@Zionist Nationalist
Dude you've never even met an Arab before. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure all Arabs have higher IQs than you'll ever have in a life time.
Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods
However, we have issues with Hamas as they are Islamist.
I think there is a sort of chink in your armor on this... If Palestinians readily and eagerly accept that they are Arabs, why is integration into Egypt or Jordan such a terrible idea?
And I swear we used to have people angered whenever War Angel or whomever would post the old book clippings & reports that identified people in the Palestinian province as Jordanians in the East, Egyptians in the West, with a smattering of Jewish people
It's actually very integral to a lot of their claims and sympathies that they are decidedly Palestinians before anything else, and that whatever associations that they have with Arabs are minimal and this is more like saying "French people happen to be Europeans" as opposed to the new mode where people are Europeans before they are anything else.
IDK, quite an interesting talking point, Ozy, and what would be the best possible outcome of this thread is if people talked about this at length because, I assure you, the "illiteracy to literacy" angle is stupid.
(3) Nobody can help the Palestinians because their position is untenable. If their lot rises in the world it'll be only because a huge amount of time has passed and literally everybody & theri grandma gets to be a postmodern consumerista, and then you can go and march in Palestine Pride with them and tell us about how sweet the victory is, Comrade.
Palestinians didn't vote for the Hamas. The Hamas were placed there by a joint operation with the CIA and Mossad.
Drlee wrote:Israel is not the enemy of Palestine. Not by a long shot.
Verv wrote:
I think that it doesn't make that much sense to call it apartheid
Drlee wrote:As for the baseless shit about Israel in this thread. I am tired of simply anti-Semites.Being against Israel is not anti-Semitism. You're making your argument fall apart when you turn to this sort of rhetoric just to shut down discussion.
Drlee wrote:As for the baseless shit about Israel in this thread. I am tired of simply anti-Semites. They are so passe.
Do try to remember kiddies that Israel is controlling Palestine because some Arab countries decided to attack what Israel without provocation.
Verv wrote:(1) I do not know how to respond to the idea that Israelis an apartheid state -- mostly because I think apartheid is a political categorization. South Africa literally had a system of racial discrimination within a single state. Here, we have two separate states in existence, that are usually in conflict with one another, and I am aware that we can play some funny business about autonomy, but generally speaking Palestinians have their own nation where they are given primacy.
I do not find that convincing as 'apartheid.' I am not interested in watching a video about it right now but if you would like to throw some text in my direction, that would be cool. I have like half a dozen friends who want me to watch YouTube videos and while this was generally tolerable back when I was a drunk, it grows quite tedious to me -- I am not saying that your YT video is garbage, Skinster, I am merely saying that I do not like watching YT that much and would prefer text.
(2) The idea that Hamas was installed by a joint Israel / USA operation isn't something that I should be forced to acknowledge, Oxy, unless you actually prove that. This is basically a conspiracy theory -- if your ideas do not work without depending on a conspiracy theory, and you aren't totally able to begin proving that conspiracy theory, it's you who are at a loss, and not your audience.
I'll not even bother telling you that the truth value of this claim is exceedingly dubious because I do not want to dwell on it at all.
(3) It's not racist to say that Palestinians were generally Egyptians & Jordanians prior to the foundation of Israel.
It could theoretically just be entirely factual.
(1) I do not know how to respond to the idea that Israelis an apartheid state -- mostly because I think apartheid is a political categorization. South Africa literally had a system of racial discrimination within a single state. Here, we have two separate states in existence, that are usually in conflict with one another, and I am aware that we can play some funny business about autonomy, but generally speaking Palestinians have their own nation where they are given primacy.
I do not find that convincing as 'apartheid.' I am not interested in watching a video about it right now but if you would like to throw some text in my direction, that would be cool. I have like half a dozen friends who want me to watch YouTube videos and while this was generally tolerable back when I was a drunk, it grows quite tedious to me -- I am not saying that your YT video is garbage, Skinster, I am merely saying that I do not like watching YT that much and would prefer text.
(2) The idea that Hamas was installed by a joint Israel / USA operation isn't something that I should be forced to acknowledge, Oxy, unless you actually prove that. This is basically a conspiracy theory -- if your ideas do not work without depending on a conspiracy theory, and you aren't totally able to begin proving that conspiracy theory, it's you who are at a loss, and not your audience.
