Palestine has been upgraded to non-member state

[DogDoo 7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Recognition_of_Israel.svg





THis will explain why there will not be peace.

You know that map doesn't show the Palestinian Authority, and they recognize Israel

[DogDoo 7]

Can you define "our lands" please?
Also, I've heard the "if only they came as guests we would have welcomed them" many times and its rubbish. There were too many who needed to come to be absorbed without a war (or the surrender of half of Mandatory Palestine in 1948).
Are you living in the territories now?

"Our lands" in terms of our Arab lands
It is true, and not rubbish as you said, I also mentioned earlier that Jews served as ministers in the courts of Muslim Caliphs and sultans, and Palestine already had a thriving Jewish quarters as well as many other Arab countries, If Cairo had and still has 5 Jewish synagogues that were built by Jews (and they are pretty lavish ones compared to a minority) suggests that they were thriving. Many Jews were very wealthy, I would even dare to say that Jews were never poor in the Arab world before they occupied Palestine.
And no, I do not live there, however, I have several friends who are Palestinians, and yes, they are highly educated and respectable people, including my Arabic teacher, who is a Palestinian born in Jerusalem, but is forced till this day to bear the status of a refugee.

Good thing there wasn't a massive Jewish immigration to most Arab lands then.

The Arab Jews (i.e. Mizrachi) were generally well off, this is not in dispute. But there is absolutely no way that the mass influx of European Jews were willing to submit to being a minority in a Muslim country. They wanted their own state, (where they could also subjugate the Arab Jews). This meant war. Of course, after 1948, many Arab countries were not so nice to the Jews (yes, I know that the Jewish Agency was working to rile up tensions to encourage immigration to Israel).

Your Arabic teacher was born in Jordan (I'm assuming he's a 1967 refugee) and the place he was born in is no longer part of Jordan. Seems like that's Jordan's responsibility.

[Tmutarakhan]

Potlimitomaha is correct: Barak's proposed map of "Jerusalem" and "al-Quds" (the Arabic name of the city).

I already posted the maps last page. I think the offer was smaller.

The map on my source is WHAT THE OFFER ACTUALLY WAS.

And regarding ethnic cleansing, fine. Leave aside the bedouin. But half the population of Umm al-Fahm and Nazareth used to live in villages along the Lebanese border until 1948.

I had already agreed with Conserative that the events of 1948 included many instances that can only be called "ethnic cleansing"; I was arguing with him that the term has no relevance to what is going on presently when you jumped in to claim otherwise.

[DogDoo 7]

I already posted the maps last page. I think the offer was smaller.

The map on my source is WHAT THE OFFER ACTUALLY WAS.

And regarding ethnic cleansing, fine. Leave aside the bedouin. But half the population of Umm al-Fahm and Nazareth used to live in villages along the Lebanese border until 1948.

I had already agreed with Conserative that the events of 1948 included many instances that can only be called "ethnic cleansing"; I was arguing with him that the term has no relevance to what is going on presently when you jumped in to claim otherwise.

They're still not allowed to go back to their villages. That's NOW.

I guess both maps are fundamentally the same. Still, the red areas wouldn't really be "Al-Quds" but instead just "Jerusalem with no infrastructure"

[Tmutarakhan]

The map on my source is WHAT THE OFFER ACTUALLY WAS.

I had already agreed with Conserative that the events of 1948 included many instances that can only be called "ethnic cleansing"; I was arguing with him that the term has no relevance to what is going on presently when you jumped in to claim otherwise.

They're still not allowed to go back to their villages. That's NOW.

And they will NEVER go back to those villages. That's the future. Get over it. None of the Jewish refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the German refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the Pakistani refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the Indian refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the Chinese refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the Finnish refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. Are you starting to see a pattern here?

[DogDoo 7]

They're still not allowed to go back to their villages. That's NOW.

And they will NEVER go back to those villages. That's the future. Get over it. None of the Jewish refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the German refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the Pakistani refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the Indian refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the Chinese refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. None of the Finnish refugees from the 40's are going back to where they came from. Are you starting to see a pattern here?

I'm not talking about the ones that fled North. I'm talking about the ones who are ISRAELI, and not allowed to go to their village IN THE COUNTRY OF THEIR CITIZENSHIP.

[Wintersun]

This is horrible news.
THe baby killing terrorists in Gaza should be exterminated, NOT given a state.

Best joke I've heard all day. Hey at least Hamas doesn't attack it's allies navy then claim to be it's "best ally" while contributing nothing to any war that nation is fighting at the time even though it is within striking distance and owes them for the survival of their entire race and all

[Tmutarakhan]

But there is absolutely no way that the mass influx of European Jews were willing to submit to being a minority in a Muslim country.

That is exactly what they were submitting to. In the 20's, the rule was fixed that Jewish immigration to Palestine in any year had to be less than the total of immigration from other Arab countries (principally Egypt and Yemen) so as to insure that the Jews would never become the majority. It was expected to remain that way.

They wanted their own state,

That was an enormously controversial proposal. The majority of the Zionists rejected that idea all through the 20's and 30's and even as late as the Biltmore Conference of 1942, after the British had begun speaking of partitioning the Mandate in the White Paper of 1939, due to the intransigent problem of Arab violence.

(where they could also subjugate the Arab Jews).

Yeah, yeah, those evil Zionists were just driven by motiveless malignancy to attack and oppress as many people as they possibly could.

This meant war.

And nobody else, ever, desired war or violence.

Of course, after 1948, many Arab countries were not so nice to the Jews

Of course, before 1948, Arab countries were not so nice to Jews either.

(yes, I know that the Jewish Agency was working to rile up tensions to encourage immigration to Israel).

But of course, of course, of course, none of the Arabs would ever have been nasty if those motivelessly malignant Zionists hadn't MADE them be nasty, because those awful Zionists just wanted to force everyone to come to Israel so that they could be horrible oppressors, because [some missing steps here ??] Profit!
Your Arabic teacher was born in Jordan (I'm assuming he's a 1967 refugee) and the place he was born in is no longer part of Jordan. Seems like that's Jordan's responsibility.[/quote]

[DogDoo 7]

But there is absolutely no way that the mass influx of European Jews were willing to submit to being a minority in a Muslim country.

That is exactly what they were submitting to. In the 20's, the rule was fixed that Jewish immigration to Palestine in any year had to be less than the total of immigration from other Arab countries (principally Egypt and Yemen) so as to insure that the Jews would never become the majority. It was expected to remain that way.

They wanted their own state,

That was an enormously controversial proposal. The majority of the Zionists rejected that idea all through the 20's and 30's and even as late as the Biltmore Conference of 1942, after the British had begun speaking of partitioning the Mandate in the White Paper of 1939, due to the intransigent problem of Arab violence.

(where they could also subjugate the Arab Jews).

Yeah, yeah, those evil Zionists were just driven by motiveless malignancy to attack and oppress as many people as they possibly could.

This meant war.

And nobody else, ever, desired war or violence.

Of course, after 1948, many Arab countries were not so nice to the Jews

Of course, before 1948, Arab countries were not so nice to Jews either.

(yes, I know that the Jewish Agency was working to rile up tensions to encourage immigration to Israel).

But of course, of course, of course, none of the Arabs would ever have been nasty if those motivelessly malignant Zionists hadn't MADE them be nasty, because those awful Zionists just wanted to force everyone to come to Israel so that they could be horrible oppressors, because [some missing steps here ??] Profit!
Your Arabic teacher was born in Jordan (I'm assuming he's a 1967 refugee) and the place he was born in is no longer part of Jordan. Seems like that's Jordan's responsibility.

[/quote]


You're telling me that Israel didn't desperately need lots of Jewish meat puppets immediately post-1948 to fill all of the strategically planned communities in the periphery and on the hilltops above Arab cities, and that the Jewish Agency and anti-Zionist anger in the Arab world didn't combine to create a push-pull combination?

Are you also denying the systematic marginalization of Mizrahi in Israeli society? You know, Gabi Ashkenazi was the FIRST Ramatkal to keep his Mizrachi name. It took until NOW.

And I know hindsight is 20/20, but even if the initial Zionists didn't want a state, it was going to have to happen. The British weren't going to be around forever, and obviously binational wouldn't have worked out (even if the Mandatory Arabs agreed, once the post-Holocaust refugees arrived, it would have become like Lebanon).

[Tmutarakhan]

Hey at least Hamas doesn't attack it's allies navy

If you are referring to the Liberty incident, the US was not an ally of Israel at the time-- had been pro-Arab, supposedly Johnson was "neutral in thought word and deed" in 67 but since his Texas donors in the oil bidness were all Arab-connected, he was expected to lean Arab during the war. The Liberty's mission there was unclear, but probably was relaying intelligence to the Egyptians.

[Wintersun]

Hey at least Hamas doesn't attack it's allies navy

If you are referring to the Liberty incident, the US was not an ally of Israel at the time-- had been pro-Arab, supposedly Johnson was "neutral in thought word and deed" in 67 but since his Texas donors in the oil bidness were all Arab-connected, he was expected to lean Arab during the war. The Liberty's mission there was unclear, but probably was relaying intelligence to the Egyptians.

Because attacking a neutral ship is oh so much better. Imagine if someone invaded Switzerland!

[Tmutarakhan]

You're telling me that Israel didn't desperately need lots of Jewish meat puppets

I am feeling a little too disgusted with you to talk right now.

[DogDoo 7]

You're telling me that Israel didn't desperately need lots of Jewish meat puppets

I am feeling a little too disgusted with you to talk right now.

What? I have friends whose parents immigrated from Morocco in the 1950s. When they went to the Jewish Agency, they told them that they wanted to go to Jerusalem. "Sure, Sure, Jerusalem you go. Just sign the Aliyah papers." They got off the boat in Haifa and were basically randomly assigned to one of those canvas sided trucks you see in WWII films and ended up in fucking YERUCHAM! The general rule was just to assign the new immigrants a place to live (which happened to be in strategic places along the borders, in the Negev, and surrounding Arab cities), where they were marginalized for DECADES. The government of Israel didn't care about these people except that they populate the new communities they constructed. I.e. "meat puppets"

[DogDoo 7]

If you are referring to the Liberty incident, the US was not an ally of Israel at the time-- had been pro-Arab, supposedly Johnson was "neutral in thought word and deed" in 67 but since his Texas donors in the oil bidness were all Arab-connected, he was expected to lean Arab during the war. The Liberty's mission there was unclear, but probably was relaying intelligence to the Egyptians.

Because attacking a neutral ship is oh so much better. Imagine if someone invaded Switzerland!

No, more like if someone lobbed artillery shells into Swiss territory during one of the various wars fought between Germany, France, and Italy.

[Wintersun]

Because attacking a neutral ship is oh so much better. Imagine if someone invaded Switzerland!

No, more like if someone lobbed artillery shells into Swiss territory during one of the various wars fought between Germany, France, and Italy.

The Liberty was disabled beyond repair. Men died. It's not simply cosmetic damage. Irreparable damage was done.

[DogDoo 7]

No, more like if someone lobbed artillery shells into Swiss territory during one of the various wars fought between Germany, France, and Italy.

The Liberty was disabled beyond repair. Men died. It's not simply cosmetic damage. Irreparable damage was done.

And I'm sure that Swiss soldiers died from the artillery shells. But it's not "invading." It's "attacking," during War.

[Knask]

Not a 100% of their land, that's for sure.

But you're wrong, and besmirching Barak. He would never have allowed a Palestinian capital i East Jerusalem.

Potlimitomaha is correct: Barak's proposed map of "Jerusalem" and "al-Quds" (the Arabic name of the city).

Thanks for the link, which shows that Potlimitomaha is incorrect. The Palestinian capital would be outside East Jerusalem, "2. Arab areas outside Jerusalem's municipal boundaries would become the heart of the new Arab city of Al-Quds, including regions such as Abu Dis, el-Azaria, Beit Jala, Anata and A-Ram.. Core Arab neighborhoods would remain under Israeli sovereignty, while many areas would be unlinked without any way of moving between them. The lack of continuity precludes those areas from forming a real capital city.

To quote Barak:

All my life I fought for Israeli security, and I reiterate: I will not agree to relinquish the vital interests of Israeli security; I will not agree to give up the strengthening of Israel and the bolstering of greater Jerusalem, with a solid Jewish majority, for future generations.

PM BARAK: We have considered, and some ideas were raised, that in order to make Jerusalem wider and stronger than at any time, in any previous time in the history of the city, we should consider annexing to Jerusalem cities within the West Bank beyond the '67 border, like Maale Adumin and Givat Ze'ev and Gush Etzion, and in exchange for this to give to the Palestinians the sovereignty over certain villages or small cities that had been annexed to Jerusalem just after '67. These ideas were raised, they were contemplated. But as the whole summit was run under the rules of "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed," even those ideas are now null and void.

[Spiritwolf]

There is nothing worth a nuclear war, save the survival of the human race, and Israel *can* be pressured, if only the US would lessen its unconditional support. The issue is that Israel thinks it can get away with anything; take away their position of absolute power, and they will act as reasonably as any other nation.

The issue is that many on the Muslim side, like the person you are responding to, still make no bones about their exterminationist intentions. Until that changes, the unconditional support by the US is never going to change.

Very well said, and absolutely true. They dont want to negotiate, they want to exterminate. I say let'em come.......... then we can waste'em all and finally END this bullshit.

[Spiritwolf]

The issue is that many on the Muslim side, like the person you are responding to, still make no bones about their exterminationist intentions. Until that changes, the unconditional support by the US is never going to change.

Palestinian side won't back down until the Israeli side backs down. Israeli side won't back down until the Palestinian side backs down.


Never ending conflict. Welcome to the Middle East.

That would END the conflict in a definitive way, yes?

[Spiritwolf]

The issue is that many on the Muslim side, like the person you are responding to, still make no bones about their exterminationist intentions. Until that changes, the unconditional support by the US is never going to change.

And until Israel stops it's policy of ethnic cleansing in Palestine, these exterminationist intentions will not die down. Israel is fostering these ideas through it's actions.

These people are a minority of Muslims and Arabs. They may not be friendly towards Israel, but most have accepted that they can no longer destroy it, or that it's not right to do so. By taking the actions of a minority and using them to oppress the majority, Israel perpetuates the environment that creates these extreme opinions.

Ethnic Re-location is NOT ethnic cleansing......... Israeli's settling lands that ARE THEIRS is entirely natural and to be expected. Ethnically re-locating the palestinians from those lands is also entirely natural and to be expected. If the palestinians, and I especially mean those with "exterminationist intentions", cannot accept this state of affairs then fuck them and the camel they rode in on.

[Gauntleted Fist]

Ethnic Re-location is NOT ethnic cleansing......... Israeli's settling lands that ARE THEIRS is entirely natural and to be expected. Ethnically re-locating the palestinians from those lands is also entirely natural and to be expected. If the palestinians, and I especially mean those with "exterminationist intentions", cannot accept this state of affairs then fuck them and the camel they rode in on.

Moving the Jews to the ghettos was also "ethnic relocating".

[Gauthier]

Ethnic Re-location is NOT ethnic cleansing......... Israeli's settling lands that ARE THEIRS is entirely natural and to be expected. Ethnically re-locating the palestinians from those lands is also entirely natural and to be expected. If the palestinians, and I especially mean those with "exterminationist intentions", cannot accept this state of affairs then fuck them and the camel they rode in on.

Moving the Jews to the ghettos was also "ethnic relocating".

And so was moving Native American tribes to shitty reservations.

[Gauntleted Fist]

Moving the Jews to the ghettos was also "ethnic relocating".

And so was moving Native American tribes to shitty reservations.

And moving the Japanese-Americans to "internment camps".

[Spiritwolf]

The issue is that many on the Muslim side, like the person you are responding to, still make no bones about their exterminationist intentions. Until that changes, the unconditional support by the US is never going to change.

Why will we want to exterminate them if they did not kill our brothers and sisters, steal their land, demolish their homes, and frequently terrorizing its neighbors, to the extent of threatening a country like Iran that is 20 times its size, and occupying Syrian, Egyptian, and palestinian territories, being the only country in the region that possesses nuclear weapons, yet not inspected nor questioned by international organizations in the time North Korea is blockaded from all sides for having them, and Iran even when it is not proven that it possesses nuclear weapons is sanctioned and on the brink of being attacked, and in 2008, more than 2000 Palestinians mostly women and children were killed by Israeli airforce, while Hamas's rockets barely claim any human lives, even though it is a legitimate act of resistance. If only... If only the Jews came to our lands seeking refuge from the German nazis, we would have accepted them, but actually taking over our lands, threatening our countries, and plunging this once relitavely peaceful region into chaos, will not be tolerated anymore. PERIOD.

Israeli territory is not "your lands". Israels possession of weapons to defend against people like you is entirely justified and right. The IDF's response to the rocket artillery barrage launched against Israel by Hamas was, in my opinion, very weak and entirely insufficient. All of Gaza and Hamas should have been wiped out (thats right, I'm saying it, EXTERMINATED) for committing this act of war. Then cleaned up and incorporated into Israel proper....... some sweet beachfront real estate there to be developed. Iran is, in time, going to eventually force a response from Israel that should have happened already in my opinion. Iran is going to be the biggest "glow in the dark" ashtray since Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Kinda gets me all misty just thinking about it. As for the Syrians and the Egyptians, fuck'em....... they dont like us anyway. And even you have to admit the North Koreans are pricks.

[DogDoo 7]

And until Israel stops it's policy of ethnic cleansing in Palestine, these exterminationist intentions will not die down. Israel is fostering these ideas through it's actions.

These people are a minority of Muslims and Arabs. They may not be friendly towards Israel, but most have accepted that they can no longer destroy it, or that it's not right to do so. By taking the actions of a minority and using them to oppress the majority, Israel perpetuates the environment that creates these extreme opinions.

Ethnic Re-location is NOT ethnic cleansing......... Israeli's settling lands that ARE THEIRS is entirely natural and to be expected. Ethnically re-locating the palestinians from those lands is also entirely natural and to be expected. If the palestinians, and I especially mean those with "exterminationist intentions", cannot accept this state of affairs then fuck them and the camel they rode in on.

First of all, the West Bank is quite hilly. They probably rode in on donkeys. 2nd of all, having citizens living in a territory while keeping non-citizens under martial law is Apartheid. 3rd of all, all your plan will lead to is more "odrob odrob," which as a resident of the region (and citizen of the country), I'd rather not experience.