15
   

ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

 
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 12:11 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
While the Jews in Palestine had originally established its state in a relatively small area, after the Jews successfully defended their state, they had been rewarded by that action with a larger state.


I'm genuinely curious when I ask, where were the borders of the nascent state of Israel defined at the time of the declaration? I haven't been able to find this.

ican's emphasis
Britannica wrote:

Arab-Israeli wars: [a] series of military conflicts between Israeli and various Arab forces, most notably in 1948 - 49, 1956, 1967, 1973, and 1982.

The first war immediately followed Israel's proclamation of statehood on May 14, 1948. Arab forces from Egypt, Transjordan (Jordan), Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon occupied the areas in southern and eastern Palestine not apportioned to the Jews by the United Nations (UN) partition of Palestine and then captured east Jerusalem, including the small Jewish quarter of the Old City, in an effort to forestall the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. The Israelis, meanwhile, won control of the main road to Jerusalem through the Yehuda Mountains (“Hills of Judaea”) and successfully repulsed repeated Arab attacks. By early 1949 the Israelis managed to occupy all of the Negev up to the former Egypt-Palestine frontier, except for the Gaza Strip. Between February and July 1949, as a result of separate armistice agreements between Israel and each of the Arab states, a temporary frontier was fixed between Israel and its neighbours.

Tensions mounted again with the rise to power of Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, a staunch Pan-Arab nationalist. Nasser took a hostile stance toward Israel. In 1956 Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, a vital waterway connecting Europe and Asia that was largely owned by French and British concerns. France and Britain responded by striking a deal with Israel—whose ships were barred from using the canal and whose southern port of Elat had been blockaded by Egypt—wherein Israel would invade Egypt; France and Britain would then intervene, ostensibly as peacemakers, and take control of the canal. In October 1956 Israel invaded Egypt's Sinai Peninsula. In five days the Israeli army captured Gaza, Rafah, and Al-'Arish—taking thousands of prisoners—and occupied most of the peninsula east of the Suez Canal. The Israelis were then in a position to open sea communications through the Gulf of Aqaba. In December, after the joint Anglo-French intervention, a UN Emergency Force was stationed in the area, and Israeli forces withdrew in March 1957. Though Egyptian forces had been defeated on all fronts, the Suez Crisis, as it is sometimes known, was seen by Arabs as an Egyptian victory. Egypt dropped the blockade of Elat. A UN buffer force was placed in the Sinai Peninsula.

Arab and Israeli forces clashed for the third time June 5–10, 1967, in what came to be called the Six-Day War (or June War). In early 1967 Syria intensified its bombardment of Israeli villages from positions in the Golan Heights. When the Israeli Air Force shot down six Syrian MiG fighter jets in reprisal, Nasser mobilized his forces near the Sinai border, dismissing the UN force there, and he again sought to blockade Elat. In May 1967 Egypt signed a mutual defense pact with Jordan.

Israel answered this apparent Arab rush to war by staging a sudden air assault, destroying Egypt's air force on the ground. The Israeli victory on the ground was also overwhelming. Israeli units drove back Syrian forces from the Golan Heights, took control of Gaza and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, and drove Jordanian forces from the West Bank. Importantly, the Israelis were left in sole control of Jerusalem.

The sporadic fighting that followed the Six-Day War again developed into full-scale war in 1973. On October 6, the Jewish holy day of Yom Kippur (thus “Yom Kippur War”), Israel was attacked by Egypt across the Suez Canal and by Syria on the Golan Heights. The Arab armies showed greater aggressiveness and fighting ability than in the previous wars, and the Israeli forces suffered heavy casualties. The Israeli army, however, reversed early losses and pushed its way into Syrian territory and encircled the Egyptian Third Army by crossing the Suez Canal and establishing forces on its west bank.

Israel and Egypt signed a cease-fire agreement in November and peace agreements on January 18, 1974. The accords provided for Israeli withdrawal into the Sinai west of the Mitla and Gidi passes, while Egypt was to reduce the size of its forces on the east bank of the canal. A UN peacekeeping force was established between the two armies. This agreement was supplemented by another, signed on September 4, 1975. On May 31, 1974, Israel and Syria signed a cease-fire agreement that also covered separation of their forces by a UN buffer zone and exchange of prisoners of war.

