ghandi, etc.

Violent resistance often just makes things worse. What would happen if the Palestinians laid down in the path of tanks en-masse? The Israelis certainly wouldn't roll over them - if for no other reason than the horrendous PR.

[motiv-8]

Well, y'know... both of those men were shot to death.

Remember Tiananmen Square? Not that I'm implying it would happen again, but it's possible.

[Mac_Bug]

I think Progenitor just volunteered to be crucified on the hood of molo's car

[edit]

oh i r have great idea motiv-8

how about all the blacks in america tie a white guy to the hood of their car so they can stop being shot at?

sweet

[motiv-8]

That's funny, because last time I checked most black people were shot by other black people.

[molo]

heyyyy racism!

anyway, look where violent resistance got the native americans. that's right, oklahoma.

[ceejayoz]

Well, y'know... both of those men were shot to death. Sure, but their millions of followers got to experience the fruits of their sacrifices.


Remember Tiananmen Square? Not that I'm implying it would happen again, but it's possible. Again, yep, I remember it, and hey, look - China has moved (slowly) towards more freedom since.

[motiv-8]

molo, look where acting peacefully got other Ntive Americans... That's right, casinos and alcoholism.

[Mac_Bug]

so you actually support suicide bombings and killing newborn babies?

[molo]

hey, more racism. sweet.

in my state, washington, there's no more of an alcoholism problem with natives than there is with anyone else. they're also way richer than pretty much everyone but bill gates thanks to their casinos.

[gbyte]

Seems like the only one that makes some sense here is caesar54, you don't have the right to judge us when you know so little about the entire situation.

First of all, Israel wasn't born because of the holocaust, this is just a misconception, Israel was born because both superpowers at the time (the US and the soviets) had parallel interest in Israel. The soviets wanted to help the Jews because they thought that giving Israel to the Jews "because of the holocaust" will give themselves credit for their own loss of life. And as for the US, it was an election year, figure yourself.
The reason that the Arabs didn't agree to the UN's proposal was their hope to destroy the Jewish country before it was even created, surprisingly they didn't succeed.

But this is all very irrelevant to the subject, you can't give the US back to the Native Americans, you can't give Australia back to the aburgenians just like you can't give Israel back to the Palestinians.

I don't agree with many of the things happening here, maybe this country isn't the most moral country in the world, but its home. And just like the Palestinians next door (Gaza is less then 10 kilometers away from my school) don't want to get up in the morning and have their house bulldozed, I don't want to die when going to school because someone got brainwashed to insanity.

And that's the problem; both sides are so locked in the never ending circle of killing and hating each other that they don't even see what's going on. This gave rise to radical solution like "the wall" (which proves itself useful every day), it might look bad, but it works. Israelis, like all people, prefer the easier solution, and what's easier, learning not to hate each other and actually helping the Palestinians, or just build a wall around then and forget that they exist? That one is easy enough.
And the "human shield" thing, as bad as it is, is just a small portion of what's going on there, some of that the Palestinians brought on themselves – by transferring bombs on ambulances, children pregnant women and so on. And some derive from the hatred – like the abuse that many Palestinians suffer every day when going to work in Israeli territory.

To make a long story short, the long way is the best way, helping the Palestinians and education on both sides is the only thing that will solve this. Unluckily, it seems that both sides don't want it.

Too long. Too long. bleh.

[molo]

You're basically saying that no one has a right to judge the German people for allowing the Holocaust to happen, because we weren't there. Of course outsiders have a right to judge. Being there has nothing to do with knowing the situation; experiencing something firsthand, your emotions allow you justify things that are under any other circumstances absolutely horrific.

[SquidDNA]

Yeah, Joe Palestinian who got shot by his neighbor because IDF forced him to knock on a door brought it on himself by..
being Palestinian? Sorry, what?

