dreamdancer 0 #151 May 30, 2011 QuoteIsrael has every right to defend its existence against overwhelming odds. as does palestine... (against even greater odds. surely you can respect them for that?)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #152 May 30, 2011 QuoteIf the existence of Israel was simply accepted in 1948 none of this would have happened. if israel had chosen some unoccupied land for its new state then also none of this would have happened...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #153 May 30, 2011 QuoteIf moving troops close to the border and blockading is against the terms of the armistice, doing so violates the armistice. and your reason for launching a surprise attack on egypt in 1956 was...?stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #154 May 30, 2011 QuoteQuoteThe Arab practice of placing Palestinians in concentration camps. presumably we're talking about the gaza strip here... Well, refer to billvon's mention of the 1952 "purge" and expulsion of the Arab League fighters and other mercenaries who were provided aid and refuge by the resident Arab population. The Arabs who fled into the Arab countries during this action, including into the West Bank and Gaza, were placed into so-called "refugee" camps and were refused assimilation into Jordan and Egypt respectively. Many of those camps still exist within the WB even though the Palestinians were offered citizenship and voting rights by Israel. They refused. But my point here is that they were herded into these concentration camps by the Arab countries. Rehashing the same old same old again. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #155 May 30, 2011 i think you'll find it is israel herding palestinians into the gaza strip...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,405 #156 May 30, 2011 >If moving troops close to the border and blockading is against the terms >of the armistice, doing so violates the armistice. So does destroying homes and killing people. Indeed, I'd say that's sorta . . . worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #157 May 30, 2011 Quotei think you'll find it is israel herding palestinians into the gaza strip... Semantics. But my point is that the "refugees" fled Israel (even though they were considered citizens of Israel) seeking "refuge" from their Arab brothers and were instead rounded up and imprisoned by the Egyptians and Jordanians in "refugee" camps. Here's a list of the concentration camps. Note that the ones in the WB and Gaza predate 1967 and most predate 1952 ...and, in fact, all the camps in Gaza predate 1950. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #158 May 30, 2011 QuoteQuotei think you'll find it is israel herding palestinians into the gaza strip... Semantics. But my point is that the "refugees" fled Israel (even though they were considered citizens of Israel) seeking "refuge" from their Arab brothers and were instead rounded up and imprisoned by the Egyptians and Jordanians in "refugee" camps. Here's a list of the concentration camps. Note that the ones in the WB and Gaza predate 1967 and most predate 1952 ...and, in fact, all the camps in Gaza predate 1950. semantics is calling refugee camps 'concentration camps'. semantics is saying that they were considered citizens of israel when they had no desire to be citizens of israel. semantics is saying they were seeking refuge 'from' neighbouring countries when they were seeking refuge from israeli violence. semantics is calling the populations of neighbouring countries 'arab brothers' when in fact they are completely different countries with different traditions and different history.stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #159 May 30, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuotei think you'll find it is israel herding palestinians into the gaza strip... Semantics. But my point is that the "refugees" fled Israel (even though they were considered citizens of Israel) seeking "refuge" from their Arab brothers and were instead rounded up and imprisoned by the Egyptians and Jordanians in "refugee" camps. Here's a list of the concentration camps. Note that the ones in the WB and Gaza predate 1967 and most predate 1952 ...and, in fact, all the camps in Gaza predate 1950. semantics is calling refugee camps 'concentration camps'. semantics is saying that they were considered citizens of israel when they had no desire to be citizens of israel. semantics is saying they were seeking refuge 'from' neighbouring countries when they were seeking refuge from israeli violence. semantics is calling the populations of neighbouring countries 'arab brothers' when in fact they are completely different countries with different traditions and different history. Now you are "getting" it. One small point though ...by "from" the Arabs I meant the refugees were seeking help "from" them, not seeking help "because of" them. IOW, the refugees thought the Arabs would help them, but apparently, since they have completely different traditions and history the non-Palestinian Arabs thought it would be best to corral them in shantytowns (can you say "apartheid"?). This is what they did. You can call them "refugee camps", "concentration camps", "club med", or any other name but the reality for the Pals and their treatment by the Arabs is the same. The non-Pal Arabs had no desire for the Pals to become citizens of their countries. (...large numbers of "Palestinians" migrated to the "Mandate" area from those Arab countries ...your point brings up the possibility that maybe they migrated because of persecution? Just asking. I know that a lot of the migration had to do with the growing economic conditions brought to the region by the Jews post WWI ...but maybe persecution by fellow Arabs did have something to do with it?) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #160 May 30, 2011 the refugees were seeking refuge from israeli violence - duh. during the second world war peoples fled from their aggressors all over europe - then they returned to their own countries. palestinians have no desire to be citizens of any country other than palestine. why would they want to be called 'jordanians' or 'egyptians' or any other name than palestinians? not long now and they'll be able to return to their own country and have their own capital stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #161 May 30, 2011 ps. you're the one calling them 'concentration camps' - not me...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #162 May 30, 2011 pps. neighbouring countries went to war for the palestinians. they lost - but you can't say they didn't try to help...