Who is right? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank.

Moderator: PoFo Middle-East Mods

Forum rules: No one-line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum moderated in English, so please post in English only. Thank you.
User avatar
By Hellas me ponas
#15105916
The question is pretty simple. Which side is right?


Unravel your beautiful and interesting views my dear friends :)

My personal opinion is that Palestine is right, simply because the state of Israel was established arbitrarily and illegaly by expelling and exterminating local natives and settling new settler from all around Europe and America. Very similar to imperialist colonisation of Africa, but even worse.
I don't have problem against Jewish people, I have friend who is Jewish I know how they are (just like every normal ordinary people)
But the state of Israel is a crime. Its existence only serves the western interests in the region and just keeps on making the locals both Arabs and Israelis suffer in a never ending feud and fight for survival.
Killing Jews was Germanys biggest crime in their history.
But the Creation of Israel is wests history biggest crime right behind the bombings of hirosima and nagasaki (maybe they are even) .
User avatar
By Metoo
#15105944
Hellas me ponas wrote:The question is pretty simple. Which side is right?


Unravel your beautiful and interesting views my dear friends :)

My personal opinion is that Palestine is right, simply because the state of Israel was established arbitrarily and illegaly by expelling and exterminating local natives and settling new settler from all around Europe and America. Very similar to imperialist colonisation of Africa, but even worse.
I don't have problem against Jewish people, I have friend who is Jewish I know how they are (just like every normal ordinary people)
But the state of Israel is a crime. Its existence only serves the western interests in the region and just keeps on making the locals both Arabs and Israelis suffer in a never ending feud and fight for survival.
Killing Jews was Germanys biggest crime in their history.
But the Creation of Israel is wests history biggest crime right behind the bombings of hirosima and nagasaki (maybe they are even) .


You are asking a wrong question. Nobody is wrong and nobody is right. You have an opinion, - keep it.

Your question is indeed 'simple'...are you?

If you are not, then may I suggest a bit of an education, - go and study the subject matter.

Look at both sides and their arguments, study the history of Palestine and Israel. Use a reputable university course in the process of your enlightenment.

If you do all that, you will no longer be asking a 'simple' question, while professing a total ignorance of the topic that you have raised and appearing rather simplistic in your argumentative defence of your worldview.

Good luck...Google is your freind and a search function of this forum is good too.
User avatar
By Hellas me ponas
#15105949
Didn't think of this that way. You have a point.

Well, I just noticed that in this site most discussions are "café" time discussions and they aren't done by people who are experts on each respective topic.

I don't want to develop a detailed report of the Palestinian issue.
It's not a university lecture.
I'm just trying to open discussion about the ethics and moral justifications behind the issue.
I should be more specific then, right or wrong when it comes to morals, not when it comes to geopolitics.
Better now? :)
User avatar
By Hellas me ponas
#15105952
I I've been reading a certain book about Ottoman history and an other about the Arab world.
I'll find them online if I can and send you links
I have a really good view of how Palestine was before the Jews invade. But I have to admit I havent studied at all the history after the invasion.
User avatar
By Hellas me ponas
#15105955
It's night now and I can't find the books.
They are both from my mother's university she studied Turkish history, arts, economy, language, politics and society at Kapodistrian University of Athens. These books are really good, I suggest you read them too. I'll give you citations tommorow, bdcaus ei can't find them now.
User avatar
By Metoo
#15106063
Hellas me ponas wrote:Well, I just noticed that in this site most discussions are "café" time discussions and they aren't done by people who are experts on each respective topic.

I don't want to develop a detailed report of the Palestinian issue.
It's not a university lecture.
I'm just trying to open discussion about the ethics and moral justifications behind the issue.
I should be more specific then, right or wrong when it comes to morals, not when it comes to geopolitics.
Better now?


Better? LOL…Clearly you are in the fantasy land. You want open discussion about “…the ethics and moral justifications behind the issue…” You can’t have it. Reason being that it would depends on ‘which church you worship at’, as it were.

I told you that you are asking the wrong question and you still do.

This is why I also told you that you need education and I suggested a university course. Do notice that I did not say that you should read a book, I said a reputable university course.

Again,- reason here is that any reputable university will at least give a semblance of balanced view on the subject matter that you are pondering, - and that subject matter is one of the most complicated issues that we are facing today, - so, no…you can’t have an open discussion on “…the ethics and moral justifications behind the issue…”.

If you attempt to persist here, what you WILL get is a verbal contest with one side claiming the divine right to the truth or the other side doing the same.