[Ishaar Niirfa]

gbyte, you yourself gave evidence to the idea that without the Holocaust, there would be no Israel. After all, you stated that the Soviet Union wanted the good PR as did the US. So yes, it was a guilt trip, Zionists pushed, the global powers gave for PR> The Palestinians were screwed.

And I have already stated my opinion that though Israel is not legitimate, making it go away would not solve most of the problems. It is unlikely for example that Palestine would suddenly become rich and plentiful in resources, or that Palestinians would stop hating the Israelis that they've built up a 50 year hatred of (and vice versa). Rather, I'm just pointing out that Israeli claims that the Palestinians are invading warmongerers are really a load of bull.

Can we stop arguing that point now? I think we've beaten it to death. And as the Supreme Court has shown the Israel government does have its good points.

However, I do not subscribe to the idea that massacre should be met with massacre. Neither do I believe that all violence can be stopped by passive submission. After all, since we're on the topic of Israel, passivity as demonstrated by German Jews really didn't help in the 1930s and 40s. The only way to stop a flood of hatred is to fight back, but not with hatred. If you fight back and kill their families because they killed your families, you'll only make things worst. You'll generate hate and enmity and more enemies to fight. You're only prolonging your misery and the war will become one of attrition, rather than one of swift victories.

So what if Palestinians kill Israeli civilians? Does that justify Israelis doing the same? No, absolutely not. Should German Jews have blown up Nazis' families homes? Should American blacks have killed whites in their sleep during the days of slavery? No. You don't justify killing innocents by saying the enemy did the same.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

But this is all very irrelevant to the subject, you can't give the US back to the Native Americans, you can't give Australia back to the aburgenians just like you can't give Israel back to the Palestinians.Do a bit of reading on Australian Native Title legislation before making statements like that. I see nothing comparable in Israel.

Palestine had nothing to do with any of the Arab Israeli wars, yet Israel claimed bits of it progressively as war prizes. They could rescind those easily enough.

[motiv-8]

A vast amount of Arab Palestinians fled the area to Jordan when the war began, because they were promised by other Arabs that after Israel was crushed the former Jewish belongings would be transferred to them. Therefore they saw no reason to fight -- sit it out and wait for the Jews to be crushed and then take their stuff. Except oops, that didn't happen. So then they said the Jews kicked them out to screw Israel on human rights violations.

[Mac_Bug]

motiv-8, what exactly would the locals fight the Israeli army, which defeated god knows how many Arab nations united, with?

Yeah so they got chased off their land by our army, but that's really because they're all greedy bastards you see.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

A vast amount of Arab Palestinians fled the area to Jordan when the war began, because they were promised by other Arabs that after Israel was crushed the former Jewish belongings would be transferred to them. Therefore they saw no reason to fight -- sit it out and wait for the Jews to be crushed and then take their stuff. Except oops, that didn't happen. So then they said the Jews kicked them out to screw Israel on human rights violations.So wait... they're in the wrong because they fled from a warzone? Right...

I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted Israel defeated. Half of the territory previously known as Palestine had just been taken away through no fault of their own. If someone took away half of your country (for arguments sake, the half you live in), would you be just fine with that? Highly doubt it. The fact remains however that whatever their feelings on the matter they took no direct action against Israel.

Re: fleeing to Jordan: Jordan annexed the West Bank following the first Arab Israeli war. There really is no love lost between Palestinians and Jordanians.

[motiv-8]

Mac... probably with arms supplied by Arab allies? Some Arab Palestinians did fight. But mostly they fled and never even saw an Israeli soldier. Which I suppose is fine and all, but then they came back, complained that they were kicked out, and demanded that the land was still theirs. Somehow that doesn't make sense to me, but I guess to others it does.

Actually n0z... the territory that became Israel comprised 1/4 of what was originally Palestine. Half of Palestine became Trans-Jordan. After the '48-49 war, the West Bank as you said was taken by Trans-Jordan (thus becoming Jordan). So you see, 3/4 of Palestinian land became the Arab nation of Jordan -- which btw offered Arab Palestinians in the West Bank Jordanian citizenship -- while the rest became Israel.

