Israel rightfully own the West Bank .
How far is one allowed to go back in time to prove he is right?
Israel ha no right to occupy the West Bank? But what about the land Russia still has from WWII countries? What about China, can it claim Taiwan or can Taiwan claim China? What does a country (or countries) has to pay when it attacks a state and loses the war? What about the Indians in the US and the Aboriginals in Australia , must they get their land back? Or the Amazon tribes who were destroyed by the Brazilians. If Turkey and Iran are allowed to invade Iraq to punish the Kurds is Israel then allowed to invade Palestine to punish Palestinian attackers? Doesn't the whole middle eastern problems come down to this expression : "The pot calling the kettle black" ?
Israel ha no right to occupy the West Bank? But what about the land Russia still has from WWII countries? What about China, can it claim Taiwan or can Taiwan claim China? What does a country (or countries) has to pay when it attacks a state and loses the war? What about the Indians in the US and the Aboriginals in Australia , must they get their land back? Or the Amazon tribes who were destroyed by the Brazilians. If Turkey and Iran are allowed to invade Iraq to punish the Kurds is Israel then allowed to invade Palestine to punish Palestinian attackers? Doesn't the whole middle eastern problems come down to this expression : "The pot calling the kettle black" ?
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
But Russia has in the last 20 or so years lost the land annexed during WW2, Chinese expansionism is currently in check and I am not sure about Tibet but I would suggest that Taiwan is kind of a special case in that technically it is Chinese (it is not like we dumped a bunch of Europeans in Taiwan and laid claim to it based on a 2000 year old fairy story) however it is controlled by an anti-communist faction of Chinese.
My recollection tells me that Turkey and Iran are not allowed to invade Iraq and have not done so however if Kurds jump the border and kill Iranians or Turks then I see no problem in them being chased back and killed or captured.
But the problem you have here is not one of nation attacking another it that a nation has been transplanted onto someone else's land which has then set out on expansionist policies at the expense of the Palestinians so I guess the closest example of this would be European expansion of 200-300 years ago which has now been recognised as wrong and incredibly destructive which is why we don't do it any more or support nations that are still doing it.
So rather than it being a case of "the pot calling the kettle black" I think it is more a case that nations have learn't from their mistakes in the hopes that they wont repeat them.
My recollection tells me that Turkey and Iran are not allowed to invade Iraq and have not done so however if Kurds jump the border and kill Iranians or Turks then I see no problem in them being chased back and killed or captured.
But the problem you have here is not one of nation attacking another it that a nation has been transplanted onto someone else's land which has then set out on expansionist policies at the expense of the Palestinians so I guess the closest example of this would be European expansion of 200-300 years ago which has now been recognised as wrong and incredibly destructive which is why we don't do it any more or support nations that are still doing it.
So rather than it being a case of "the pot calling the kettle black" I think it is more a case that nations have learn't from their mistakes in the hopes that they wont repeat them.
Russia lost their annexed land because the USSR fel apart. Poland and Romania didn't get their land back.
The Turks and Iranians regularly attack Kurdish villages (the Iraqi president complained about that recently at the UN). I agree with you on chasing attackers back to their base, but bombing a village with artillery fire or from the air is something different.
The Palestinians must get a state and expanding Jewish settlements is wrong. But you also must understand the Israeli side. They gave back southern Libanon and got back rockets from Hezbollah. They gave back the Gaza strip and got back rockets from Hamas. What will they get back if the give the West Bank to the Palestinians? Peace or rockets from Fatah?
After WWII the UN thought they had the solution, a two state solution. The Israelis accepted and the Palestinans and the Arabs refused. Worse, they started to attack several times during the following decades with as result the loss of the Golan Heights , Gaza and the Sinai plus the West Bank, and now they want it all back as nothing had happenend.
Lots of Palestinians fled or were expelled from the newly founded Irael, but the Arab countries also expelled a lot of Jews.
I think a peacefull solution is far away and lots of trouble is on its way.
One last thing, how treat the Arab countries the Palestinian fugitives? The ones who stayed in Israel are much better off.
The Turks and Iranians regularly attack Kurdish villages (the Iraqi president complained about that recently at the UN). I agree with you on chasing attackers back to their base, but bombing a village with artillery fire or from the air is something different.
The Palestinians must get a state and expanding Jewish settlements is wrong. But you also must understand the Israeli side. They gave back southern Libanon and got back rockets from Hezbollah. They gave back the Gaza strip and got back rockets from Hamas. What will they get back if the give the West Bank to the Palestinians? Peace or rockets from Fatah?