A university setting will mitigate that, but then again, it does depend on the school too. Today, thanks to the pandemic, you can take a web-course at the best schools that this planet has to offer that teach the subject. I can, if you like, suggest a few…

Hellas me ponas wrote:In case you want to discuss history of this certain region. I'm glad to have this discussion with you in an other thread, or personal msg.


No, - history cannot be discussed, - only stated as a fact.

Personally, I agree with the maxim that states that ‘History is written by the Victor’. It is often attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte, but I am sure he was not the first one to say it…methinks Churchill and also Goring uttered the same too.

As you see, one was the hero of our time and the other was the villain. Both said the same thing, - I hope that logic is your friend and you can figure out how baseless your initial desire to “…discuss history of this certain region… “really is.

Hellas me ponas wrote:I I've been reading a certain book about Ottoman history and an other about the Arab world.
I'll find them online if I can and send you links


You read the book? LOL…I read the book too! Thank you for the offer though, but I pass. Here is the question for the win, - whose book is ‘better’, - yours or mine?

Hellas me ponas wrote:I have a really good view of how Palestine was before the Jews invade. But I have to admit I havent studied at all the history after the invasion.


Jews… invade? WOW? Are you referring to the ‘invasion’ of Israelite tribes led by Joshua Bin-Nun? Are you?

If so, - that happened in the Bible, back about 4000 years ago give or take. And if you were to study the subject at reputable university, you’d know that the Bible is not a history book.

After the ‘invasion’ by Joshua Bin Nun, the Jews did not invade again, - ever. There was nothing to invade. They stayed in the land, that they called Judea, for the past 4000, or some historians and anthropologists will say 5000, years.

So, - what ‘invasion’ are you talking about?

Judea was controlled by many forces in the past 3000 years, - pick your favorite! The Israelites, the Assyrians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Romans, the Turks, The Arabs, the British - some are still around…and before them by the Amorites, the Philistines the Moabites, etc., - who are dead or extinct and have been for over 3000 years.

There is only one common denominator in the above paragraph, - it is the Jews. Yes, the Jews have stayed throughout the times since Biblical Joshua Bin Nun led the Israelite tribes in the military assault against the people living in what Bible called Canaan. The Jews won. The Jews never left the Land whose history you claim to have “a really good view of how Palestine was before the Jews invade…” LOL! All other cultures either died out, left, or, in the case of Arabs, came much later.

So, - which one is your favorite ‘invader’? If you can answer this question, then you will know who invaded who! Good luck with that…

Hellas me ponas wrote:It's night now and I can't find the books.
They are both from my mother's university she studied Turkish history, arts, economy, language, politics and society at Kapodistrian University of Athens. These books are really good, I suggest you read them too. I'll give you citations tommorow, bdcaus ei can't find them now.


I am sure the books you mother have “…are really good…” Well, - good night to you too, - I suggest that you re-read my post!

Still, - there is a light at the end of this tunnel. Here it is, - you can’t discuss history! You can only state your views and attempt to support it by facts as you see it. You will have to rely on the vote here and then accept the majority opinion. Like it or not, this is all you can do.

You can’t discuss the future, because it is yet to happen.

All you can do is to discuss the present and perhaps attempt to affect it as you see fit, or discuss a very close past, say…within a 100 year from the present.

If you attempt to venture outside of that time envelope you will find yourself in the turbulent waters of arguments and polemic. Take your chances, - you may drown as many did.
User avatar
By ingliz
#15106081
Metoo wrote:They stayed in the land, that they called Judea, for the past 4000, or some historians and anthropologists will say 5000, years.

Are you sure?

The official beginning of the construction of the New Yishuv in Palestine is usually dated to the arrival of the Bilu group in 1882. At that time native-born Jews made up only 3% of the population* and foreign-born Jews, non-citizens, numbered less than 10,000.

* The Ottoman census of 1878 indicated the following demographics for the three districts that best approximated what later became Mandatory Palestine; that is, the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem, the Nablus Sanjak, and the Acre Sanjak.

Muslim citizens: 403,795 : 86-87%
Christian citizens: 43,659 : 9%
Jewish citizens: 15,011 : 3%
Jewish (foreign-born): Est. 5-10,000: 1-2%


:)
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15106168
Hellas me ponas wrote:The question is pretty simple. Which side is right?


Unravel your beautiful and interesting views my dear friends :)

My personal opinion is that Palestine is right, simply because the state of Israel was established arbitrarily and illegaly by expelling and exterminating local natives and settling new settler from all around Europe and America. Very similar to imperialist colonisation of Africa, but even worse.
I don't have problem against Jewish people, I have friend who is Jewish I know how they are (just like every normal ordinary people)
But the state of Israel is a crime. Its existence only serves the western interests in the region and just keeps on making the locals both Arabs and Israelis suffer in a never ending feud and fight for survival.
Killing Jews was Germanys biggest crime in their history.
But the Creation of Israel is wests history biggest crime right behind the bombings of hirosima and nagasaki (maybe they are even) .


Israel came to be because of the circumstances of the time. If WW2 didn't happen then Israel wouldn't exist. It was a heavy motivator for the creation of the state from the side of the Jews. Ignoring that is ignoring history. Not to mention that the British crown promised that land to the Jews eventually.

With the modern world view, sure it is a crime. But you can't blame the jews and the state of Israel for it because otherwise you would be ignoring history and the situation of the time. Basically like taking text out of context to proove a point of sorts. If somebody lined up 100 of somebodies relatives and then arbitrarily shot half of them that would be a gigantic motivator for that somebody to prevent that situation from happening ever again. Essentially that created the state of Israel.

Can it be called imperealism though? I guess it is British imperealism for promising that land. Jews didn't really care at the time where to settle as long as there was a place to do it and create their own state.
User avatar
By Metoo
#15106215
ingliz wrote:Are you sure?


Yes, I am sure. Please read my post. I am referring to the Biblical narrative, not modern times. I am not saying that the Bible is a history book. It is not. Nobody knows for sure what happened and how. However, the Israelites arrived in the land, Israel today, about 4000years ago, that much we know from archeological data.

ingliz wrote:The official beginning of the construction of the New Yishuv in Palestine is usually dated to the arrival of the Bilu group in 1882. At that time native-born Jews made up only 3% of the population* and foreign-born Jews, non-citizens, numbered less than 10,000.

* The Ottoman census of 1878 indicated the following demographics for the three districts that best approximated what later became Mandatory Palestine; that is, the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem, the Nablus Sanjak, and the Acre Sanjak.

Muslim citizens: 403,795 : 86-87%
Christian citizens: 43,659 : 9%
Jewish citizens: 15,011 : 3%
Jewish (foreign-born): Est. 5-10,000: 1-2%


So? We all know that the Jews constituted minority in the land since about Common Era, even perhaps a few hundred year before that. What difference does it make? This is not important.
The important point is, as it relates to the original poster, is that The Jews never left Judea before it was renamed ‘Palestina’ by the Romans around 2 century C.E. or any time after that.

There has always been a Jewish presents in the Land, whatever you want to call this land. Naturally today, the Jews have returned and now once again, constitute the majority, as they did 2000 years ago. That is all.
User avatar
By Metoo
#15106220
JohnRawls wrote:Israel came to be because of the circumstances of the time. If WW2 didn't happen then Israel wouldn't exist. It was a heavy motivator for the creation of the state from the side of the Jews. Ignoring that is ignoring history. Not to mention that the British crown promised that land to the Jews eventually.


Really? Are we now going to indulge ‘in a what if’ history? You have no idea what would have happened had it not been for the WW2. It is entirely possible that the British would have done exactly as they promised to do, regardless WW2. So, - let’s not do this, let’s not speculate.

JohnRawls wrote:With the modern world view, sure it is a crime.


Why is it a crime “…With the modern world view…”? Are aware that quite a few Arab countries were also created by UN at the same time as Israel? How about Jordan, created in 1946 as an example might be. Is it not a crime too? When do you think Lebanon was created, or Syria, or Saudi Arabia, - the list will go on into dozens of Arab countries, all came to be in 1930s or late 1940s. All those countries was carved out from the Ottoman lands. So, - Israel is just another country. Let’s treat it the same way.

JohnRawls wrote:But you can't blame the jews and the state of Israel for it because otherwise you would be ignoring history and the situation of the time. Basically like taking text out of context to proove a point of sorts. If somebody lined up 100 of somebodies relatives and then arbitrarily shot half of them that would be a gigantic motivator for that somebody to prevent that situation from happening ever again. Essentially that created the state of Israel.


This is wrong. The Jewish community had been lobbying for a long time to be recognized by the League of Nations and then by UN, its successor, as a rightful claimant to the parts of the land vacated by the Ottoman empire. The WW2 played no role in the submissions. WW2 was used to show what can happen if the World were to look ‘the other way’. Legal basis was derived from the string of British White papers, the Balfour and St. Remo declarations. WW2 was used to amplify the point, but not to justify it.

