[War Angel]

I just want them to have the option of returning to their homes. What's so moronic about that?

Why? They came here to annihilate the Jewish settlement in the 19th century. They lost the war of 1948. Why on EARTH would we let them back in?! Especially when this isn't their 'home'. Hell, they've probably been to Lebanon longer than they've been here... actually, it's pretty close to certain. They don't want their freaking dumps back, some backwards village in the middle of no-where. They want to end the Jewish state.

Hey, I bet if you offered them enough money to compensate their loss, some of them would probably be happy not to return to the ruins of their bulldozed villages. Why not try that?

They should compensate us, if anything. But hell, we've tried the money deal... they didn't take it. They don't money or land - they want us dead. Our lives are not for the giving.

The land was not empty.

Relatively speaking, it was.

Looking out for the Palestinians like a class of childeren?

You're the one who expects us to give them shit they don't deserve.

You got a superiority complex.

I have no superiority complex. I am simply superior.

This is pointless to keep naming all who once kicked your ass. Half of europe kicked our ass,... we aint complaining.

I'm going to score this one for your ignorance, rather than callousness. You're not seriously suggesting the Holocaust was a mere nothing, that the Dutch (!!) had it the same, or some other drivel, are ye? You are not seriously belittling the magnitude of that tragedy, are you? I certainly hope not. That would be crossing a new line of foolishness.

Huge amounts of arms and ammo were trafficked out of the USA to the Zionist forces in Palestine.

Care to elaborate, my good man? Because that's not what I've seen. Hell, they only had two 20mm cannons for the entire country. Busiest cannons ever.

The idea of slave reparations for example is scoffed at (I don't support it either) but there's no problem with annually sending $2.2 billion in aid to a nation the size of Massachusetts.....mostly out of sympathy for a horrendous crime that we didn't even commit.

The money the USA gives Israel is not out of sympathy for the Holocaust or anything, really. It's an investment, one you may not agree with on basis of ideology, but still an investment. It's not pity money.

The Palestinian Arabs are descended in part from those Hebrews who had avoided expulsion and remained in what is now Israel/Palestine.

Dude, seriously, where are you getting this? That stuff you're obviously smoking, that is.

[Gletkin]

Relatively speaking, it was.

So's the Negev.
So you won't mind if settlers from other lands come to take it away from Israel?

Care to elaborate, my good man?

It was a print source long ago. But this is what I could find online on short notice:

http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm
The Arab defeat and the birth of the refugee problem - Despite initial setbacks, better organization and intelligence successes, as well as timely clandestine arms shipments, enabled the Jews to gain a decisive victory.

http://motlc.learningcenter.wiesenthal. ... m2475.html
The Haganah budget was substantially increased, and the purchase of arms was expanded by the emissary of the Haganah, Hayyim Slavin, who concentrated upon the acquisition of machinery to manufacture arms and ammunition from the United States.

The money the USA gives Israel is not out of sympathy for the Holocaust or anything, really.

It's how it's sold to the US taxpayer however. Sure the real reasons may be different but when it comes to emotional appeal to justify this aid the Holocaust is constantly evoked.

Dude, seriously, where are you getting this? That stuff you're obviously smoking, that is.

I posted a link to and a quote from the source.

Try reading presented evidence first before sponataneously firing off flip ad hominum remarks.

[sploop!]

Two States for Two Peoples. Peace. NetsNJFan87

Have you ever come across that old problem involving two boys and one cake? the problem is to ensure that both sides get a bit of the cake and go away happy. The solution is that one of the boys takes responsibility for dividing the cake, and the other boy gets first pick of the two pieces. In this way, you can be sure the cake is divided absolutely fairly.

Now my point is this - if you think the cake is being divided fairly, you shouldn't really have any objection to swapping pieces. What's your answer? Don't worry, I know what it is - you wouldn't dream of having Israel based in the land you are suggesting the Palestinians get told is theirs. Why? Because it would be unfair.

From a Palestinian perspective, Israel has been dropped onto their land, and they have been pushed out. Of course they were not going to agree to this in 1948 - why should they? They had their land, and you were the invaders. Now the situation is different. Whether they liked it or not, the land was taken and they were pushed out. And they've been pushed out for 60 years. Maybe there is space for negotiation now.

