Israel

[iron yuppie]

As far as I understand it, the British began a program of gradual Jewish resettlement in the Palestine Mandate and then completely jumped ship without leaving behind any kind of framework for that program to continue. If anyone is to blame for the mess over there, it's Britain, but strangely they are almost never mentioned in that context.

[DaveC]

Originally Posted by iron yuppie

As far as I understand it, the British began a program of gradual Jewish resettlement in the Palestine Mandate and then completely jumped ship without leaving behind any kind of framework for that program to continue. If anyone is to blame for the mess over there, it's Britain, but strangely they are almost never mentioned in that context.

From what I can recall from my Middle Eastern History class in college, I believe the British government actually signed (separate) documents in the 1930s which made declarations that both the Arabs and Jews would be entitled to the full territory of Mandatory Palestine, which is where a large portion of the conflict comes from as both sides felt they had been promised the area. The Jewish authorities began the resettlement program after World War 2 as a result of the declarations with the intention of eventually having the numbers to train armies to defend the territory they wanted to take over, and the British did nothing/were incapable of stopping it. Eventually the Jewish numbers reached the point where they were able to train militias, outnumber and terrorize the Arab inhabitants in many areas into either leaving or accepting the new authority, and essentially occupy all of Palestine, declaring the state of Israel immediately after the UN mandate expired and was not renewed. The Jewish militias turned into the Israeli Army and immediately set about expelling the Arabs and creating settlements across the territory, and the Arab countries surrounding Israel all immediately declared war on Israel, which Israel won rather easily due to the large amounts of arms and supplies purchased from Western governments in preparation for exactly that occurrence. The Arab countries were either too new (in the cases of Jordan/Iraq) or too devastated from WWII (Egypt) to have modern, well equipped and trained armies and the Israelis knew this would be the case, and prepared well in advance knowing they would have to fight all of their neighbours instantly. This led to the 1967 war in which Israel occupied the West Bank (formerly Jordanian territory), the Golan Heights (formerly Syrian), and the Gaza Strip (from Egypt). Essentially the history of Israel is one of a Roman-style conquest and assimilation, and wholesale ethnic cleansing of the original inhabitants of an area (not necessarily in a genocidal sense, but in the pushing of Arabs out of the area of the mandate, and forcing them to live in enclaves and/or foreign lands).

Someone please feel free to correct anything about that that is wrong as it is entirely from memory, and I could be mistaken.

[iron yuppie]

There was definitely ambiguity (and much of it understandably) in that region immediately after WW2: ambiguity about the legitimacy and intentions of British policy in the Palestine Mandate and ambiguity about the terms of the UN resolution that created Israel. This is testing my memory, but I think there was a proposal from the UN to both Zionist leaders and Arab leaders in the region about the terms of an Israeli state; the Zionists signed, but the Arabs refused. As time went on without an Arab signing, the Zionists simply inhabited the area by force. The question of the UN's legitimacy in creating a new state, especially as a brand new international body, was also a complicating factor.

I think the sense that a contract about Israel was never agreed to (at least in Arab eyes) has been the source of Arab hostility toward Israel more so than anti-Semitism etc.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by iron yuppie

I think the sense that a contract about Israel was never agreed to (at least in Arab eyes) has been the source of Arab hostility toward Israel more so than anti-Semitism etc.

The truth is - even had a contract been signed - the Muslims would still hate the Jews because 1) they are non-Muslims, and 2) they are regarded as Islam's worst enemy.

When Palestine had only a handful of Jews in small little population pockets, they didn't seem like much of a threat. When suddenly hundreds of thousands, and then millions of Jews started pouring into the land - I'm going to guess it wasn't too difficult to get the Muslims in the region riled up.

[Vincent Vega]

Originally Posted by AEON

The truth is - even had a contract been signed - the Muslims would still hate the Jews because 1) they are non-Muslims, and 2) they are regarded as Islam's worst enemy.

Who are "the Muslims"?

[Axver]

Originally Posted by AEON

The truth is - even had a contract been signed - the Muslims would still hate the Jews because 1) they are non-Muslims, and 2) they are regarded as Islam's worst enemy.

What. Where to even begin...

When Palestine had only a handful of Jews in small little population pockets, they didn't seem like much of a threat. When suddenly hundreds of thousands, and then millions of Jews started pouring into the land - I'm going to guess it wasn't too difficult to get the Muslims in the region riled up.

I'm pretty sure most groups would be uncomfortable with hundreds of thousands of people waltzing in and claiming their territory. We have people in the West screaming bloody murder about much smaller migration flows - and those are of people who mostly want to become part of their host country, not found a new one in place of what's already there.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by AEON

The truth is - even had a contract been signed - the Muslims would still hate the Jews because 1) they are non-Muslims, and 2) they are regarded as Islam's worst enemy.

#1 is completely ignorant of how the Jews were treated as dhimmis throughout much of Islamic history. #2 I don't even know how you concluded that.

[DaveC]

Originally Posted by Axver

I'm pretty sure most groups would be uncomfortable with hundreds of thousands of people waltzing in and claiming their territory. We have people in the West screaming bloody murder about much smaller migration flows - and those are of people who mostly want to become part of their host country, not found a new one in place of what's already there.