I'll not even bother telling you that the truth value of this claim is exceedingly dubious because I do not want to dwell on it at all.
I am just curious what you would say if this conspiracy wasn't true, or if you will take the time to defend this position.
(3) It's not racist to say that Palestinians were generally Egyptians & Jordanians prior to the foundation of Israel.
It could theoretically just be entirely factual.
Indeed, some of the initial propaganda pins against Israeli settelemnt talked about them as Jordanians living there explicitly.
The argument goes that Jordan & Egypt only recognize them a sdifferent ethnicities because they know that nobody will give a shit about the problem if the argument is "We're upset that Jordan & Egypt lost some of its land."
p. 132
And furthermore, there’s very good scholarship on this that’s come out in Israel now which shows, I think pretty conclusively, that the intervention of the Arab states [into Israel in 1948] was very reluctant, and that it was to a large extent directed not against Israel, but against King Abdullah of Transjordan (what’s now Jordan), who was basically a client ruler for the British. And the Arab states in fact did it because they felt that Abdullah was just a pawn of Britain, and they had good reason to believe that he was assisting the British in reconstructing their imperial system in the region in various ways [Britain had arranged to turn formal administration of Palestine over to the United Nations in May 1948]. It’ll be a hundred years before any of this material enters mainstream American scholarship, I should say—but it’s very good scholarship, and it’s important. FOOTNOTE 63
So anyway, the area that’s now Jordan was being ruled by a British client, and the other Arab states in the region regarded the Jordanian military, quite correctly, as just a British army with kind of a guy with Arab headgear leading them. And they were very much concerned about the fact (which they knew at some level, even if they didn’t know all of the details) that Abdullah and the Zionists were cooperating in a plan to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state—which in fact did happen, Abdullah and the Zionists did carry out that plan of partitioning the area that was to be the Palestinian state between them. FOOTNOTE 64 And furthermore, Abdullah also had much greater plans of his own: he wanted to take over Syria, and become the king of “Greater Syria.” And there was apparently a plan in which Israel was going to attack Syria, and then Abdullah was going to move into Syria to defend the Syrians and end up afterwards holding the whole pie, by pre-arrangement. Well, that plan never quite got worked out, as history shows—but the other Arab states had wind of it, so then they moved in against Israel to try to block Abdullah’s goals. FOOTNOTE 65
It was not only popular clamour for intervention, however, but the knowledge that Abdullah would intervene whatever happened that pushed the Arab governments, with Syria at their head, to the brink of war. From a military point of view, the Syrians had no illusions about their ability to handle the job alone. But from a political point of view they continued to see Abdullah as their principal enemy and were impelled to intervene, if only to prevent him from tipping the balance of power in the region against them.
The overriding issue was the revival of the Hashemite plan for a United Arab Kingdom in Greater Syria -- ruled by the Hashemites, supported by the British, and embracing Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and at least the Arab part of Palestine. . . . [T]he Arab governments were aware of Abdallah's contacts with the Jewish Agency and of his expansionist plans. They tried to persuade him to adopt instead a policy of cooperation with the Arab League. These attempts were without success. For Abdallah, the Greater Syria plan was not only a vision but a concrete political aim to be realized through the efficiency of his own military forces, with British and Zionist support. . . . Although Abdallah continued to be an active member of the Arab League, his real relationships with the Arab states and with Israel became the very opposite of the way they were represented. Officially Israel was the adversary, and the Arab states were his allies. In practice, the roles were reversed. . . .
Philip C. Jessup, acting U.S. ambassador to the U.N. between 1947 and 1952, cast light on the Syrian situation in a report to the secretary of state, in which he concluded that "the real fear . . . is not so much fear of Israel as reason [sic] of the expansion of Transjordan and an increase in Abdallah's prestige in the light of his former Greater Syria ideas. In other words, a fear that a settlement between Israel and Abdallah would only be a stepping stone for the latter -- his next step being attempted expansion into Syria."
[Zionist leader Ben-Gurion had] reached a tacit understanding with King Abdullah of Transjordan, which allowed the latter to move into the territories west of the River Jordan, which had been allotted by the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan to the Arab Palestinian state. This would limit the war on at least one front, leading eventually to peace; would absolve Israel from having to rule over about one million Arabs, and would pave the way for Israel to join the Western bloc by colluding with Britain's regional client, Transjordan. The crux of the arrangement was that Jerusalem, intended to be internationalized by the Partition Plan, should be divided between Israel and Transjordan. This plan was not revealed either to the Cabinet nor to the military command.
King Abdullah of Transjordan was driven by a long-standing ambition to make himself the master of Greater Syria which included, in addition to Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine. King Faruq saw Abdullah's ambition as a direct threat to Egypt's leadership in the Arab world. The rulers of Syria and Lebanon saw in King Abdullah a threat to the independence of their countries and they also suspected him of being in cahoots with the enemy. Each Arab state was moved by its own dynastic or national interests. Arab rulers were as concerned with curbing each other as they were in fighting the common enemy. Under these circumstances it was virtually impossible to reach any real consensus on the means and ends of the Arab intervention in Palestine. Consequently, far from confronting a single enemy with a clear purpose and a clear plan of action, the Yishuv faced a loose coalition consisting of the Arab League, independent Arab states, irregular Palestinian forces, and an assortment of volunteers. The Arab coalition was one of the most divided, disorganized, and ramshackle coalitions in the entire history of warfare. Separate and conflicting national interests were hidden behind the figleaf of securing Palestine for the Palestinians. The Palestine problem was the first major test of the Arab League and the Arab League failed it miserably. The actions of the League were taken ostensibly in support of the Palestinian claim for independence in the whole of Palestine. But the League remained curiously unwilling to allow the Palestinians to assume control over their own destiny. . . .
In 1947, as the conflict over Palestine entered the crucial stage, the contacts between the Jewish side and King Abdullah intensified. Golda Meir of the Jewish Agency had a secret meeting with Abdullah in Naharayim on 17 November 1947. At this meeting they reached a preliminary agreement to coordinate their diplomatic and military strategies, to forestall the mufti, and to endeavor to prevent the other Arab states from intervening directly in Palestine. . . . In return for Abdullah's promise not to enter the area assigned by the U.N. to the Jewish state, the Jewish Agency agreed to the annexation by Transjordan of most of the area earmarked for the Arab state. Precise borders were not drawn and Jerusalem was not even discussed as under the U.N. plan it was to remain a corpus separatum under international control. Nor was the agreement ever put down in writing. The Jewish Agency tried to tie Abdullah down to a written agreement but he was evasive. Yet, according to Yaacov Shimoni, a senior official in the Political Department of the Jewish Agency, despite Abdullah's evasions, the understanding with him was: "entirely clear in its general spirit. We would agree to the conquest of the Arab part of Palestine by Abdullah. We would not stand in his way. We would not help him, would not seize it and hand it over to him. He would have to take it by his own means and stratagems but we would not disturb him. He, for his part, would not prevent us from establishing the state of Israel, from dividing the country, taking our share and establishing a state in it."
[A Syrian report to the U.S. ambassador indicates that Syrian Foreign Minister Barazi:] "said seemingly fantastic story, now widely believed here, that Abdullah has made deal with the Jews 'not without foundation.' According story Haganah [the Zionist military] will counter-invade Syria after crushing Syrian Army then return quickly to Jewish Palestine as Abdullah rushes to rescue. Abdullah would receive plaudits of grateful Syrian population and crown of Greater Syria. . . . Barazi added Syria would not tolerate Abdullah with his royal airs and his black slaves. . . . [H]e added 'We must invade, otherwise the people will kill us. . . .'"
[The U.S. representative at the U.N. noted that the] real reason for present Syrian extremism is not so much fear of Israel as fear of the expansion of Transjordan and increase in Abdullah's prestige in the light of his former Greater Syrian ideas. In other words a fear that a settlement based on arrangements between Israel and Abdullah would be only a stepping-stone for the latter, his next step being attempted expansion into Syria.