To be honest, someone could rip away half the United States (even on my coast) and it wouldn't bother me TOO much, so long as my daily life wasn't interrupted. I'm not even originally from this part of the nation, so I have no strong ties.

I think they're in the wrong because they didn't fight for the land they said was theirs. I see it as analogous to, for example, American colonists bitching that the land was theirs for 50 years while doing nothing else, instead of declaring their independence.

[Ishaar Niirfa]

They fled, motiv-8, that doesn't make them wrong. And as you yourself have pointed out, some fought. The ones who fled were the survivors.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

They didn't fight because they weren't expecting Jordan to claim their land. The Palestinians had been "assured" by the other Arab nations that they were going to go hit Israel for six and reclaim Palestine. This was pretty much an excuse by the Arab nations to try and destroy Israel, and for a land-grab by Jordan.

Palestinians fought Jordan to try and reclaim their territory just as much as they now fight Israel for it. Nothings changed there, other than who is there target. Indeed, the methods used by the Palestinians to try and free their country aren't much different from those used by the Israelis to win their independence from the Brits in the first place. What goes around comes around.

[Ishaar Niirfa]

But some did fight, just not most.

And really, if you are expecting your ally to come whoop some butt for you, you're probably not going to be exerting yourself too much are you? The point I'm trying to emphasize here is that the Palestinians didn't just give up as motiv-8 seems to be indicating.

[Mac_Bug]

the real answer is if they had fought and lost still would Israel give a damn and give the land back?

[n0z3k1ll3r]

But some did fight, just not most.Some Australians fought for Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Does this make Australia a nation of Islamic Extremists?

[MusedMark]

Pride comes before a fall

[motiv-8]

the real answer is if they had fought and lost still would Israel give a damn and give the land back? No, and I don't think they should have to.

The US won the West in war, hell it even won its independence in war (kind of like Israel). Does that mean it should just give all that back to Mexico, the UK, or Native Americans to be nice?

Ishaar, I'm not implying that the Palestinians gave up, I'm just saying that the events that occured in '48-49 give Israel more credit for owning the land than the Palestinians. Sure, it's just my worthless opinion, but I really believe that a people who fought for the land they live on, and fought for survival, deserve it more than people who didn't. The Palestinians to me, merely stepped away, came back and said "gimme". I do understand, however, that they lived there to begin with. That's why the situation is so complicated.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

Sure, it's just my worthless opinion, but I really believe that a people who fought for the land they live on, and fought for survival, deserve it more than people who didn't.So what exactly are the Palestinians doing now? Playing hopscotch?

[motiv-8]

Sorry, terrorism doesn't score points with me.

[Ishaar Niirfa]

No, but you're suggesting they should fight for their land. They're doing that now.

n0z3k1ll3r, I am trying to say that the soldiers fought. I take it that the Australian army is fighting in Iraq then. Well, then Australia is fighting against the Iraqi insurgents. The Palestinian military.

Besides, I really don't know much about this supposed flight of all the Palestinians before the fighting for the West Bank began. I'd like to see the data.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

Sorry, terrorism doesn't score points with me.Despite the fact that's what the Israelis and, arguably, the Americans used to secure their independence?

[motiv-8]

Errr no.. open warfare between standing armies does not equal terrorism. A lesson in warfare is apparently in order for you.

Ishaar, unfortunately the data is mixed with Israeli apologist errata and innane comments, but I'm assuming that it's accurate. If not, then my bad.