After WWII the UN thought they had the solution, a two state solution. The Israelis accepted and the Palestinans and the Arabs refused. Worse, they started to attack several times during the following decades with as result the loss of the Golan Heights , Gaza and the Sinai plus the West Bank, and now they want it all back as nothing had happenend.
Lots of Palestinians fled or were expelled from the newly founded Irael, but the Arab countries also expelled a lot of Jews.
I think a peacefull solution is far away and lots of trouble is on its way.
One last thing, how treat the Arab countries the Palestinian fugitives? The ones who stayed in Israel are much better off.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
See that is the mistake you are making you seem to think the UN's decision in 1948 was the right one when in reality it was a limp wristed one when the right decision would have been to put all those new arrivals of non-middle eastern decent back on a boat to Europe where they all had their homes and roots.
But you are correct peace is a long way off because as long as Palestinians have no borders Israel can continue colonising Palestinian land with impunity it is that simple, as long as the words keep flowing and the goal posts keep moving Israel can keep building settlements and then claiming ownership.
I can understand your point of view. A land with few jews and many Arabs gets invaded (legally and illegally) by many jews and keep confiscating their land. That is also the current view of many nations and I do not dispute that. But when you go back to the foundation of Israel after WWII that view was very different. Lots of nations saw what happenend with the jews in Germany and nations occupied by Germany. Millions were massacred. Whole families destroyed. Most survivors didn't want to live there anymore with citizens living nearby concentration camps and claming they didn't know what happenend there. Then it is completely normal that they wanted to go where almost every jew was going to : Israel, the land of their ancesters. During WWII the arabs were supportive of the Nazi regime. So, after the war not many nations had a high opinion of the arabs. That's why my first sentence of this tread was : How far is one allowed to go back in time to prove he is right?
Another point that I like to make is that the arabs not only want the West Bank as a palestinian state but also the destruction of Israel. Iran said once that Israel must be wiped of the map. Is it possible to make peace with someone who wants to destroy you???
Another point that I like to make is that the arabs not only want the West Bank as a palestinian state but also the destruction of Israel. Iran said once that Israel must be wiped of the map. Is it possible to make peace with someone who wants to destroy you???
senojekips
Active member
The Israelis should never have been put in a position where they have to make a peace with the Palestinians, they they have no legal or moral right to be in Palestine in the first place.
No doubt there were a few Belgians who had similar feelings towards the German's in WWII. There's nothing immoral about wanting what is rightfully yours.
Panzercracker
Active member
In what way is Palestine a jewish home?
lvcabbie
Active member
Let's get to the heart of the problem ---
Israel is a DEMOCRATIC society where all religions are tolerated and the people have to right to determine their own fate.
Gaza and The West Bank are under the TYRANNICAL control of religious leaders who tolerate no other religion than Islam and do not allow the common people to determine their own fate.
Why should the Democracy be wiped out to be replaced by the Tyranny?
Then, look at what the people of Israel have done with their land as compared to what the "Palestinians" have done with theirs. Look what the Arabs and Muslims have done with ALL the lands they control!!!!
Israel is a DEMOCRATIC society where all religions are tolerated and the people have to right to determine their own fate.
Gaza and The West Bank are under the TYRANNICAL control of religious leaders who tolerate no other religion than Islam and do not allow the common people to determine their own fate.
Why should the Democracy be wiped out to be replaced by the Tyranny?
Then, look at what the people of Israel have done with their land as compared to what the "Palestinians" have done with theirs. Look what the Arabs and Muslims have done with ALL the lands they control!!!!
Was there ever a palestinian state? NO
Was there ever a Israeli state? YES , hundreds of years BC.
The land where the jews and palestinians now live was whom before the creation of the state of Israel? British Mandate of Palestine and before that the Ottoman Empire. None of them gave the Palestinians "their" land nor did the Palestinians asked for it. But after the creation of Israel the Palestinians suddenly wanted all of it. They were offered the land they want now but refused.
I am not against giving the palestinians the West Bank and Gaza. But what about the Kurds? Don't they deserve a Kurdistan? Why don't the Turks give the Kurds "their" land back? The Kurds attack the Turks just as the Palestinians attack Israel.
Was there ever a Israeli state? YES , hundreds of years BC.
The land where the jews and palestinians now live was whom before the creation of the state of Israel? British Mandate of Palestine and before that the Ottoman Empire. None of them gave the Palestinians "their" land nor did the Palestinians asked for it. But after the creation of Israel the Palestinians suddenly wanted all of it. They were offered the land they want now but refused.
I am not against giving the palestinians the West Bank and Gaza. But what about the Kurds? Don't they deserve a Kurdistan? Why don't the Turks give the Kurds "their" land back? The Kurds attack the Turks just as the Palestinians attack Israel.