The Zionist leaders, of course, were well aware of Abdullah's long-standing scheme to make himself the ruler of Greater Syria. They knew about his family history, his thwarted dynastic ambitions, and his longing to break out of Britain's tutelage. They knew of his dream to make Damascus his capital and his feeling that Amman was no substitute -- a spring-board at best. Not only did they understand all this but they also professed themselves to be sympathetic and supportive. No doubt Abdullah's preoccupation with bringing Syria into his domain suited and was exploited by the Zionists as a means of diverting him from the equally burning preoccupation with bringing Palestine into his domain. Nevertheless, the Jewish Agency had always led the amir of Transjordan to believe that it looked with favour on his ambition to conquer Syria, and this was indeed one of the props of the unwritten alliance between the two sides. The Agency did not pledge its active support for the realization of this particular ambition, but it did promise not to stand in his way. An appeal by Abdullah to Israel to lend him military support for the long-awaited march on Damascus was therefore not as bizarre as it might seem at first sight.
Even though the Arab Legion was a crack army, it had at most five thousand men and no air force or heavy artillery. It could hardly be expected to defeat the fifty- thousand-strong, well-trained, and well-equipped Haganah. What the Arab states actually feared was that the implementation of Abdallah's secret agreement with Israel would be the first step toward the creation of a Hashemite [Arab royal family] kingdom extending over Syria and Lebanon. This fear explains not only Egypt's intervention -- which was undertaken mainly to foil the plans of Abdallah and his British backers -- but also the overall logic of its military operations. The best of the units, nearly half of the invading force, did not attack Israel. They were sent to the Arab cities of Beersheba, Hebron, and Jerusalem to prevent Abdallah's annexation of these areas, which had been designated for the Palestinian state. The other forces moved along the seacoast northward to Tel Aviv, also in the area designated by the U.N. for the Palestinian state. . . .
Abdallah's first step after occupying Hebron and Bethlehem was to disband and disarm the Palestinian fighting forces and the Egyptians who remained in the area. One week after the signing of the Egyptian armistice, Israel was able to conquer Eilat without firing a single shot.
[I]n November 1947, Abdullah secretly received Mrs. Golda Myerson as the representative of the Jewish Agency. They discussed the prospects of the resolution to partition Palestine which was then before the United Nations. The King told Mrs. Myerson that he would take over the Arab part of Palestine, for he would not permit another Arab state to be set up; he would then conclude a treaty with the Jewish State. Abdullah foresaw no exceptional difficulties in the way.
It is only persuasive if "Palestinian" is an independent identity and ethnicity that is currently not represented anywhere in the world. It kind of works, then.
Doesn't really work for the Kurds that much but, hey, there are some people in the West sympathetic with the idea of a Kurdish homeland.
It's a really brilliant chess move.
That is why I tell white Americans that htey need to start identifying as an ethnicity.
Oxymandias wrote:@Zionist Nationalist
Dude you've never even met an Arab before. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure all Arabs have higher IQs than you'll ever have in a life time.
Verv wrote:The two-state solution is on the table, and that is going to be the likely result.
The Palestinian Authority largely exists as a separate state and is recognized more or less as having its own political structure, etc.
- The reason that there are Jewish only streets, etc., is because they have to act like they are more or less a different nation, and because there are terror attacks that occur with a pretty high frequency against Israeli people.
Oh yeah, oh yeah, I can almos thear you shouting right now -- sure, the Israelis come and "terrorize" the Palestinians, etc. etc., but at the end of the day you can't blame the Israelis for being better at warfare than you and then taking precautions to protect their citizens from you.
(2) The idea that Jordan would remain allied indefinitely with the Israelis is foolish.
Normal people see Israel for the genocidal settler state that it is.
Drlee wrote:Nonsense.
Normal people know it is nothing of the sort.
Normal people know that the so-called Palestinians are largely an invention in the first place.
Normal people know that Israel fought a war of survival against nations that continue to insist that they be annihilated
Normal people are simply tired of disgruntled Islamist's pounding their chests and shouting death to the enemy du jeor. They are blind to the fact that they do have an enemy. It is themselves and their cowardice in the face of the real oppressors. The states of the region who insist on distracting them with Israel.
Drlee wrote:Yes. As usual you completely ignore the post I made directly quoting the dictator in Iran calling for the annihilation of Israel.
I wrote:This isn't about other states in the region, even though people like you try to point elsewhere in an attempt to get off topic, as if that's not always obvious.
Enough of your propaganda.
Who is paying you?
He is still under checks and balances while other[…]
So the evidence shows that it was almost certainly[…]