". Most of the Arabs living within the boundaries of the newly declared "ISRAEL" were encouraged to leave by the invading Arab armies to facilitate the slaughter of the Jews and were promised to be given all Jewish property after the victorious Arab armies won the war. The truth is that 70% of the Arab Palestinians who left in 1948 – perhaps 300,000 to 400,000 of them – never saw an Israeli soldier! They did not flee because they feared Jewish thugs, but because of a rational and reasonable calculus: the Jews will be exterminated; we will get out of the way while that messy and dangerous business goes forward, and we will return afterwards to reclaim our homes, and to inherit those nice Jewish properties as well. They guessed wrong; and the Arab Palestinians are still tortured by the residual shame of their flight. Their shame is so great because in their eyes running from Jews was like running from women. So much for the blatant lie about Jews throwing out all the [Palestinian] Arabs! The remaining 30% either (1) saw for themselves that these Jews would fight and die for their new nation and decided to pack up and leave or (2) were driven off the land as a normal consequence of war.

When the 19 month war ended, Israel survived despite a 1% loss of it's entire population! Those Arabs who did not flee became today's Israeli-Arab citizens. Those who fled became the seeds of the first wave of "Palestinian Arab refugees."

The Arab propagandists and apologists almost never mentioned that in 1948, five Arab countries launched a war against a one-day-old Israel. Instead he focused on the main consequence of that war: the creation of Arab refugees, stating that Israel "short of genocide" expelled 800,000 of them. This not only disagrees with UN estimates of a bit over 400,000 refugees but also ignores the fact that most of the Arabs/Palestinians were encouraged to leave by the Arab World itself!"


http://www.masada2000.org/historical.html


I really hate statements like "driven off the land as a normal consequence of war" and the comments about Arab shame, but I tried to look past that to the numbers. I'll look for some other sources that may back this one up.

EDIT:

"
The vexing question of the "Palestinian Refugees" is one of the perennial open sores of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. The Palestinians left their homes in 1947-48 for a variety of reasons. Thousands of wealthy Arabs left in anticipation of a war, thousands more responded to Arab leaders' calls to get out of the way of the advancing armies, a handful were expelled, but most simply fled to avoid being caught in the cross fire of a battle. Tragically, had the Arabs accepted the 1947 UN resolution, not a single Palestinian would have become a refugee and an independent Arab state would now exist beside Israel.

There are now claims from Arab sources that millions of Palestinians were pushed off their land by the Zionists, then expelled by the new State of Israel in the War of Independence in 1948, followed by similar Israeli policies that continue today. What is the truth of these claims?

The Palestinian tragedy is primarily self-inflicted, a direct result of the vehement Palestinian Arab rejection of the United Nations resolution of November 29, 1947 calling for the establishment of two states in Palestine, and the violent attempt by the Arab nations of the region to abort the Jewish state at birth. Palestinian Arabs have tried to rewrite the history of the 1948 war in a manner that stains Israel politically and morally. Their objective is to 1) extract from Israel a confession of the allegedly forcible dispossession of "native Palestinians" by "an act of expulsion," and then 2) to ensure the return of refugees to parts of the territory that is now Israel and/or to compensate the Palestinian Arabs monetarily for their sufferings.

But this cannot actually happen, however fervently Arabs may believe in it, because historical fact is not what they claim. Arabs left Israel in 1948 in large numbers, it is true, but not for the reasons that Palestinian Arabs put forth."

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_independence_refugees_arabs_why.php

[n0z3k1ll3r]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing

If you're referring to America, look at some of the actions of Sam Adams before and after the "Boston Massacre" and you'll see what I mean. Specifically his terrorising of anyone who looked like offering their services as defence lawyer of the soldiers. It's no coincidence their eventual lawyer was Adams' second cousin, someone whom he wouldn't carry his threats out against...

EDIT: Both your sources there assume collusion between the Palestinians and the other Arab states, based on practically no evidence. How do you know that "They did not flee because they feared Jewish thugs, but because of a rational and reasonable calculus: the Jews will be exterminated"? It's just pointless speculation.

