Judaism
18 January 2011, 08:48 AM
#123
Tony is going to shout as loud and as long as it takes for people to see his point of view, however that is not going to happen.
From his attitude on this thread this is the bottom line according to him Israel = Good anything muslim = Evil.
James you have a discussion with everything Islam/Islamism related however you have been rather quiet on this thread, do you not want to upset your comrade Tony.
You dont need to respond to my post as I am disappointed that you share views with such a person
From his attitude on this thread this is the bottom line according to him Israel = Good anything muslim = Evil.
James you have a discussion with everything Islam/Islamism related however you have been rather quiet on this thread, do you not want to upset your comrade Tony.
You dont need to respond to my post as I am disappointed that you share views with such a person
18 January 2011, 09:38 AM
#124
Scooby Regular
The UN said Saddam had WMD's.
What would you want your Government to do if there was a country next door launching terrorist attacks? Sit back and do nothing? No you would want a blockade.
Israeli immigration policy is not your business.
I've admitted the settlements are an issue but otoh the Israli state has shown it will use force to removed them.
I believe your point was an existential one though not specifically pertaining to settlers because most Israelis are not right-wing setters.
Like I said it's hard to say Jews should not be in Israeli when you presumably think it's ok for say Indian or Pakistanis to come to the UK.
What would you want your Government to do if there was a country next door launching terrorist attacks? Sit back and do nothing? No you would want a blockade.
Israeli immigration policy is not your business.
I've admitted the settlements are an issue but otoh the Israli state has shown it will use force to removed them.
I believe your point was an existential one though not specifically pertaining to settlers because most Israelis are not right-wing setters.
Like I said it's hard to say Jews should not be in Israeli when you presumably think it's ok for say Indian or Pakistanis to come to the UK.
18 January 2011, 10:09 AM
#125
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
).Geezer
18 January 2011, 10:09 AM
#126
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tony is going to shout as loud and as long as it takes for people to see his point of view, however that is not going to happen.
From his attitude on this thread this is the bottom line according to him Israel = Good anything muslim = Evil.
James you have a discussion with everything Islam/Islamism related however you have been rather quiet on this thread, do you not want to upset your comrade Tony.
You dont need to respond to my post as I am disappointed that you share views with such a person
From his attitude on this thread this is the bottom line according to him Israel = Good anything muslim = Evil.
James you have a discussion with everything Islam/Islamism related however you have been rather quiet on this thread, do you not want to upset your comrade Tony.
You dont need to respond to my post as I am disappointed that you share views with such a person
18 January 2011, 10:14 AM
#127
You're not qualified to assess when I need to respond to a post and your disappointment affects me not. Perhaps you would garner my respect should you find the courage and the insight to attack the position rather than the person. Try to see the grey Banny, the truth lay there.
18 January 2011, 10:31 AM
#128
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Banny,
Remember when you were at school and there would always be a bully who would have a group of followers that would hang round with him and obey his every word, Then when the bully would pick on another kid and fight with him his followers would be ready to wade in if it looked like his victim was going to get the better of him all except for one who was alway not brave enough to get involved himself but would take great glee in the downfall of the chosen victim whooping ad hollering and jeering from the sidelines.
Remind you of anyone?
Remember when you were at school and there would always be a bully who would have a group of followers that would hang round with him and obey his every word, Then when the bully would pick on another kid and fight with him his followers would be ready to wade in if it looked like his victim was going to get the better of him all except for one who was alway not brave enough to get involved himself but would take great glee in the downfall of the chosen victim whooping ad hollering and jeering from the sidelines.
Remind you of anyone?
18 January 2011, 04:16 PM
#129
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OTOH the anti-Israeli people on this board see fit to paint Israeli as a cartoon bad guy based on youtube videos and demagoguery.
18 January 2011, 04:22 PM
#130
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It never replaced, all, or part of a 'Palestinian' state. There was no such thing, just the British Mandate and before that a region which was part of the Ottoman Empire.
Many Palestinians then fled when the Arabs attacked and unfortunately never returned. There was a needless war in 1948 started by the Arabs which has caused much of the Palestinian suffering.
18 January 2011, 04:34 PM
#131
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: will be back in another scooby in time....
Posts: 2,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is a lie. I've acknowledged some Israeli failings and my criticism of the Palestinians and their supporters is based on reason.
OTOH the anti-Israeli people on this board see fit to paint Israeli as a cartoon bad guy based on youtube videos and demagoguery.
OTOH the anti-Israeli people on this board see fit to paint Israeli as a cartoon bad guy based on youtube videos and demagoguery.
18 January 2011, 05:11 PM
#134
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
18 January 2011, 05:14 PM
#136
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
18 January 2011, 05:16 PM
#138
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
18 January 2011, 05:18 PM
#139
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
18 January 2011, 05:19 PM
#141
i don't care what religieon people are i don't belive in god or jesus and i don't mind anyone talking about it, what i do find petty is these so called people saying i killed your family in the name of god, surely if those whom believe he created all life why would he want it destroyed in such horrid ways, we all live and we all die naturally me when i go i go and if my SOUL does go somewhere i'll pop back and tell you all 'OOOPPPPS MY BAD', i just hope there is a race if there is somewhere to go lol
18 January 2011, 05:38 PM
#142
That is not what happened though. Jews were immigrating from the start of the 20th century and buying land. Then at some point the British decided to set up a the Jewish state.