JohnRawls wrote:Can it be called imperealism though? I guess it is British imperealism for promising that land. Jews didn't really care at the time where to settle as long as there was a place to do it and create their own state.


You are wrong. The Jews did care. They were offered other lands, - Uganda for instance. The Jewish community had a good laugh at it.

British Palestine has always been a historic Jewish homeland, so no other territory would have done the trick. To paraphrase Moshe Dayan, former Minister of Defense, - you can dig under any hill in Israel and you will find Jewish artifacts. Today you can visit the Israel museum in Jerusalem with room after room filled with Jewish artifacts some 2600 years old and all the way to present time, uninterrupted.
#15106221
Hellas me ponas wrote:The question is pretty simple. Which side is right?

Way too complex an issue for such a simple answer. Both sides have done right and wrong. So I don't have a "side", other than what is right, which is different sides at different times.

My personal opinion is that Palestine is right, simply because the state of Israel was established arbitrarily and illegaly by expelling and exterminating local natives and settling new settler from all around Europe and America. Very similar to imperialist colonisation of Africa, but even worse.
I don't have problem against Jewish people, I have friend who is Jewish I know how they are (just like every normal ordinary people)
But the state of Israel is a crime.[/quote]
The state of Israel itself as a matter of existence is not a crime, it was brought about through a legal UN Resolution by the UN General Assembly. So by international law, it technically has a right to exist under the proposed UN Partition Plan. Jews in the area also legally bought a lot of land in the area starting in the 19th Century before the UN resolution or British mandate rule.

But the Arab League rejected the UN Partition Plan, and the creation of an Israeli state, so these Arab states immediately illegally attacked Israel, and lost, and during the war Israel illegally took more than was promised to them by the UN and annexed it. Israel and the Arab states went to war again in 1967 and as a result of the war Israel militarily occupied (but did not annex) more Arab and Palestinian land. It gave the Sinai back to Egypt in the 1970's. Israel has been slowly building illegal settlements on some of this occupied land in the West Bank, and now has plans to annex it, which again is illegal. And of course throughout this time Israelis and Palestinians & friends have been doing all sorts of illegal stuff to each other. Not to mention Israeli troops and Palestinian/Arab terrorists doing all sorts of terrible things to each other.

So in other words, they've all done their share of criminal things and it's a huge shit-show.
User avatar
By Hindsite
#15106248
Hellas me ponas wrote:The question is pretty simple. Which side is right?

My simple answer is Israel.
HalleluYah
User avatar
By ingliz
#15106277
Metoo wrote:I am referring to the Biblical narrative

"that much we know from arch[a]eological data"

So why don't you pull back to within the ancient borders of Judah. Archaeological evidence shows us that the Biblical kingdom of the Jews under Saul, David, and Solomon was no more than a small tribal entity limited to Jerusalem and its immediate surroundings.


:)
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15106320
Metoo wrote:Really? Are we now going to indulge ‘in a what if’ history? You have no idea what would have happened had it not been for the WW2. It is entirely possible that the British would have done exactly as they promised to do, regardless WW2. So, - let’s not do this, let’s not speculate.



Why is it a crime “…With the modern world view…”? Are aware that quite a few Arab countries were also created by UN at the same time as Israel? How about Jordan, created in 1946 as an example might be. Is it not a crime too? When do you think Lebanon was created, or Syria, or Saudi Arabia, - the list will go on into dozens of Arab countries, all came to be in 1930s or late 1940s. All those countries was carved out from the Ottoman lands. So, - Israel is just another country. Let’s treat it the same way.



This is wrong. The Jewish community had been lobbying for a long time to be recognized by the League of Nations and then by UN, its successor, as a rightful claimant to the parts of the land vacated by the Ottoman empire. The WW2 played no role in the submissions. WW2 was used to show what can happen if the World were to look ‘the other way’. Legal basis was derived from the string of British White papers, the Balfour and St. Remo declarations. WW2 was used to amplify the point, but not to justify it.



You are wrong. The Jews did care. They were offered other lands, - Uganda for instance. The Jewish community had a good laugh at it.

British Palestine has always been a historic Jewish homeland, so no other territory would have done the trick. To paraphrase Moshe Dayan, former Minister of Defense, - you can dig under any hill in Israel and you will find Jewish artifacts. Today you can visit the Israel museum in Jerusalem with room after room filled with Jewish artifacts some 2600 years old and all the way to present time, uninterrupted.