[motiv-8]

Yes, we all know that there were/are Israeli terrorists too. I'm not blind. However, most terrorist activity by Zionist was directed at British colonialism and not Arab Palestinians. A notable exception is the Deir Yasin massacre.

Yes, yes, I suppose that Saratoga, Monmouth, Trenton, and Yorktown were terrorist acts as well. And the four wars that Israel fought? Terrorism, man.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

Yes, we all know that there were/are Israeli terrorists too. I'm not blind. However, most terrorist activity by Zionist was directed at British colonialism and not Arab Palestinians. A notable exception is the Deir Yasin massacre.What does it matter who it's directed at? Terrorism is terrorism.

Also your first source needs to do some more reading. Transjordan was never a part of Palestine. Considering about half his argument rests on this "fact" I somehow doubt it's validity...

EDIT: In fact I'm becoming increasingly convinced that your first source is intentionally trying to mislead people. He implies that there were few or no Arabs in Palestine, without actually stating such (there were several hundred thousand for the record). He then implies that the Sykes-Picot agreement (which was never put into practice due to countless revisions, then a complete rewrite in 1923 following the second peace treaty with Turkey) somehow meant that Jordan was part of Palestine. In short I wouldn't trust that article as far as I could spit. The second source is a different matter, it seems to be accurate but it doesn't really agree with your point of view... it claims the Palestinians fled the war, which I accept. They weren't anticipating having their land pilfered by Jordan while they weren't looking. As I've said, following the first Arab-Israeli war the Palestinians made several attempts to free their land from Jordanian control, and only switched their target to Israel after the latter assumed control of the West Bank.

For the record, the Palestinians in Gaza made no attempt to overthrow Egyptian control. I think they were actually pretty happy with it.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

The terrorism angle crap. Suicide bombers don't represent a whole people and they don't justify doing the wrong thing.

It is sometimes hard to get accurate facts on the situation. There are nationalists and zealots of all stripes and origins spinning and lying to gain advantage from a generally screwed up situation.

[motiv-8]

Actually n0z if you would bother to read the second article you would see that it does reference evidence about the fleeing of Arabs from the area:

". Fortunately for history, during the past decade Israeli and other state archives have declassified millions of records, including invaluable contemporary Arab and Palestinian documents, relating to the 1948 war and the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem. These make it possible to establish the truth about what happened in Palestine. A good example is events of the War of Independence period in the city of Haifa. When hostilities between Arabs and Jews broke out in 1947, there were 62,500 Arabs in Haifa; by May 1948, all but a few were gone, accounting for fully a tenth of the total Palestinian dispersion.

The first thing the documents show is that Arab flight from Haifa began well before the outbreak of hostilities, and even before the UN’s November 29, 1947 partition resolution"

"There is an overwhelming body of evidence from contemporary Arab, Jewish, British, and American sources to prove that, far from seeking to drive the Arabs out of Haifa, the Jewish authorities went to considerable lengths to convince them to stay. During the fighting in the city in April 1948, The Hagana’s truce terms stipulated that Arabs were expected to "carry on their work as equal and free citizens of Haifa."

And yes, it does matter who it's directed at when we're talking about the conflict between the Jews and Arabs, while most Zionist activity during the time period was focused on the British.

Re: Egypt: The problem there was that the Egyptians ignored the Arab Palestinians' problems and instead focused on trying to kill the Jews.

[Mac_Bug]

it's funny how the Israeli wanted them to stay, and then refused to let them come back, isn't it?

[motiv-8]

Funny how "On April 29, even Farid Saad of the [Arab] National Committee was saying that Jewish leaders had 'organized a large propaganda campaign to persuade [the] Arabs to return.'"

After the war, it's true that Israel was reluctant to let all of the refugees return. It was seen as a security issue, similar to the dilemma of repatriating Confederates after the Civil War. However, a large number of Arabs were allowed to return (totaling up to ~150,000 by the mid 1950s) and all Arab assets were unfrozen. Whether or not the decision to prevent mass repatriation as a matter of security was right was, I would think, part of the central issue for a long time. Now it's a moot point because the issue today is the creation of a separate Palestinian state.

