Generation Terrorists » Forum
Sign up   |   Start new thread   |   Lost password?   |   Edit profile   |   Member List   |   myGT   |   Blog
Keyword
From
To
 

Why the conflict in the Middle East ?
ifihadahif Posted: Sun Jun 17 08:23:07 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/


 
DanSRose Posted: Sun Jun 17 10:45:33 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  It's a bit more nuanced than that, but yeah.


I was going to start an Israel thread right now, but because I'm leaving for the airport in about an hour to go on the dig. I will try to drop a post but no promises.



 
addi Posted: Sun Jun 17 10:59:45 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  there was no official country of Palestine with set borders, but Palestinians lived in the land that the Israelies took as their homeland.

It's somewhat like President jackson here in the 1830's. There was no official borders and separate nation-state for the cherokee indians in the southeast, but they lived there and it was their home. So we decidied we needed it and sent them west on the trail of tears to oklahoma.
Just because a people don't have an officially recognised country does not mean that the certain location they live in isn't their "home".

Your link makes a complicated issue way too simple....a tactic overly used by right wing simpletons. It's full of bias and propoganda, and short on facts.
To be sure many Palestinians have blood on their hands and are doing great harm to the prospects of peace in that area. However the same can said of some of the Israeli policies over the past decades. Neither side is completely innocent.
Anyone that believe's otherwise is demonstrating their total ignorance of the current mess in the middle east.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Sun Jun 17 14:20:47 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>there was no official country of Palestine with set borders, but Palestinians lived in the land that the Israelies took as their homeland.
>
They both occupied that land and they were both given their own lands to settle in, were they not ?

If you go back to the beginning, it seems pretty simple, though I'm pretty sure I'm not a "right wing simpleton".

How much simpler can it be ?

They were both given their own land to settle, The Jews worked hard and prospered, the Palestinians did not.

They focused on hatred the anhilation of the Jewish state.

That was the beginning.

Now what has happened since then is debatable for sure, but how it started is pretty cut and dried.


 
addi Posted: Mon Jun 18 07:35:28 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>Now what has happened since then is debatable for sure, but how it started is pretty cut and dried.

It's anything but "cut and dried", and further proof that you get your information from sites with an agenda...acedemically lazy ones to boot.

If you seek out information easily available on the history of the problem you can assertain that the Palestinian's were given the shaft by the powers at that time. Sorry in advance for the length but just a brief historical summary:

1917-1947
The Palestine problem became an international issue towards the end of the First World War with the disintegration of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. Palestine was among the several former Ottoman Arab territories which were placed under the administration of Great Britain under the Mandates System adopted by the League of Nations pursuant to the League's Covenant.
All but one of these Mandated Territories became fully independent States, as anticipated. The exception was Palestine where, instead of being limited to "the rendering of administrative assistance and advice" the Mandate had as a primary objective the implementation of the "Balfour Declaration" issued by the British Government in 1917, expressing support for "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people".
During the years of the Palestine Mandate, from 1922 to 1947, large-scale Jewish immigration from abroad, mainly from Eastern Europe took place, the numbers swelling in the 1930s with the notorious Nazi persecution of Jewish populations. Palestinian demands for independence and resistance to Jewish immigration led to a rebellion in 1937, followed by continuing terrorism and violence from both sides during and immediately after World War II. Great Britain tried to implement various formulas to bring independence to a land ravaged by violence. In 1947, Great Britain turned the problem over to the United Nations.
1947-1977
After looking at various alternatives, the UN proposed the partitioning of Palestine into two independent States, one Palestinian Arab and the other Jewish, with Jerusalem internationalized (Resolution 181 (II) of 1947). One of the two States envisaged in the partition plan proclaimed its independence as Israel and in the 1948 war expanded to occupy 77 per cent of the territory of Palestine. Israel also occupied the larger part of Jerusalem. Over half of the indigenous Palestinian population fled or were expelled. Jordan and Egypt occupied the other parts of the territory assigned by the partition resolution to the Palestinian Arab State which did not come into being.
In the 1967 war, Israel occupied the remaining territory of Palestine, until then under Jordanian and Egyptian control (the West Bank and Gaza Strip). This included the remaining part of Jerusalem, which was subsequently annexed by Israel. The war brought about a second exodus of Palestinians, estimated at half a million. Security Council resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 called on Israel to withdraw from territories it had occupied in the 1967 conflict.