Exactly, millions of Chinese immigrants have come to Toronto over the past 20 years, and there's nothing wrong with that.

If they came here and started evicting every non-Chinese, planning to remove the GTA from Canada and turn it into their own country while claiming that it was their "promised land" and they were ordained by their God to do this, I absolutely would be extremely upset, to the point where I would consider it an invasion and would probably be inclined to fight back for my home (except for Scarborough, they can have that). Especially if a large majority of the rest of the world not only allowed it, but actively encouraged it.

I don't understand the people who say that the Palestinians should just lay down their arms and move somewhere else and suddenly there will be peace. It's ignorant of history. They have as much right to be there (in ALL of Israel) as the Israeli population, which is why I think a one-state solution is eventually going to be the outcome (if there ever is peace there).

[AEON]

Originally Posted by anitram

#1 is completely ignorant of how the Jews were treated as dhimmis throughout much of Islamic history. #2 I don't even know how you concluded that.

#1 Since the 7th century the Jews "dhimmi" status was routinely ignored. The tolerance of Jews during the Middle Ages is disputed by scholars. #2 The Jews are called out more than any other group of non-believers in Muslin literature, especially in the Hadith.

We can all go online and see the anti-Jewish verses and see the debates on context. What really matters is the actual history - and that history demonstrates a long battle between Muslims and Jews that has progressively worsened.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Axver

What. Where to even begin...



I'm pretty sure most groups would be uncomfortable with hundreds of thousands of people waltzing in and claiming their territory.

I know - that's the point I'm making here. I can understand why the Palestinians where getting upset.

[iron yuppie]

This is true that Islam for the bulk of its history has not been particularly tolerant of other religions, despite the rhetoric that Judaism and Christianity are part of a shared Abrahamic tradition. That said, Judaism and Christianity have not exactly been welcoming of rival faiths, either.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by iron yuppie

That said, Judaism and Christianity have not exactly been welcoming of rival faiths, either.

This is very true. And it's only been fairly recent that Fundamentalist Christians are suddenly strong Jewish supporters - and it seems it has more to do with the restoration of Israel in order to hopefully bring about the "End Times" than actual love toward Judaism. I would also agree - that throughout history, the Christian West (and then of course the Darwin/Nietzsche inspired Nazis) has a much worse track record of mistreatment of the Jews than the Muslims do.

However, with the rhetoric coming from Iran and of course the ongoing battle in Palestine/Israel - it seems that Islam is currently the least tolerant of the Jews.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by AEON

This is very true. And it's only been fairly recent that Fundamentalist Christians are suddenly strong Jewish supporters - and it seems it has more to do with the restoration of Israel in order to hopefully bring about the "End Times" than actual love toward Judaism.

yes x 1000

this is where the often shocking pro-Israel-no-matter-what attitude comes from in parts of the US. it doesn't come from elderly Jews in Miami.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

it doesn't come from elderly Jews in Miami.

The image of Hyman Roth just flashed into my mind...

[deep]

Abbas seeks immediate int'l recognition of Palestinian state - Xinhua | English.news.cn

[PhilsFan]

I find it very sad that people on the right have made people on the left often immune to the crimes of Hamas because people on the right won't criticize Israel and people on the left feel they have to default to the other side just to try to move the conversation back to somewhere reasonable.

[anitram]

The problem is also that Hamas are terrorists and thugs borne out of opportunity and a leadership vacuum. Think about your average Palestinian woman in her 20s/30s. Probably married before she was 20, on average is having something like 7-8 children all of whom are living in abject poverty with no hope of a future. Level and quality of education are very questionable. Maybe she supports Hamas because they restored some sort of order in Gaza and are able to smuggle and provide contraband FOOD (remember that the Israelis keep Palestinians on a caloric-oriented diet as if they're collectively on Weight Watchers). I don't think she or her young kids have really a full understanding of all the geopolitical implications of Hamas, and maybe they don't even care. Even if her husband himself in Hamas because he's a terrorist or because he sympathizes or because they give him a job to do or whatever, she and those kids are doomed to his fate.

But what we are constantly being asked by those on the right awaiting their rapture is to compare this band of terrorists & thugs to a properly, democratically elected first-world government which has the support (financial to the tunes of billions and every other imaginable support from the lone world superpower). For example, there is a ceasefire and some Hamas idiot goes and shoots off 3 rockets. Probably excellent chances that the "leadership" of Hamas (such as it is) has no idea and no control over what random members are doing in a random field. This is not a trained, disciplined, organized army. But the Israeli response to that is to go flatten 100 buildings and take the collateral damage. And then we all have to sit around the table and say that both sides are equally as bad.

It is a terrible premise because one side is not even really a side, it is a few million unfortunate people in an unfortunate situation without a future ahead of them who have made the unfortunate choice of entrusting this non-existent future to a terrorist group.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by anitram

...and thugs

I don't think we can use this term anymore without racial undertones.

[DaveC]

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by AEON

I don't think we can use this term anymore without racial undertones.

Context matters.