On March 26, 1979, Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty formally ending the state of war that had existed between the two countries for 30 years. Under the terms of the Camp David Accords, as the treaty was called, Israel returned the entire Sinai Peninsula to Egypt, and, in return, Egypt recognized Israel's right to exist. The two countries subsequently established normal diplomatic relations.

On June 5, 1982, less than six weeks after Israel's complete withdrawal from the Sinai, increased tensions between Israelis and Palestinians resulted in the Israeli bombing of Beirut and southern Lebanon, where the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) had a number of strongholds. The following day Israel invaded Lebanon, and by June 14 its land forces reached as far as the outskirts of Beirut, which was encircled; but the Israeli government agreed to halt its advance and begin negotiations with the PLO. After much delay and massive Israeli shelling of west Beirut, the PLO evacuated the city under the supervision of a multinational force. Eventually, Israeli troops withdrew from west Beirut, and the Israeli army had withdrawn entirely from Lebanon by June 1985.

Hostility continued, however. On December 9, 1987, rioting broke out among Palestinian Arabs living in the Israeli-occupied territories of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and in Jerusalem. The Palestinian demonstrations and riots continued in the following years and took on the character of a mass popular rebellion (known as the intifadah, or “shaking off”) directed against continued Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. In 1993 Israel and the PLO reached an agreement (known as the Oslo Accords) that involved mutual recognition and envisaged the gradual implementation of Palestinian self-government in the West Bank and Gaza Strip before a permanent peace settlement. The process was fraught with difficulty, however, and violence in the form of a second intifadah erupted in 2000. Violence ebbed and flowed in subsequent years, sometimes reaching the level of full-scale war between Israeli forces and Palestinian police and irregulars.

...

The 1947 UN partition resolution proposed to divide the territory of Mandatory Palestine--the area between the Jordan River Valley and the Mediterranean Sea--into a Jewish state and an Arab state in economic union, with Jerusalem established as an international enclave. Although the 650,000 Jews in Palestine owned only 7% of the land, 55% of it was to go to the Jewish state, whereas the 1.2 million Palestinian Arabs would receive 45%. The Arab governments and the Palestinian Arabs rejected both the concept of partition and the terms of the resolution and decided to oppose it by force. In the armed struggle that followed, the Arabs, in spite of the intervention of Arab armies, were defeated by the better organized and equipped Jews, who ended up with 77% of the land.

...

The General Assembly approved partition on November 29, granting to Jews some 5,500 square miles, mostly in the arid Negev. When the Arab League proclaimed a jihad (holy war) against the Jews, Truman's advisers began to reconsider partition, for the loss of Arab oil might cripple the Marshall Plan and the U.S. military in case of war. When, however, the British pulled out and Ben-Gurion declared the state of Israel on May 14, 1948, Stalin and Truman (whether out of sympathy or domestic politics) immediately advanced recognition.

At the moment of partition the number of Jews had risen to some 35 percent of the total population of Palestine, and they were faced with Arab League forces totaling 40,000 men. The Haganah fielded about 30,000 volunteers armed with Czechoslovakian weapons sent at the behest of the U.S.S.R. On the day after partition the Arab League launched its attack, but the desperate Jewish defense prevailed on all five fronts. The UN called for a cease-fire on May 20 and appointed Folke, Count Bernadotte, as mediator, but his new partition plan was unacceptable to both sides. A 10-day Israeli offensive in July destroyed the Arab armies as an offensive force, at the cost of 838 Israeli lives. Members of the Stern Group assassinated Bernadotte on September 17. A final offensive in October carried the Israelis to the Lebanese border and the edge of the Golan Heights in the north and to the Gulf of Aqaba and into the Sinai in the south. Armistice talks resumed on Rhodes on Jan. 13, 1949, with the American Ralph Bunche mediating, and a truce followed in March. No Arab state recognized Israel's legitimacy, however. More than a half-million Palestinian refugees were scattered around the Arab world. Between 1948 and 1957 some 567,000 Jews were expelled from Arab states, nearly all of whom resettled in Israel. The 1948 war thus marked only the beginning of trouble in the region.