But, paradoxically, the positions are now reversed. Now it is Israel that feels no need to negotiate. 'Why should we - we have the land, it is ours'. Does this ring any bells? And you know what, that might well be the truth. Israel quite likely will be able to survive without making any effort to be reasonable. And lots of people, danholo, maybe, or War Angel will be quite happy that they can hold their heads up. But I really wonder what the point of Israel might be, and what it might be like to have to live there, if it has to go into the future surrounded by walls and plagued by continual strife.

If Israel is going to negotiate for peace, it needs to do so in good faith. And that probably means actually giving up things you would prefer to keep, and talking to people you would sooner ignore.

As a P.S. I wonder what you think about Bush's claim that 'peace is possible' when a big part of the difficulty is not even invited to sit at the table?

[Nets]

But Sploop in the 1948 case the Cake was split by an independent U.N. Commission. Neither side was happy with the Split, but ultimately the Jews accepted and the Arabs chose war. Too bad, you could have had a much larger Palestine then but you chose war.

As a P.S. I wonder what you think about Bush's claim that 'peace is possible' when a big part of the difficulty is not even invited to sit at the table?

Why would you negotiate with a violent Jihadist group calling for your expulsion. Let Hamas rot in Gaza like the PLO rotted in Tunis and then will come the time for talks.


And as for good faith, Israel withdrew from Gaza in good faith, leaving the hot-houses so some Gazans could salvage the settler economy. Instead, they trashed the hothouses and immediately started launching rockets. No wonder Israelis don't want to leave the West Bank and have rockets fall on Ben Gurion Airport.

Israel made its good faith move --- its there turn.

[Maas]

(as far as Palestinians were a minority)

How did "Palestinians" constitute a minority? What is the major ethnicity of Jordan as opposed to Palestine...?

Danholo, what are you trying to say.
That you question if the people of Jordan are ethnically the same as Palestinians? That must be one of the most stupidist questions you ever made scine I started out not disputing that. Either way, it doesn't matter. Most europeans are ethnically identical, yet are a minority in eachother countries. I stopped ready right there and than. It's pointless.

[sploop!]

But Sploop in the 1948 case the Cake was split by an independent U.N. Commission. Neither side was happy with the Split

Ther situation in 1948 was somewhat different, as I suggested in my previous post. And you know, from your side of the wall, the Arabs chose War. From their side, they defended themselves.

[danholo]

So you won't mind if settlers from other lands come to take it away from Israel?

Actually, we would, but nobody is as insane as a Jew when it comes to Israel so it'd likely never happen.

Danholo, what are you trying to say.
That you question if the people of Jordan are ethnically the same as Palestinians? That must be one of the most stupidist questions you ever made scine I started out not disputing that. Either way, it doesn't matter. Most europeans are ethnically identical, yet are a minority in eachother countries.

I don't know how the Arabs feel about it. Nonetheless, Jordanians, as Palestinians, are Arabs, and it shouldn't have been a problem to resettle all the refugees, as other people's have done with their respective similar problems.

I stopped ready right there and than. It's pointless.

Lost in comprehension?

Have you ever come across that old problem involving two boys and one cake? the problem is to ensure that both sides get a bit of the cake and go away happy. The solution is that one of the boys takes responsibility for dividing the cake, and the other boy gets first pick of the two pieces. In this way, you can be sure the cake is divided absolutely fairly.

Now my point is this - if you think the cake is being divided fairly, you shouldn't really have any objection to swapping pieces. What's your answer? Don't worry, I know what it is - you wouldn't dream of having Israel based in the land you are suggesting the Palestinians get told is theirs. Why? Because it would be unfair.

From a Palestinian perspective, Israel has been dropped onto their land, and they have been pushed out. Of course they were not going to agree to this in 1948 - why should they? They had their land, and you were the invaders. Now the situation is different. Whether they liked it or not, the land was taken and they were pushed out. And they've been pushed out for 60 years. Maybe there is space for negotiation now.

I don't think anybody is missing the point here. We are clearly aware of the Palestinan plight and the motives behind their moves. There's a couple of problems with your scenario. You are missing the point of "the other side didn't even accept the idea of division and it just became a fight over the entire cake". Another problem: you, as well as anyone else for one reason or the other, attributes the ownership of the land to either party.