Also, there was a UN resolution regarding the repatriation of Arab Palestinians into Israel (as Israeli citizens), 194. However, just like 181, it was rejected by Arabs. The point of contention in 194 was this:

"that refugees wishing to return to their homes and liveat peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which under principles of international law or in equity should be made good by Governments or authorities responsible."

Israel believed that refugees that were seen as a security problem would be excluded, drawing on "live at peace". The Arabs believed that the Resolution demanded universal and complete repatriation of all refugees. That is why the resolution failed, and that is why the refugee problem was never solved.

[Scribble]

A very enlightening thread, the more so as it has travelled so far beyond its original remit.

However, does anybody have any ideas that adress the futer of the issue. that is to say proposals towards perminately resolving the current situation. As in the past equivilent matters have been resovled through genocide, something im sure no one wishes to see.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

And yes, it does matter who it's directed at when we're talking about the conflict between the Jews and Arabs, while most Zionist activity during the time period was focused on the British.You can't accuse one group of being terrorists, then refuse to take into account any terrorism practiced by the other side.

[Mac_Bug]

motiv-8, you're going to sit there and tell me with a straight face that Israel would be willing to merge with the Palestinians and live in ONE country?

[motiv-8]

In the 1940s and 50s yes. That's why the Jews had always agreed with unification plans. It was the Arabs who rejected it, remember? They were the ones who didn't want to merge. Today, obviously not.

Uhmm n0z, I didn't.

Yes, we all know that there were/are Israeli terrorists too. I'm not blind.

[n0z3k1ll3r]

You claimed that Palestinians didn't fight to keep their country. When I pointed out that they do, you claimed it didn't count because that's terrorism. By that reasoning Israel should not exist, as it was won to a large degree through terrorism, and had at least two former terrorist prime ministers. It's entirely relevant.

[Mac_Bug]

I think motiv-8 wouldn't do very well in this game called Poker.

[motiv-8]

K.

n0z, I completely disagree. Israel was won as a result of open warfare between standing, moderately professional armies in set-piece battles. The war of 1948-49 decided the status of Israel, and to call that "terrorism" is IMO very inaccurate.
I'd also say there is no reasoning that Israel should not exist. But there is also no reasoning that Palestine should not exist.

[Ishaar Niirfa]

Israel did not support unification plans. They supported plans that gave them territory. The Arabs rejected the plans because by all rights the land was already theirs and the British were leaving, decolonizing, which left the assumption that the land was returning to its previous owners which were... the Arabs.

Zionists also considered all of Israel to be rightly theirs due to the nature of their belief that the Promised Land was the Promised Land and all this diaspora stuff was overrated. Therefore the Zionists were undoubtedly much happier to have less competition on their land following the War of Independence.

[General Nuke Em]

Just how many Londoners in coffeeshops and nightclubs, or their late 1940's British equivalent, did the pre-Israelis kill?

[n0z3k1ll3r]

n0z, I completely disagree. Israel was won as a result of open warfare between standing, moderately professional armies in set-piece battles. The war of 1948-49 decided the status of Israel, and to call that "terrorism" is IMO very inaccurate.
I'd also say there is no reasoning that Israel should not exist. But there is also no reasoning that Palestine should not exist.The war broke out due to the British withdrawal, which was in itself precipitated by the terror campaign waged by groups like the Irgun. The bombing of the King David Hotel was a VERY significant act at the time.

GNE:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irgun_attacks_during_the_1930%27s
About 250 Arabs dead, and a handful of Brits. And that's just for the Irgun actions during the 30s, not taking into account groups like Lehi (who were fucking nutcases. A Jewish terrorist group who tried to ally themselves with the NAZIS of all people...) and Irgun attacks during the 40s.