_________________________

I'm not a Palestinian apologist. Their tactics over the years have just exacerbated the problem, and a large portion of the responsibility for the current mess lies on their shoulders.
But I do react against all the pro-Israeli misinformation out there that wants to put 100% of the blame on everyone else, and paint them as "God's Chosen" and innocent.
That just ain't so.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Mon Jun 18 19:53:32 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  God's chosen ?
Maybe not.

Innocent, mostly so in my opinion.

They never attacked without provocation did they ?

Did they not work hard and make the desert a productive place ?

Did the Palestinians even attempt this ?

No, their energy was alway focused on the destruction of Israel. They have been the pawns of the Arab world, to use against Israel.

The Palesinians have never in their history had a homeland, they have never been a nation unto themselves. They were nothing more than an ethnic minority in the Arab world.

They were given their own state and pissed it away.

They lost it to Israel because of their ill advised and unprovoked attacks against Israel.

I think Israel had every right to annex that land after the Palestinians attacked them.

Even so, it was offerred back to Yasser Arafat in exchange for peace, not once but twice, and both times refused, proving that the Palestinians are not interested in peace.

If the Israelis were never again attacked by the Arabs, do you think you would hear about their military attacking anyone ? Not likely.

All they want is to be left alone and to live in peace. How can they made to shoulder the blame in this conflict ?

It is very simple and the left has made it into something that it's not.

It's so simple it's fucking infuriating.

If the Arabs stop fucking with the Israelies, it's over. period.

How much simpler do you need it to be ?



 
addi Posted: Tue Jun 19 08:02:52 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  If it's as simple as you say then the problem should have been settled long ago. The fact of the matter is that it's a complicated mess there, and has been for a long long time. Blame falls on both sides in my opinion.

Work with me here..if only to try and make a point.

It's 1970 and we're at the zenith of the American Indian Movement. What to do with the oppressed Shawnee nation, that once lived in Kentucky long before the whites arrived, comes to a head. They are spread across the nation and make demands that they be given their own land once again. In order to rectify the explosive situation the U.N and the Nixon administration jointly decide to give the Shawnee their own homeland again...a significant part of what is now Loiusville, KY. So you and thousands of others are told that your home is no longer your home...that it will be given back to those that lived there long before you were born. You are forced to move away to a smaller and less desirable plot of land in order to give the Indians their rightful homeland back, or you can stay and live under their culture and rules and be a minority group. The Shawnee get the most fertile land and get to call all the shots being a separate sovereign nation now.

In this fictional story according to your outlook you and thousands of other whites should just accept the situation and learn to co-exist peacefully with those that now occupy what was once yours.
I mean..it's so simple it's fucking infuriating.

In the above fictional history I can tell you with certainty that the reality of what would have happened would have been quite different. All hell would have broken out and fighting, violence and blood would spill between the two groups...and it would still be going on today.

People are very good at seeing simple solutions to problems that involve other outside groups.
We have a much harder time finding peaceable simple solutions when we're in the middle of a conflict.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Tue Jun 19 17:43:37 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I see your point, but it doesn't apply here in my opinion. The Palestinians never owned the land to begin with.
Yes, they lived there as an ethnic minority. They also lived in Jordan as an ethnic minority. They were never a nation unto themselves.
The land they were given was not smaller and less desireable, both groups got desert and dust.
One group made it more desireable, the other group just shit where they ate.

I'm trying to work with you, I just don't see it.


 
addi Posted: Tue Jun 19 19:09:27 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>I'm trying to work with you, I just don't see it.

well it was worth a shot.
I just reread my post and now I'm tempted to argue with myself about some points I made.

: )


 



[ Reply to this thread ] [ Start new thread ]