But, paradoxically, the positions are now reversed. Now it is Israel that feels no need to negotiate. 'Why should we - we have the land, it is ours'. Does this ring any bells? And you know what, that might well be the truth. Israel quite likely will be able to survive without making any effort to be reasonable. And lots of people, danholo, maybe, or War Angel will be quite happy that they can hold their heads up. But I really wonder what the point of Israel might be, and what it might be like to have to live there, if it has to go into the future surrounded by walls and plagued by continual strife.

I, honestly, don't know what you are talking about. For you to say this, you have to ignore decades of history. Israel has had negotiations, and even made peace deals, with the conflicting party. Israel and the Palestinians have been in negotiations and almost reached a settlement. Negotiations fell apart, more or less, due to the misgivings of both sides. It quite clearly defined what the crux of the matter is; the issue of compromise is too difficult at this time. Refugees, Jerusalem etc. are issues which are too difficult to solve to make both sides at least a little satisfied.

[Maas]

I don't know how the Arabs feel about it. Nonetheless, Jordanians, as Palestinians, are Arabs, and it shouldn't have been a problem to resettle all the refugees, as other people's have done with their respective similar problems.

Same thing could be said about Jews who lived in the US but moved to Israel anyways. You can make this in an ethnic thing like some racist would, but it's a cultural thing.

People living on the Dutch-German near the border are the same on both sides of the border. Same thing with the Belgium-Dutch border. Yet People who live at at one of those borders probably would never move to the other border or to the other side of the border, just like I probably would never move from the coastal region to a border. And my country is small as fuck (300 km x 100 km)

Lost in comprehension?

too much of a chance reading more totally pointless questions

[danholo]

Same thing could be said about Jews who lived in the US but moved to Israel anyways. You can make this in an ethnic thing like some racist would, but it's a cultural thing.

I have no idea what you're talking about concerning your odd conclusions.

My point is, if you can't count on your own to help you out when you're not doing that hot, it must really suck. When it comes to Palestinian refugees they are, well, still refugees. That doesn't apply to any refugee crisis created in those times.

People living on the Dutch-German near the border are the same on both sides of the border. Same thing with the Belgium-Dutch border. Yet People who live at at one of those borders probably would never move to the other border or to the other side of the border, just like I probably would never move from the coastal region to a border. And my country is small as fuck (300 km x 100 km)

So what? What does this have to do with them? I really fail to see the connection here, once again.

too much of a chance reading more totally pointless questions

I am sorry for not being meaningful enough for you.

[War Angel]

So's the Negev.
So you won't mind if settlers from other lands come to take it away from Israel?

The Negev is owned by the State of Israel. The land before 1948 didn't belong to anyone - it was British Mandate. When they left, it became No Man's Land. Then, war came about, and you know the rest.

It was a print source long ago. But this is what I could find online on short notice:

Thanks for spotting it, but it still doesn't say how much. If the Jews had so much to fight with in terms of weapons, why the hell did we produce grenades from lipsticks and pieces of plumbing? Why all the bother with other hand-made weapons? Anyway, my resources (i.e, people who actually lived and fought during that time) tell me they barely had anything to fight with, and they even lacked proper man-power. Fresh Holocaust survivors were given rifles, and sent to fight with the shortest of training. Some died with their rifles still locked... it was a glorious, but shitty time to be an Israeli. I wonder when that will stop being the truth.

It's how it's sold to the US taxpayer however. Sure the real reasons may be different but when it comes to emotional appeal to justify this aid the Holocaust is constantly evoked.

Well, that's just not right. The Holocaust is a major reason for the existence of Israel, but the USA's help is not what's preventing Israel from crumbling, far from it. It's simply an investment - the USA wants Israel to have to the most powerful military in the area, and have an edge over the other nations here. That makes sense to American officials, and that's why they're willing to let go of some money.

Try reading presented evidence first before sponataneously firing off flip ad hominum remarks.

What you posted was a big-ass article, and I really couldn't be arsed to look for hints on Israelis and Palestinian Arabs having some ethnic connection. I'm not saying it's impossible - just extremely unlikely. The two groups had only several decades to mingle with one another, and I doubt they did, seeing as their wasn't exactly great friendship between them.