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #163 May 30, 2011 Quotepps. neighbouring countries went to war for the palestinians. they lost - but you can't say they didn't try to help... their form of "help" was to try to destroy Israel. But helping the actual people has been a different matter. Though it's worth noting Egypt has in the past week substantially opened their border with Gaza, allowing 1000/day to cross. Soon the excuse that Israel has imprisoned these people will ring false. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #164 May 30, 2011 QuoteQuoteIf the existence of Israel was simply accepted in 1948 none of this would have happened. if israel had chosen some unoccupied land for its new state then also none of this would have happened... seems overdue for you to address Amazon's point that more land was seized from Jews in lands outside Israel than Israel itself compromises. Call it a land swap. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #165 May 30, 2011 Quote'Israel has not been secure since its inception' it had the backing of the un and the world's superpower - of course it was secure. not safe perhaps - but secure... How well did that work for the victims of genocide in Rwanda or Yugoslavia? Both occurred in the 90s. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #166 May 30, 2011 Quoteps. you're the one calling them 'concentration camps' - not me... By "you" I meant "a person". No one has to call them anything. They are what they are. They were designed to "concentrate" the Palestinians into "camps" and to keep them from spoiling the general Arab populations. Many came from these regions originally anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #167 May 30, 2011 Quotepps. neighbouring countries went to war for the palestinians. they lost - but you can't say they didn't try to help... The "neighboring countries" did/do not give a damn about the Palestinians. Never have. They went to war to eliminate Israel and they continue to use the Pals as expendable chess pieces in their efforts. I can't see into their hearts and minds but I can see what they have said and done and and what they continue to say and do. Same for the Israelis. I don't know how many different ways I can say that the Islamic Middle Eastern countries, to include non-Arabs as well, are using the Palestinians' condition, mostly caused by them, to incite hatred against Israel and to rally sympathy for their "cause". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #168 May 30, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteIf the existence of Israel was simply accepted in 1948 none of this would have happened. if israel had chosen some unoccupied land for its new state then also none of this would have happened... seems overdue for you to address Amazon's point that more land was seized from Jews in lands outside Israel than Israel itself compromises. Call it a land swap. doesn't help the palestinians does it? unless you're suggesting that they should move into these properties and become the new jewish diaspora. i'm not denying that the jews have had a hard time in recent history. but where was the worst time they had - europe or the middle east?stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #169 May 30, 2011 QuoteQuote'Israel has not been secure since its inception' it had the backing of the un and the world's superpower - of course it was secure. not safe perhaps - but secure... How well did that work for the victims of genocide in Rwanda or Yugoslavia? Both occurred in the 90s. both rwanda and yugoslavia still exist (i've given you an easy hook there to reply to)...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #170 May 30, 2011 QuoteQuoteps. you're the one calling them 'concentration camps' - not me... By "you" I meant "a person". No one has to call them anything. They are what they are. yes, refugee camps. concentration camps - as you are well aware - has a special connotation which you invoke when using the term...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #171 May 30, 2011 QuoteQuotepps. neighbouring countries went to war for the palestinians. they lost - but you can't say they didn't try to help... The "neighboring countries" did/do not give a damn about the Palestinians. Never have. They went to war to eliminate Israel and they continue to use the Pals as expendable chess pieces in their efforts. I can't see into their hearts and minds but I can see what they have said and done and and what they continue to say and do. Same for the Israelis. I don't know how many different ways I can say that the Islamic Middle Eastern countries, to include non-Arabs as well, are using the Palestinians' condition, mostly caused by them, to incite hatred against Israel and to rally sympathy for their "cause". a while back you could have said that the european countries were using the jews' condition, mostly caused by them, to incite hatred against germany and rally sympathy for their zionist cause. you can say all sorts of twisted things. just because a people have had an injustice done to them doesn't mean they can then return that injustice to a different people...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wsd 0 #172 May 30, 2011 Just as long as you realize that land proposed to be given to the Palestinians was not the land owned by the Palestinians in the first place. Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt were the rightful occupiers of that land. I guess we are down to talking about a few slivers of land if you discount the aforementioned countries land. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,405 #173 May 30, 2011 >Just as long as you realize that land proposed to be given to the >Palestinians was not the land owned by the Palestinians in the first place. >Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt were the rightful occupiers of that land. Just as the Sioux, Comanche, Navajo and Inuit are the rightful occupiers of the US. Fortunately, we've found a way to live in peace with them - although it took a long, long time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #174 May 30, 2011 QuoteQ. WAS THERE A PALESTINIAN STATE BEFORE 1948 OR NOT? A. Arabs lived under the control of the Islamic Ottoman Empire for more then 1350 year before the British mandate on Palestine. Before the twentieth century, there were no independent Arab countries; there were only Arab emirates under one Islamic empire. After the World War I and World War II, Arab countries got there independent from the Islamic Ottoman Empire and the modern states were created. Palestine should have been created if Jews did not start migrating to Palestinian lands, with the help of the British. http://www.palestinehistory.com/history/faq/faq.htm#faq14stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wsd 0 #175 May 31, 2011 Therefore the state of Palestine was not ever an independent or recognized state. Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt never considered them a state either, nor did they ever give them any lands. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