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
Don't kid yourself.
senojekips
Active member
The heart of the problem is people spreading lies and half truths, such as your wildly inaccurate statement.
Israel is not a democratic society in any way, shape or form. They are in contravention of more International Laws and UN resolutions than all of the other members combined and more closely fit the description of a Rogue State than a democracy. http://www.israellawresourcecenter.org/internationallaw/studyguides/sgil3.htm
Who said the Palestinians are tyrannical? If the Israelis were not occupying their land these radical groups like Hamas and for that matter Al Qaeda would never have come into existence. Other than that, the Palestinians have no legal or moral obligation to allow the Israelis to steal their land.
What would you do if the UN gave the best parts of the US to the starving Somalians and then provided them with unlimited military and financial aid to drive the rightful owners into Mexico and refuse to allow them back, killing any US citizens who resisted?
Last edited:
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
You mean like this?
Still it is good to see that not having a clue isn't holding people back from posting.
grey shadow
Banned
Israel has a State legislative that divides its citizens after a basic criteria: not color, but religion
Israeli law has a section on the right of return, giving Jews the right to immigrate to Israel and obtain Israeli citizenship. That is not offered to others.
The Israeli law of 2003 on family reunification gives Jews permission to family reunification, while Christians, Muslims, atheists, etc. don’t have this right.
Institutionally, Israel is a parliamentary democracy after the Western European pattern. The Declaration of Independence guarantees equal rights for all citizens regardless of religion, race and gender. But this statement is not followed by a set of laws where these rights are enshrined in the provisions which apply to all Israeli citizens. On the contrary, the parliament - the Knesset - eventually adopted a series of laws that show that Israel only is a Jewish state - ie. A state for the Jewish population and all other Jews in the world. Not a state for those who are people in the state.
What a wonderful democracy we have!!!
You mean like this?
Still it is good to see that not having a clue isn't holding people back from posting.
Who designed and build these beautiful buildings?
senojekips
Active member
WRONG, Palestine is Nation State as defined in Wikipedia.
The fact that both of these groups were 'States" has absolutely nothing to do with the legitimacy of Israel's occupation of Palestine, or the west Bank in particular.
WRONG,.... again, The Palestinians had asked for a homeland of their own, and were in fact promised it by the British, in agreement for their help in defeating the Turks. It was only after this, that Lord Balfour came on the scene wanting a Jewish homeland, something that the Brits were in no legal position to offer as the land in question was not theirs, they were by their own admission only the mandated administrators, hence the name, The British Mandate.
Last edited:
It seems that on this board, like in the real world, we cannot agree on the Israeli-Palestinian problem.
Both sides have facts to claim they are right and many were posted here, and both sides reject the facts of the other. (that's why I stated in my first post How far is one allowed to go back in time to prove he is right?) It's pro or contra.
Why don't they ask the mixed families for a solution? Israelies married to palestinians. They know how to live together. We probably would see a whole different palestine. Problem is the pro's and contra's won't accept that solution. Most Israelies and Palestinians just want to be free, live in peace, have a home of their own and have a nice job. Just like 99% of the people living on this earth. The problem is the 1%, the pro's and contra's. Any stick will do to beat a dog.
Both sides have facts to claim they are right and many were posted here, and both sides reject the facts of the other. (that's why I stated in my first post How far is one allowed to go back in time to prove he is right?) It's pro or contra.
Why don't they ask the mixed families for a solution? Israelies married to palestinians. They know how to live together. We probably would see a whole different palestine. Problem is the pro's and contra's won't accept that solution. Most Israelies and Palestinians just want to be free, live in peace, have a home of their own and have a nice job. Just like 99% of the people living on this earth. The problem is the 1%, the pro's and contra's. Any stick will do to beat a dog.
senojekips
Active member
You seem not to grasp the subject. You ask how far can we go back? The answer is simple, we can go back to when the Israelis claimed ownership of the west Bank
The Pro's and Contra's won't accept it, because for a start you have obviously never bothered to try and find the facts of the matter.
Firstly it is not done because the group you speak of, are so small a minority as to be voiceless. Secondly, these mixed marriages are not even officially recognized, so why would the Israelis listen to an officially unrecognized minority. This lack of basic recognition flies in the face of your earlier claim that Israel is a Democratic State. See below:
jewishvirtuallibrary.org said:
Not true,... or we wouldn't have the present situation. Yes,... the Israelis certainly want to be free and live in peace, but only so long as it is at the expense of the Palestinian people, living on their land without possibility of retribution or resistance. The Palestinians also want freedom and peace, but they can't have it, because there is an occupier who keeps starving, beating, harrassing and murdering them when they want to take their land back.
Last edited: