Posts
The territory of Jordan was part of the original British Mandate of Palestine and made up a majority of the landmass of Palestine. Over 70% of all Jordanians are in fact Palestinian Arabs. The little "King" of Jordan and his fellow minority Heshimites rule over the majority Palestinian population with an iron hand. This is very simple: JORDAN IS PALESTINE. The Palestinians already have a state and it is called Jordan, they don't need another state. What they do need is to take control of their own state. So if everyone wants a two state solution, then lets have a two state solution and bid farewell to the little King. Otherwise please shut up.
5 hours ago
>they don't need another state.
ReplyDeletePalestinians would disagree, I'm sure.
Of course, the argument thrown back at surrounding Arab states is that they should take them all in,and the problem is solved.
Let me ask you this : If a foreign ideology and mostly foreign people came to the United States, then began expanding both politically, socially, and in terms of population (getting to the point where the locals were seen as an irritating block to creating a new state in its place), would you be fine with that? How would you feel if someone said that Canada should just take you all in, to make way for this foreign political and cultural entity?
Going by the 'fear' of 'Islamization' going on in Europe and the U.S, it seems that infact everyone can identify with the feeling that someone's home, familiar domestic political ways, and culture is being overwhelmed by an entity which feels its needs are far more important than of the ones who live there.
It happened with the Native Americans, and it happened with many of the local Arabs of Palestine. I appreciate that certain local Arab leaders made things far worse in the early years than they needed to be, but it has to be said that they were smart in seeing that there was an outside political ideology coming in with the intention (long before the Holocaust) not to co-exist with the people and be 'guests' in the land of the local Arabs, but ultimately to create a secular Jewish state on that land whether the local Arabs liked it or not. It wasn't long before the awful truth that the land was not an empty wasteland, hit home. Instead of abandoning or altering plans, the decision was made to carry on regardless and face the consequences of local rebellion later on. Israel has been facing the consequences for many decades now.
Israel was born out of an ancient vision unique in the annals of history. In the words of its Declaration of Independence, Israel "was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped. Here they first attained statehood, created cultural values of national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book of Books." All of that, long before there was even such a thing as "Islam".
ReplyDeleteThis was understood by President Harry Truman, who defied the advice of his State Department to recognize the re-establishment of Israel in 1948. His favorite Psalm, according to presidential historian Michael Beschloss, was Number 137: "By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion." Again, long before there was such a thing as "Islam".
Why is this important now? Because the Arab world has long challenged Israel’s legitimacy by arguing, as you do, that Israel is a Western implant in the Middle East, created to appease the conscience of a Europe with Jewish blood on its hands.
President Clinton encountered this view when his valiant efforts to make peace were rebuffed, as Yasser Arafat outrageously denied the historical Jewish connection to Jerusalem.... again, a connection well documented long before there ever was such a thing as "Islam".
The "foreign ideology and mostly foreign people" in Israel are in fact the Arabs. By the way, much if not most of the Jewish population of Israel are Jews who escaped or were expelled from Arab countries.
Arab denial of all of this, more than any other issue, gets to the root of the conflict.
Certainly an element of the fight against Israel for some people,is from an 'Islamic' angle. Hamas approaches this from a Jihad point of view. But it's not essentially an Islamic issue for many of those who don't benefit (many of whom are mixed race and different religions due to the long history of the region with meditteranean peoples) from how Israel treats them. It's one of honour and identity. Just as the Jews fought the Roman occupation bitterly in the Jewish revolt, so do the peoples pushed out fight Israel, out of a sense of anger/injustice at being booted off the land from milita activity and war,and then not let back in again once the dust settled.
ReplyDeleteIsrael today would say - "Just get over it, and all will be well". Perhaps, but tell that to the vast numbers of people squashed into a small area like inconvenient pests with their remaining plots of land still being encroached on bit by bit. The Jews of old Israel wouldn't put up with it, so I don't see why the Palestinians should put up with it. The issue won't be resolved just by accepting the now.
Zionism, which led to the creation of Medinat Yisrael,we all know is an essentially secular political ideology based on ideas thought up in Russia and Eastern Europe and then propagated in the United States,that by its own admission in writings was breaking from the Judaism of old. It was a design for a new Jew, with nominal relation to the old times.
A new modern Jew who cast the ways of the Jewish past that were seen as archaic, and into the mainstream of secular life that was occuring in Europe. That was not old Israel.
Israel is a Euro/U.S colony in the middle east.
At the same time, modern Israel trys to link itself to Ancient Israel via religion and history to justify coming in centuries later and reclaiming the land in its absence. Huh?
My view is that Israel has shot itself in the foot with this one, because the Palestinians are viewing their struggle in the same way.
To them, it's Al Nakbah (a term which Israel's education ministry has ordered removed from school books recently). Some see this as a dream of a religious return. Others see it as a return of the land that their forefathers toiled on for centuries, just as was the justification for Europeans going to Palestine. Both sides play this game, and both end up victims of it by trying to use this.
I noticed how you conveniently failed to reference the fact that at least half of the population of Israel is made up of Jews who fled or were expelled from Arab lands where they lived for centuries; A population at least as large as that of Palestinian Arabs. Their home and land were confiscated. Should they not be compensated? I noticed that you failed to mention that while tiny Israel absorbed these Jewish refugees, it was the Arab states that refused to absorb their Palestinian “brethren”, placing them in camps to fester in poverty and hate for over half a century. There is no such thing as a 50 year old refugee, unless of course every effort is made to keep them that way. I notice how you bemoan how Palestinians were “booted” out of their land during the 48 war, but fail to mention who started that war. You fail to mention that the UN voted in favor of the creation of Israel by partitioning the land. The Jews accepted, the Arabs refused and invaded with the public intention of throwing the Jews into the sea. Did you forget that? Then they lost the war (which they call ‘the catastrophe’) that they started, and now complain about the consequences of starting a war, and then losing it.
ReplyDeleteBottom line? Although it is geographically tiny, its GDP is larger than all of the Arab countries combined. Soon it will be energy self-sufficient. The average household income is about the same as Great Britain and will soon surpass it. With all the insecurity, the average Israeli citizen still lives longer than the average UK citizen (Google “lifespan by country”).
It has the ability to defend itself, including a nuclear arsenal that is believed to be about the same size as Great Britain’s, including second strike nuclear capabilities; and it is growing stronger by the day. It will continue to grow economically and will become an economic powerhouse. It is already a technological powerhouse, with inventions and innovations coming out practically every day. Every time you turn on your computer, every time you turn on your cell phone, you are very likely to be using Israeli originated technology. Fr.m cancer treatments to agricultural technology, Israel is at the forefront. And the Arabs contribution to humanity? IED’s and suicide bombs.
The Arabs can choose to live in peace with tiny Israel, or they can choose to live in a constant state of ignorance, poverty, hatred and economic backwardness. I hope they choose peace, but I’m sure Israel is prepared wait it our for centuries if necessary.
That Israel is a powerhouse of creativity and discoverys is not disputed. Hell,even the Soviet Union came up with fantastic discoverys and many achievements. Of course,the Arab nations don't have the money pumped into it from the United States,that Israel does. Nor do they have U.S companys on their soil in which these technological discoverys are made.
ReplyDeleteAs I say, Israel is a Euro/U.S colony.
What we're not discussing here,is if Israel is better than Arab nations,or if Jewish minds are better than Arab minds. To do so is suggesting that the Arabs are inferior peoples that are just makers of IEDs and Suicide Vests so "our rights are far more important really".
Early Zionists far away from the reality of Palestine,and in their imagination,viewed the Arabs in equally extreme comic book ways. But they imagined them as quaint docile easily subdued natives in a dustbowl.
When the reality hit in the years when immigration began,it was found that the land wasn't empty and this presented a major moral crisis amongst Zionist thinkers. It was later Zionists who decided - "Oh to hell with it, if we have to fight them for it, then so be it".
As mentioned, that's what happened to the Native Americans. What we're discussing here,is how well the claim to the land by Zionism,stands up morally under scrutiny 'today'. Not in the 1890,1920,30s or 40s, but today where the lives of Jews worldwide are not at risk like they were in earlier days.
Not long ago you would have found me a staunch supporter of Israel and the Zionist dream.
...Believe it or not.
That the nation stood heroically like a modern fortress at Masada,taking on all comers,was admirable because I kept on stumbling across books and propaganda which portrayed it that way. You need to go back into research from the early days and the reports in the days of the British mandate, to find out what Zionist leaders were really saying about their goals.
And to be honest,it isn't pretty reading.
There came a point when the Zionist leaders knew they were going to have to fight the Arabs to the death, and they decided to press ahead regardless of consequences. THAT is what started the events that led to the 1948 war.
The U.N partition was fundamentally flawed and came too late for it have been implimented anyway. Historians accept this. Ben Gurion accepted the partition idea,but only as a way to get some kind of legal standing in the eyes of the world. He fully intended to expand once it was established. The Arabs rejected it, knowing this was the intention all along.
There comes a point where you find you can no longer turn a blind eye to what is happening the expelled and how they are treated today.
I turned a blind eye for long enough.
The security situation 'seems' it can justify the cattle style border crossings and the walls which cut through Arab agricultural land (how convenient for joint U.S/Israeli companys), and the Blitzkrieg that was the recent pummeling of Gaza and the deaths of many many innocent people of all ages, many of whom do not support the Hamas group (a reality which undermines the idea that people living in Gaza deserved it,for voting in Hamas).
All the atrocitys can be excused in the Zionist mind,very easily. Believe me,I used to do it myself. Not all the Arabs are saints and victims, but a lot of them are victims and are looked down on as scum. I know this from the way an Israeli immigration officer one day talked about Arabs like they were subhumans when I mentioned I had been travelling in the region. How very Germany in 1930s it seemed.
I'll continue on the next post (character limit)
The forced expulsions and voluntary moves of Jews from Arab lands (as historians suggest it was a combinatoin of both),mostly occured after the creation of Israel. In earlier days, it was after seeing what the Zionists were up to in the region. These were no doubt an Eye for an Eye tit for tat in the way that the Torah demands. Does this make it all ok?
ReplyDeleteNo, but it's hardly surprising really considering the fury of the Arabs who had been stabbed in the back 'again' by politicians from far away lands who promised one thing and then did something else.
Jews in Arab lands would now have been looked at suspiciously in the way that the United States rounded up Japanese citizens in the country in WWII, as mistrust was very high.
It should be noted that prior to this,Jews had lived in Arab lands for centuries (as I'm sure you know very well indeed), and very well compared to their persecution in Christendom. That the Jewish property lost after the migration to Israel adds up to quite a nice amount, is proof of this itself.
That the Palestinians today are being used by Arab states as a continual pressure against Israel is a 'possibility'. Another way to look at it is to ask "why the hell should they clean up the mess that the creation of Israel in the form it manifested, left"?
To take them in,would not doubt let Israel off the hook. At the same time, doing so would seal the conquest of Palestine in the eyes of those who feel it is a foreign occupation that deceived in order to create.
You recognize that Israel is in top position. It can go on fighting. It just asks the silly Arabs to stop being so petty about the theft of land and peace will reign. It reminds me of a line from the movie Gladiator where the Roman legions are in Germania. A legionare sighs - "People should know where they're conquered" to suggest that the German's fight is futile and they should just surrender to the inevitable. Crowe's character replies - "Would you, Quintus? Would I?". Just "getting over it" is a luxury that Arab pride and the refugees don't have, unlike safe Israelis.
The Jews didn't accept defeat. Granted, they were in exile for 1000s of years. But eventually Jews came back (albeit in a very different form), this time to fight a Jihad.
Like in Israel, where the press is free, the opinions you express, such as they are, are welcome on this web site. The opposite would not hold true in any media in the Arab world. Not a single democracy, with the hopeful exception of an emerging Iraq and a semi-democratic Lebanon (where a large militia refuses to come under the authority of the state).
ReplyDeleteAll humans are indeed equal before God (if there is a God), but not all cultures are equal. The evidence of who the aggressor is can easily be illustrated: If the Arab world was to unilaterally disarm tomorrow, what would be the consequence? If Israel was to unilaterally disarm tomorrow, what would be the consequence? Every thinking person will answer that in their own mind. I know what my answer is, and I suspect you do to. Arabs will find salvation when they start loving their own children more than they hate others.
You get the last word:
Once again,it falls back onto advertising how wonderful Israel is compared to the Arab nations,and how free it is and how liberal it is,so the disturbing questions get deflected.
ReplyDeleteHow successfull Israel is, gets used to justify the Jewish nation being where it is today, as if its shining brilliance in achievements is enough to eclipse all the murky darkness surrounding its creation, its actions today, and to dismiss the disturbing questions because in the Zionist mind the Arabs are merely pesky gnats and - "a little people, a silly people, barbarous and cruel" (to quote a line from Lawrence of Arabia). It's way too simplistic.
I can recognize all the lines you post because they are stock lines that come from reading lots of books justifying Israel and deflecting criticism about the dark history of how Israel came about and what it is doing today.
It's likely I read the same books,watched the same videos,and used the same websites as I once used exactly the same replys in discussions.
The Arabs infact love their children. Very much so.It can even be suggested that they love their children far more than many western parents.
Golda Meir famously made the remark about the Arabs and their children. It can appear that is showed sensitivity from that notoriously hard woman, but it was actually rooted in sheer ignorance and simplistic views of Arabs.
What you are referring to is groups like Hamas recruiting youngsters and the games that they get up to with young minds. It is sick(especially when it is the leaders who spin tales of paradise for martyrdom but ask others to do it for them). But this is not typical of the every day Arab world and how it treats its children. Not by a long shot.