It never replaced, all, or part of a 'Palestinian' state. There was no such thing, just the British Mandate and before that a region which was part of the Ottoman Empire.
Many Palestinians then fled when the Arabs attacked and unfortunately never returned. There was a needless war in 1948 started by the Arabs which has caused much of the Palestinian suffering.
It never replaced, all, or part of a 'Palestinian' state. There was no such thing, just the British Mandate and before that a region which was part of the Ottoman Empire.
Many Palestinians then fled when the Arabs attacked and unfortunately never returned. There was a needless war in 1948 started by the Arabs which has caused much of the Palestinian suffering.
- The British did not _decide_ to set up a Jewish state. In the aftermath of the first world war they favoured a democratic, secular Palestinian state, an idea accepted by the Arabs, but rejected by the Jewish population (at the time less than 10%). After the second world war Britain could not afford to maintain the mandate and couldn't get agreement from the Arabs and Jewish populations (who had been at each other's throats through much of the preceeding 30 years), so handed the problem over to the UN. UNSCOP (UN Special Committee on Palestine) defined the 1948 boundaries. To give you an idea of how much of a land grab this was, at the start of the second world war Jews made up about a third of the population and owned ~15% of the land. The UNSCOP boundaries allocated 56% to the Jewish state!
- While the Jews bought up land between the wars, often this was from absentee Arab landlords resulting in Arab peasants being evicted from land their family had farmed for centuries.
- Almost immediately the UNSCOP boundaries were set and the date for the end of the British mandate announced fighting broke out between the Zionist and Arab militia within Palestine. This was pretty one sided - about 45,000 well equipped Zionists against 8,000 poorly equipped Arabs.
- Even before the end of the mandate (and before any other Arab countries were involved) the Zionists had taken much territory that was earmarked for the Palestinians in the UNSCOP plan. When the Arab countries invaded on 14 May 1948 (the day the British withdrew) it was already clear that the Zionists had no intention of sticking to the UNSCOP boundaries.
18 January 2011, 06:07 PM
#143
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not a witch hunt? I came up with the question and asked it. How can one person asking one question be a witch hunt? Maybe you should ask shy others would also like an answer.
Why not just answer it? I mean what have you got to hide?
Why not just answer it? I mean what have you got to hide?
18 January 2011, 06:23 PM
#145
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ thesyn.
On which side of the house, or both and what would constitute an 'original' position?
FWIW the roots of the 'conflict' stem back to around the 2nd millenia BCE. After 10 years of observation I cannot, with clear conscience, find an unequivocal position. Grey, grey and more grey.
On which side of the house, or both and what would constitute an 'original' position?
FWIW the roots of the 'conflict' stem back to around the 2nd millenia BCE. After 10 years of observation I cannot, with clear conscience, find an unequivocal position. Grey, grey and more grey.
Last edited by JTaylor; 18 January 2011 at 06:34 PM.
18 January 2011, 06:27 PM
#146
Banny,
Remember when you were at school and there would always be a bully who would have a group of followers that would hang round with him and obey his every word, Then when the bully would pick on another kid and fight with him his followers would be ready to wade in if it looked like his victim was going to get the better of him all except for one who was alway not brave enough to get involved himself but would take great glee in the downfall of the chosen victim whooping ad hollering and jeering from the sidelines.
Remind you of anyone?
Remember when you were at school and there would always be a bully who would have a group of followers that would hang round with him and obey his every word, Then when the bully would pick on another kid and fight with him his followers would be ready to wade in if it looked like his victim was going to get the better of him all except for one who was alway not brave enough to get involved himself but would take great glee in the downfall of the chosen victim whooping ad hollering and jeering from the sidelines.
Remind you of anyone?
18 January 2011, 06:40 PM
#148
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tony, you need to read a bit of history. You paint a picture of the Zionists not treading on any toes and always willing to abide by international law and opinion, but this is so far from the truth it is laughable. Yes, the Arabs have been far from saints in all of this, but neither were the Zionists. Let me give you a bit of a history lesson.
- The British did not _decide_ to set up a Jewish state. In the aftermath of the first world war they favoured a democratic, secular Palestinian state, an idea accepted by the Arabs, but rejected by the Jewish population (at the time less than 10%). After the second world war Britain could not afford to maintain the mandate and couldn't get agreement from the Arabs and Jewish populations (who had been at each other's throats through much of the preceeding 30 years), so handed the problem over to the UN. UNSCOP (UN Special Committee on Palestine) defined the 1948 boundaries. To give you an idea of how much of a land grab this was, at the start of the second world war Jews made up about a third of the population and owned ~15% of the land. The UNSCOP boundaries allocated 56% to the Jewish state!
- While the Jews bought up land between the wars, often this was from absentee Arab landlords resulting in Arab peasants being evicted from land their family had farmed for centuries.