...
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 12:13 pm
McT,

You are correct in saying that ican more often than not is at least minimally civil. So are you.

In this case, ican's criticisms of Setanta I though went too far. I've been "associated" with Set for a long time, and have been impressed with the level of his scholarship repeatedly. Set can off the top of his head recite names, dates, and a host of historical detail that a lesser man would have to root out. Setanta has been wrong on occasion, sometimes by a good margin, but not usually. Setanta and I part ways in our conclusions as to what significance to put on events and trends. I tend to be rather more cynical, I think, than Setanta. I don't believe men change much, while Setanta believes that government can and should change the world to be more just. I believe in a strong central government that operates more on the practical necessities of the moment, while Set favors a popular government that bends to the Will of the public. Though I strongly disagree with most of Setanta's political conclusions, he deserves our full respect.

Sorry Set, if I've misrepresented you, but your perfectly capable of setting the record straight.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 12:59 pm
No harm done, Ash . . . although not an exact characterization, it is not far off the mark on how i see government. I am more cynical than you give me credit for, though, and that is why i believe (mostly) in popular government--my cynicism tells me that's what politicians will deliver because of the nature of their profession.

But with regard to both our shared interests and our differences, i continue to respect you as well educated, widely and carefully read, and honest.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 01:13 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
While the Jews in Palestine had originally established its state in a relatively small area, after the Jews successfully defended their state, they had been rewarded by that action with a larger state.


I'm genuinely curious when I ask, where were the borders of the nascent state of Israel defined at the time of the declaration? I haven't been able to find this.


Ignoring the idiocy of suggesting that Israel had been rewarded when in fact all they did was grab land to which they were not entitled, and acknowleding that Ash gave Miss Duck a link to maps, i would point out that OE provided an excellent graphic just a few pages ago:

old europe wrote:
Here's the UN partition plan from 1947:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/UN_Partition_Plan_Palestine.png/327px-UN_Partition_Plan_Palestine.png


Israel, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank today:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/63/Cia-is-map.gif/276px-Cia-is-map.gif

As you can see, the Palestinian Territories are significantly more than the city of Gaza or the Gaza Strip.


I think it is useful to have this graphic displayed again, as it points out quite clearly that Israel has taken and retained land not granted to the Jewish state in the terms of General Assembly Resolution 181.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 01:23 pm
Actually, the Israelian Foreign Ministry provides similar maps on their webside

http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/6820ACDE-FD3F-4583-9963-28CA13BA376C/0/MFAG007y0.gif

http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/7B4C068A-BC60-48B0-9CED-244973AAACD5/0/MFAJ0d1s0.jpg
Modern Israel
(within boundaries and cease-fire lines)


source: Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs: Israel's story in maps
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 01:35 pm
Rather than accept the UN portition, all of the "Arabs" joined together to exterminate Israel on the day of its birth. Whoops! Another bad mistake, perhaps even worse than joining Germany during WWI and WWII. They got their collective asses kicked by refugees from the Hitler's extermination camps, armed with whatever was at hand against well-equipped armies. Israel won by right of conquest every inch of land it occupies now, or has occupied since 1948.

To make peace, Israel has repeatedly given back conquered territory. In return, they have been under siege for over 60 years. On the other hand, Palestinian maps of today still don't even acknowledge Israel exists. Since the Muslim occupation back in the 9th century, the land lay fallow and the Palestinians were nice, docile subjects of the Ottoman Empire. In the last 60 years, though plagued continually by Arab attack and terrorism, the Jews have made the desert bloom.

Recently, Israel has been criticized by some here because so many Lebanese/Palestinian children die in a little war their parents provoked. That's meant to demonstrate how heartless and vicious the Israelis are. What it actually shows is that Israel has take great care to preserve their civilian population from attack, while the terrorist organizations used their own population as a shield for unguided missiles fired at population centers. Ah, those wicked, wicked Jews always looking for non-Jewish children to sacrifice in their worship of evil.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 01:49 pm
Asherman wrote:
Recently, Israel has been criticized by some here because so many Lebanese/Palestinian children die in a little war their parents provoked. That's meant to demonstrate how heartless and vicious the Israelis are. What it actually shows is that Israel has take great care to preserve their civilian population from attack, while the terrorist organizations used their own population as a shield for unguided missiles fired at population centers. Ah, those wicked, wicked Jews always looking for non-Jewish children to sacrifice in their worship of evil.


This is a tendentious and politically-motivated statement, and i don't intend to let it pass without comment. As i pointed out earlier, when you erroneously claimed that i had said Hezbollah offered social programs to the Lebanese, in fact, Hezbollah claims to represent all the Shi'ites of the Lebanon--which is about 40% of the population. Whoops, they don't represent those dispicable Sevener Shi'ites, only the Twelvers, so let's say about 35% of the population. Oops again, Hezbollah has never gotten even 10% of the seats in the Lebanese Parliament, so maybe Hezbollah doesn't represent the Lebanese Shi'ites at all--barely more than a quarter of them voted for Hezbollah.

Therefore, claims that Lebanese children died because their parents "provoked" an Israeli attack are scurrilous, and ought to be beneath your dignity. Futhermore, Hezbollah has made cross-border raids and attempted to snatch IDF personnel for 15 years, and has occassionally succeeded. It was only now, at a time when many right-wing Israelis believed that America was willing to go to war with Syria, that the Israeli government decided to respond to yet another raid to snatch IDF personnel with a devastating attack on the whole of the nation of the Lebanon. If you doubt that some Isrealis believe that their government intends to involve the United States in a war with Syria, i suggest that you visit this thread which was posted today.

That was the most vicious politically motivated post i've seen you make, apart from being a strawman contention about what people with whom you disagee believe. Shame on you.
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 02:11 pm
Nonsense. Hezzbolah is a terrorist organization dedicated to the extinction of Israel. It has operated, under the auspices of Syria and Iran for decades, and relinquished control of southern Lebanon to the Lebanese government. They have indeed been guilty of cross border incursions and terrorism inside Israel. So, finally they tried to put one too many straws on the camels back. They provoked the Israeli's into an attack, and then whined about the result. Hezzbolah chose to place its missiles in schools, mosques, quiet neighborhoods and hospitals ... and they did that on purpose. It would not have served their propaganda to protect the civilian population, and they did not. They used their own children as shields, and those heartless Israelis targeted all those poor innocents.

Which came first, the Israeli attacks upon southern Lebanon and Palestine, or the terrorist bombs that regularly were set off inside Israel by terrorists? Did Hezzbolah and Hamas kidnap and hold for ransom Israelis, or did Israel just make the whole thing up? Who fired the first rocket, Hezzbolah and Hamas, or was it Israel.

Way, way back in 1947-48, was it Israel who embarked on a 60 year campaign to exterminate the Palestinians, or was it the Arab world that has spent all those years trying to violently murder as many Israelis as possible?

Is my recollection of the history of the region really a complete fabrication, or is the propaganda of the terrorist organizations and their sponsors the "real" story?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 02:16 pm
Asherman wrote:
They got their collective asses kicked by refugees from the Hitler's extermination camps, armed with whatever was at hand against well-equipped armies.


It is certainly true that the Zionists (that's the term they used themselves, by the way--just go back and read the Jewish Peoples Council statement about their intent to found a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel) were attacked by the Arab states, that's where your factual content ends.

Israel was created out the Palestinian Mandate territory which was administered by the British as the Palestine-Transjordan Mandate. The nation of Jordan as we know it did not exist until 1946.