Have you ever come across that old problem involving two boys and one cake?

How about the one with the two boys, the one cake, and the lady who told them to share? One of the kids agreed, the other didn't, and started a fight over it. He got his arse handed to him, but instead of buggering off back home, he stuck around for 60 years and whined, refusing any offer to share some of the cake, wanting only all of it?

[Maas]

So what? What does this have to do with them? I really fail to see the connection here, once again.

You failt to see the connection because you only see racial issues. Racially, Dutch people are the same as Belgiums and Germans, yet we hardly ever mix. It's purely a cultural thing. My country is just 100 km by 300 km. And even we don;t mix with our selves.

The southern people are on average 2 cm smaller than other Dutch people. They also celebrate carnaval . Them people... they live in The Netherlands. But unlike the south, north and eastern pasts: I say I'm from Holland.


In that same way it could be that Palestinians never will became Jordanians. Just like it's a snowballs change is hell I'll be celebrating carnaval.

[ArtAllm]

The Palestinian Arabs are descended in part from those Hebrews who had avoided expulsion and remained in what is now Israel/Palestine.
-------
War Angel:
Dude, seriously, where are you getting this? That stuff you're obviously smoking, that is.

Well, this is what scientists say, though it may contradict the mythology of the Bible Stories.

Most modern Jews are converts and stem from Khazars, Arabs, Berbers, Greeks, Slavs, etc. etc.

Judaism is a religion, not a race.

[sploop!]

The land before 1948 didn't belong to anyone - it was British Mandate. When they left, it became No Man's Land. Then, war came about, and you know the rest. War Angel

Clearly wrong. The land, the buildings on it (now bulldozed and buried), the livestock (stolen), the businesses all belonged to the people living there. The Mandate, the apparent lack of a state is irrelevant - these are all political mechanisms that have nothing to do with the reality that there were people living on that land, and Israel bullied them (and continues to bully them) off of it. Why do you continue to lie so blatantly, War Angel?

[ArtAllm]

The land, the buildings on it (now bulldozed and buried), the livestock (stolen), the businesses all belonged to the people living there. The Mandate, the apparent lack of a state is irrelevant - these are all political mechanisms that have nothing to do with the reality that there were people living on that land, and Israel bullied them (and continues to bully them) off of it. Why do you continue to lie so blatantly, War Angel?

Fully agree with you.

[danholo]

Clearly wrong. The land, the buildings on it (now bulldozed and buried), the livestock (stolen), the businesses all belonged to the people living there. The Mandate, the apparent lack of a state is irrelevant - these are all political mechanisms that have nothing to do with the reality that there were people living on that land, and Israel bullied them (and continues to bully them) off of it. Why do you continue to lie so blatantly, War Angel?

Does a person become a liar when you call him one? You clearly miss the idea of what is "war" and how shit doesn't go your way. But whatever, "Jews are thieves". Let's just forget history, dumb it down to "good guys and bad guys" and go have a picnic. Then we can "chat" about those evil Jews.

http://www.israelipalestinianprocon.org ... stine.html

For being bullied, the Palestinians population has grown an awful lot since Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza. The Israeli Arab population has remained at about 20% since its inception. I really don't understand your tripe because, frankly, the only people being bullied out of their homes are Jews. These people are not allowed to settle previously unsettled land as if it were "Palestinian" by your own words.

The Romans wons. Thanks, guys, for sticking it up for the big guy.

[Maas]

I really don't understand your tripe because, frankly, the only people being bullied out of their homes are Jews.

oh... realy? Correct me if I'm wrong but that wall them Jews in Israel want goes right through Palestinian homes and never through Jewish houses.

[sploop!]

But whatever, "Jews are thieves".

I just want to highlight two things, danholo.

1. The quote above is yours, not mine. Check every post I have made for any sign of anti-semitism if you must, but I really object to your continual calls on the race card. I don't care what race or religion you are. I would be having this argument with you if Palestine had been annexed by the US, and made the 51st state, or seized by the British for holiday homes.

2. My problem with War Angel is that he continually implies that Palestine did not exist, or was empty land before Israel arrived. He is wrong. He knows he is wrong, and yet he continues. I object to this airbrushing of history, be it with a bulldozer or text. The idea of 'unsettled land' is ridiculous in relation to Palestine. Much of Arizona is 'unsettled', but I bet you'd have a fight on your hands if you started building there.