- Almost immediately the UNSCOP boundaries were set and the date for the end of the British mandate announced fighting broke out between the Zionist and Arab militia within Palestine. This was pretty one sided - about 45,000 well equipped Zionists against 8,000 poorly equipped Arabs.
- Even before the end of the mandate (and before any other Arab countries were involved) the Zionists had taken much territory that was earmarked for the Palestinians in the UNSCOP plan. When the Arab countries invaded on 14 May 1948 (the day the British withdrew) it was already clear that the Zionists had no intention of sticking to the UNSCOP boundaries.
- The British did not _decide_ to set up a Jewish state. In the aftermath of the first world war they favoured a democratic, secular Palestinian state, an idea accepted by the Arabs, but rejected by the Jewish population (at the time less than 10%). After the second world war Britain could not afford to maintain the mandate and couldn't get agreement from the Arabs and Jewish populations (who had been at each other's throats through much of the preceeding 30 years), so handed the problem over to the UN. UNSCOP (UN Special Committee on Palestine) defined the 1948 boundaries. To give you an idea of how much of a land grab this was, at the start of the second world war Jews made up about a third of the population and owned ~15% of the land. The UNSCOP boundaries allocated 56% to the Jewish state!
- While the Jews bought up land between the wars, often this was from absentee Arab landlords resulting in Arab peasants being evicted from land their family had farmed for centuries.
- Almost immediately the UNSCOP boundaries were set and the date for the end of the British mandate announced fighting broke out between the Zionist and Arab militia within Palestine. This was pretty one sided - about 45,000 well equipped Zionists against 8,000 poorly equipped Arabs.
- Even before the end of the mandate (and before any other Arab countries were involved) the Zionists had taken much territory that was earmarked for the Palestinians in the UNSCOP plan. When the Arab countries invaded on 14 May 1948 (the day the British withdrew) it was already clear that the Zionists had no intention of sticking to the UNSCOP boundaries.
I can't refute your figures of 15% of land, but otoh what does that mean? Was the other 85% specifically owned by Arabs or was some land owned by the 'state' or was common? I think you would agree that statistic is potentially highly misleading.
Blame the Arab landlords for selling the land.
Where is your evidence the Zionists had no intention of sticking to the agreed boundaries?
If the Jews were 10% how was it 45,000 vs 8,000?
In the aftermath of the first world war they favoured a democratic, secular Palestinian state, an idea accepted by the Arabs
You have to agree that there was no Palestine as such which was carved up, just a region first run by the Ottomans then British. There was no nation state called Palestine. As Euro powers withdrew from colonies and parts of the Empire a 'carve up' of the land was very common.
Last edited by tony de wonderful; 18 January 2011 at 06:43 PM.
18 January 2011, 09:01 PM
#149
I'm just trying to give a more balanced view than the picture you create with your posts of happy Arabs walking away from their land with big fat cheques and no-one suffering.
Armed militants, not total population. On the Zionist side there were at least 40,000 in Haganah, and the rest came from the Irgun and Stern Gang terrorist groups.
Not sure I understand what your point is here. There are plenty of secular democratic states in the world (the UK for example). Is secular the word you are having problems with?
You have to agree that there was no Palestine as such which was carved up, just a region first run by the Ottomans then British. There was no nation state called Palestine. As Euro powers withdrew from colonies and parts of the Empire a 'carve up' of the land was very common.
Last edited by scud8; 18 January 2011 at 09:03 PM.
18 January 2011, 09:15 PM
#150
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have 3rd world immigration to the UK. Are you against that?
Much as I hate using Wikipedia as a reference, in this case it has some well-attributed data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate...Land_ownership). This puts the Jewish land-ownership somewhere between 7 and 8% in 1947, somewhat less than my 15% figure (which came from "The Middle East since 1945" by Stewart Ross since we're into quoting sources - it's a good overview book although not very detailed and obviously wrong in some of its numbers!). The data also shows that in most districts more than 2/3 of the rest of the land was in private Arab ownership, with the big stand-out being Beersheba where 85% of the land was publically owned. Even with Beersheba being a big chunk of the Israeli partition I'm sure a detailed analysis would show that a substantial amount of privately Arab owned land ended up in the Israeli partition and very little Jewish owned land ended up in the Arab partition.
Mainly their actions. They captured vast swathes of Arab territory between UN resolution 181 and the end of the mandate, including territory (Jerusalem) that was supposed to be administered by the UN. During the 1948 war they forcably expelled large numbers of Arabs when there was no security-related reason for doing so. The public statements of such luminaries as Golda Meir and Sharon would certainly support this view as well. (My favorite Golda-ism is ""There is no such thing as a Palestinian people. It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist.")
The Zionists captured the land after they were attacked by the Arab armies.
I'm not disputing any of this, but it was a region that had been stable under the Ottoman's for hundreds of years before the Zionists took a liking to it. The really irritating thing is that they originally considered a sparsely populated area of Argentina for a Jewish state, and the British government offered an area of East Africa - but because their scripture told them god had promised them Palestine they had to go for an area with an existing settled population. Religion really sucks sometimes (all of them!).