I don't quite understand your point a bit but i will try to explain some things.

1) Why British Palestine and not some other place? Well, this all comes down to the fact that it was probably the easier place to create a state of Israel in. People were migrating there, it was promised by the crown and so on. If Uganda was an easier place to etablish Israel then i have no doubt that Israel would be in Uganda. This wouldn't change the modern situation much. There would be relatively same kind of problems if Israel was in Uganda.

2) Why is it a war crime with modern morality? Well, simply because moral principles and rules change over time. Creation of Israel was justified in the eyes of European, Americans and USSR after WW2 ended because jews have been opressed heavily by HItler and other governments. Same went not only for the leadership but also the people at that time including the jews themselves. So if you look at after WW2 situation then nobody was really against it in any serious manner and saw it as a just outcome or reparations to the jewish people. With a modern morality though, when we forget everything and use our new norms of international relations etc then sure, it is a war crime and unjustified. I am a firm believer that you can condemn things that happened in the past but there is no backwards compatability in the area of legality of international relations. So basically, you can't charge Israel for anything regarding this. The Classical Geneva convention was created in 1949, Israel was created in 1948 for example. Not to mention the problems that come from the fact that not all countries were part of it etc.

3) Jews have indeed been arguing for creation of state of Israel even before WW1. The problem is that there was no clear cut plan for it. So after WW2, heavily motivated by the events of WW2 and the inaction in the last 100 years, a lot of the leaders of the jewish community took things in to their own hands. This is what leaders do. They wanted to prevent another outcome like WW2 for the jews and they technically did for now. I doubt the leaders of the jewish community would do it if WW2 didn't happen. It takes extreme motivation to do what they did.
By skinster
#15106326
Hellas, check out some history here: viewtopic.php?f=42&t=178837

JohnRawls wrote:If WW2 didn't happen then Israel wouldn't exist.


Ahistorical nonsense. Zionism preceded WW2 by about 6 decades. Zionists used WW2 as an opportunity to colonize Palestine, despite majority Jews being opposed to it at that time, and today.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15106442
skinster wrote:Hellas, check out some history here: viewtopic.php?f=42&t=178837



Ahistorical nonsense. Zionism preceded WW2 by about 6 decades. Zionists used WW2 as an opportunity to colonize Palestine, despite majority Jews being opposed to it at that time, and today.


Yes it did exist before WW2 but WW2 catapulted it in to taking very agressive action or extreme. You get the point. Pre-WW2 zionism was more peaceful and probably would have seen steady flow of the jewish population to Palestein with there forming a kind of reasonable government body with both jews and arabs included. PRE-WW2 Zionism was based mostly on consensus and negotiating/gaining favour from the Ottomans, British empire etc and had branches all over the world etc. After WW2 Israel was deemed as a necessity right now, so the jewish diaspora armed themselves and just took palestine by force basically.
User avatar
By Hindsite
#15106481
JohnRawls wrote:Yes it did exist before WW2 but WW2 catapulted it in to taking very agressive action or extreme. You get the point. Pre-WW2 zionism was more peaceful and probably would have seen steady flow of the jewish population to Palestein with there forming a kind of reasonable government body with both jews and arabs included. PRE-WW2 Zionism was based mostly on consensus and negotiating/gaining favour from the Ottomans, British empire etc and had branches all over the world etc. After WW2 Israel was deemed as a necessity right now, so the jewish diaspora armed themselves and just took palestine by force basically.

Don't forget that it was also a promise by God.
Praise the Lord.
By Patrickov
#15106489
Hindsite wrote:Don't forget that it was also a promise by God.
Praise the Lord.


This does not mean Rawl's words were not right. The point is that some events made the people "carry out" the promise in a different manner.

God promised that land to the Jews, but He did put the Jews in others' hands or chased / moved them away at least several times. I guess they still have to live up to God's expectations in order to keep it.
By Rich
#15106527
Patrickov wrote:God promised that land to the Jews,

That's a hideous racist lie. God clearly expressed his will on this matter in 332, by granting Alexander his miraculous victories. The only question is who can claim to be the legitimate successor State / government to Alexander. I know one thing for sure, its not Hamas.
Election 2020

Maybe it would not be so bad a thing (and worth[…]

Joe Biden

He could very well the logopenic variant of Alzhe[…]

Thank Goodness for Sane People

You both haven't noticed yet that politically the […]

You can block the airway without physically damag[…]