[War Angel]

Clearly wrong.

Nope, sorry, but it's you who is wrong. Don't worry, though, it happens to the best.

The land, the buildings on it (now bulldozed and buried)

There was a WAR. WAR. Do you know what WAR is? They wanted to kill us. We kicked their asses. We got their land, built our own homes, destroyed most of theirs. Tough shit, man, but that's WAR.

the livestock (stolen)

WTF are you on about? Why the hell would we still their freaking cows? You're just going for the whole 'Jewish thieves' bit, again. It's not very appreciated.

the businesses all belonged to the people living there.

Businesses, homes, factories, little teddy bears, whatever. Most of it went down the shitter when the war started. How about how the Arabs killed over 1% of the Jewish population here? That's like the USA being invaded, and over 3 million people die. Can you even fathom something like that, or do you simply don't care?

the businesses all belonged to the people living there.

Oh, but it is, so very much relevant. The Arabs did not come here to establish a new country, they have over two dozens of those. They came here to fight the Jews and drive them off their land - action you would likely have supported, or at least wouldn't have spoken out against, because Jews are evil and deserve whatever they get, isn't that so?

and Israel bullied them (and continues to bully them) off of it.

"War! What is good for?!" Absolutely everything, if you're an Israeli or an Arab in 1948. Both sides wanted this land - only one side could win, and only one side did. But, since it was the Jews who won, they are not entitled to the land, as it is a well-known fact Jews are not allowed to own anything, since feudal times. Jews are thieves by their very nature, they destroy everything they touch. Jews are like vermin, wouldn't you agree? Of-course you would.

Why do you continue to lie so blatantly, War Angel?

Heh, here we go again, so I'm the 'lying Jew' now. I don't care, dude. We've got our own country now, so you all can hate us as much as you like.

My problem with War Angel is that he continually implies that Palestine did not exist

It did exist, but not as an Arab country, or even a long-lasting Arab entity. It was another province of the Ottoman empire, and then a British Mandated area. Little more. There was close to nothing here in terms of civilization, up until the late 19th century.

He is wrong.

I assure you, I am not.

The idea of 'unsettled land' is ridiculous in relation to Palestine.

History does not and will not conform to your desires.

(Out of Mark Twain's book, 'Innocents Abroad', chapter 56)

Palestine is desolate and unlovely. And why should it be otherwise? Can the curse of the Deity beautify a land?

Palestine is no more of this work-day world. It is sacred to poetry and tradition--it is dream-land.

This was published in 1869, before the major Jewish Aliyahs of 1881 and 1887.

Much of Arizona is 'unsettled', but I bet you'd have a fight on your hands if you started building there.

I can buy land in Arizona and build there (yeah, I know, I'm Jewish so I can only steal, but bear with me), or I can defeat the United States in war and take their land. All fair game.

[ArtAllm]

@danholo:

The Israeli Arab population has remained at about 20% since its inception.

Well, that is because of a very high birth rate, not because of a law death or killing rate.

I really don't understand your tripe because, frankly, the only people being bullied out of their homes are Jews. These people are not allowed to settle previously unsettled land as if it were "Palestinian" by your own words.

Nobody believes in that stuff . There was no “previously unsettled land”, many hundreds of Palestinian villages were destroyed, the land was robbed and the native population was expelled.

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I don't blame you because geography books no longer exist, not only do the boooks not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushu'a in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."

[ Moshe Dayan, in Haifa, quoted by Ha'aretz, April, 4 1969. Reproduced by Ed Walid Khalidi in the book "All That Remains - see below]

www.palestine-net.com/geography/gifs/cleansed.gif

http://www.palestine-net.com/geography/cleansed/

[ArtAllm]

@WarAngel:

Do you know what WAR is? They wanted to kill us. We kicked their asses. We got their land, built our own homes, destroyed most of theirs. Tough shit, man, but that's WAR.
...
...or I can defeat the United States in war and take their land. All fair game.

No, that is against international laws.
You cannot acquire land by wars and expel the native population, this is called ethnic cleansing and this is a crime.

Hitler tried to do that, but he was stopped.

After that the world community agreed on laws prohibiting ethnic cleansing.