Middle East Conflict (merged)

[oldius]

There never was such a place though. And even if the Arabs had won the war in 1948 and wiped Israel out, there still wouldn't be a state called Palestine. That's because Egypt, Israel & Jordan all claimed the territory and saw it, or parts of it, as being part of their country. That's not speculation either. It's well and here's the proof if you need it.

In 1948 Jordan controlled the whole West Bank. Did they create a Palestinian state? No. They annexed it. And the Egyptians placed the Gaza Strip under military control.

There has never been, nor would there have been, an independent, sovereign Palestinian state.

It is recognised, officially, by the UN as the state of Palestine.

 

[Don Karleone]

Just seen a video of people driving around Jewish areas in London shouting anti Semitic insults....people have every right to be mad at Israel, but I think it’s clear a sizeable number just don’t like Jewish people.

disgusting behaviour from racists

They can fuck off as well.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

It is recognised, officially, by the UN as the state of Palestine.

But it's not a full member as it doesn't meet the criteria for that. It's even run by two completely separate factions, who hate each other almost as much as they hate Israel.

The UN is really not an independent arbitrator, like CAS for example, making rational and carefully thought-through decisions based on law and logic. It's a political body where those who shout the loudest get their way.

 

[Mancityus]

The rest of the world absolutely get the legal case, they just chose to look the other way, just like they have with Saudi Arabia because they'd rather be on good terms with tyrants than stand up for what's right. Israel and the Saudi's know this so know they can continue to push further and further, free for international repercussions.

What legal case ? it is not a simple situation and if you have a point of view that is fine, there are million others. Artificial lines drawn up cutting populations into arbitrary areas and then each side over years trying to take advantage when they could does not mean that one side is right. Why don't all neighboring states offer Palestinians a home when there are many rich with large land mass around but that will not be done while they will be offered arms to continue an endless fight.

 

[west didsblue]

It is recognised, officially, by the UN as the state of Palestine.

There was no State of Palestine before 1988.
As PB says, it’s complicated and all the arguments have been gone through countless times on here over the years.
As far as I’m concerned the main two problems are Netanyahu and Hamas. Without moderates on both sides taking the lead it cannot be resolved and there appears to be no prospect of a satisfactory resolution any time soon. Although I am a strong supporter of Israel I have absolutely no time for Netanyahu and his nationist / religious allies, and I believe Israel needs to make concessions first because they are in the position of strength, but that’s not going to happen with Netanyahu running the show.

 

[KPXBLN]

There never was such a place though. And even if the Arabs had won the war in 1948 and wiped Israel out, there still wouldn't be a state called Palestine. That's because Egypt, Israel & Jordan all claimed the territory and saw it, or parts of it, as being part of their country. That's not speculation either. It's well documented and here's the proof if you need it.

In 1948 Jordan controlled the whole West Bank. Did they create a Palestinian state? No. They annexed it. And the Egyptians placed the Gaza Strip under military control.

There has never been, nor would there have been, an independent, sovereign Palestinian state.

And I'm not saying this to support the Israelis or downplay what's happened to the Palestinians. But people have this view that the Jews somehow invaded this peaceful state and kicked the residents out, like the fate so many indigenous people have suffered in other parts of the world. You really have to know the history before you comment because, once you do, you realise there is no simple, black-and-white picture but one with multiple shades of grey and where there are no simplistic answers.

A group of people can have a collective identity, and a homeland, without posessing their own state. That is after all a founding principle of zionism. So the fact that there was no state called 'Palestine' is irrelevant to the question of whether or not the Palestinian people have been subject to disposession and injustice.

I've been reading this article by Peter Beinart, who is an American liberal Jewish writer, in Jewish Currents on 'A Jewish case for Palestinian Return,' and find it morally clarifying.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

A group of people can have a collective identity, and a homeland, without posessing their own state. That is after all a founding principle of zionism. So the fact that there was no state called 'Palestine' is irrelevant to the question of whether or not the Palestinian people have been subject to disposession and injustice.

A very good post. I've never denied they have been subject to dispossession and injustice. They have.

And in relation to the article, it makes a lot of sense and again I've said that paying compensation should be a part of the solution.

But the article seems to dismiss the claims of the 850,000 Jews expelled from their homelands, treating that as a 'bargaining chip' while talking about restoring property to the Palestinians as part of a meaningful scheme.

It also seeks to put Zionism, whereby European Jews sought a return to the Holy Land, on the same plane as the desire of Palestinian people to return to theirs. But Zionism arose from the fact that Jews in Europe felt threatened and many, like my great grandparents, left Eastern Europe for other places at the turn of the century because of a genuine fear for their lives. And from 1933 to 1945 that fear was realised in the worst possible way.

I have no desire to go back to Ukraine or wherever else my family came from. We aren't wanted there, which is why I'm sat in North Manchester writing this. And I doubt many if any third generation immigrants like myself have any longing to return either. So that's a major and fundamental flaw in what's otherwise a very interesting article.

While the situation for Palestinians certainly isn't great, particularly at the moment, they're really not facing the same sort of existential threat that many European Jews faced from the 1890's until well into the 1970's and 1970's, when Russian Jews were finally allowed to emigrate.

 

[Vic]

But it's not a full member as it doesn't meet the criteria for that. It's even run by two completely separate factions, who hate each other almost as much as they hate Israel.

The UN is really not an independent arbitrator, like CAS for example, making rational and carefully thought-through decisions based on law and logic. It's a political body where those who shout the loudest get their way.

i.e. a majority

 

[Vic]

Time for a reminder of what was in the Balfour declaration:

Balfour_declaration_unmarked.jpg (3875×5100) (wikimedia.org)

 

[Bigga]

Neither side comes out of this well. The problem is that the leadership on both sides believes in belligerence and intransigence over compromise and peace and until that changes this shit will carry on.

I'm not looking to argue with you, but I have a question; what's the difference between Israel asking to be made a state and Palestine asking the same?

Nobody owns the land on this earth, it's claimed by default and only as Mother Nature grants it.

I find it all hypocritical for the US to support and fund apartheid in this modern day and age.