Quote:
Between 1928 and 1946, a series of Anglo-Transjordanian treaties led to almost full independence for Transjordan. While Britain retained a degree of control over foreign affairs, armed forces, communications and state finances, Emir Abdullah commanded the administrative and military machinery of the regular government. On March 22, 1946, Abdullah negotiated a new Anglo-Transjordanian treaty, ending the British mandate and gaining full independence for Transjordan. In exchange for providing military facilities within Transjordan, Britain continued to pay a financial subsidy and supported the Arab Legion. Two months later, on May 25, 1946, the Transjordanian parliament proclaimed Abdullah king, while officially changing the name of the country from the Emirate of Transjordan to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.


That quote is from the King Huseein-dot-gov website.

To suggest that the Jordanians had a well-equipped army is ludicrous.

Syria also did not exist as a state until shortly before the 1948 war:

Quote:
After the surrender of France to Germany in 1940, Syria came under the control of the Vichy government. British and Free French forces, however, invaded and subdued Syria in 1941. Later in the same year, the Free French government formally recognized the independence of Syria but continued to occupy the country. With the elections in 1943, a new government was formed under the presidency of the Syrian nationalist Shukri al-Kuwatli, one of the leaders of the 1925 to 1927 uprising against the French. After the end of World War II in 1945, France persisted in trying to exercise influence over Syria. Resultant anti-French uprisings subsided only after the British military intervention on the side of the French and the withdrawal of all French troops and administrative personnel. In 1946 the British troops left Syria. Syria became a charter member of the United Nations (UN) in 1945.


The source for that quote is made-in-Syria-dot-com. Syria has been, in fact, the most unstable country in the region. It was not until 1970, when Hafez al-Assad launched his "corrective revolution" that the Ba'athists stopped killing each other and a stable Syrian state emerged.

To suggest that Syria had a well-equipped army in 1948 is ludicrous.

In Egypt, the puppet Kings of the English ruled until Faruq was overthrown in 1952, by officers of the Young Officers Movement (known in Egypt as the "Free Officers" movement), a Pan-Arabist movement prominent in Egypt, Syria and Iraq. The English only withdrew from Egypt in 1947, at the same time that they declared their intention to abandon the Palestine-Transjordan Mandate. They left with all of their arms an equipment--whereas in the Palestine Mandate, they withdrew leaving their arms and equipment behind, which the Zionists quickly seized. The Zionists had already been trained and equipped since 1936 by the English, and were seasoned troops by 1948, and had English arms and transport--and advantage which the Jordanians, Egyptians and Syrians did not enjoy.

The Egyptian coup had as an excuse the failure of Faruq's army in 1948, and was lead by General Muhammad Naguib, who was not even Egyptian, but Sudanese. The contention that Egypt had a better equipped military in 1948 is ludicrous.

Don't make things up, Ash, if you please.

Quote:
Israel won by right of conquest every inch of land it occupies now, or has occupied since 1948.


You invoked the victims of the Nazis in your screed there. But hadn't the Nazis won by conquest every inch of the land they occupied? This is the most specious of your contentions. A bad effort altogether.
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 02:27 pm
Yep, Hitler won all that territory, and then he lost it. If it hadn't been for American resources, Europe might well have been consolidated into a Third Reich that extended into the 21st century. Hitler screwed up, as we both know, in many ways and so his territorial gains came to nothing.

Of course, your dates are more accurate than mine which were written on the fly. That Syria and the other Arab States weren't exactly equal to what the U.S., Britain, or the Soviet Union could field at the time does not mean that they weren't far better organized, armed and led than infant Israel. They thought that Israel could be choked to death in the crib. They were wrong.

Saying that those beastly Jews were the aggressor and all the Arab "armies" were victims just isn't true ... and you know that as well as I do.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 02:30 pm
Not only that, but Israel did not get its land by conquest to begin with. It got the original land as a result of a UN resolution and the remainder as a result of self defense against imminent threat of attack or actual attack by hostile neighbors. Germany can't really say that in the land it took for whatever length of time it got to hold it.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 02:38 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Germany can't really say that in the land it took for whatever length of time it got to hold it.



I doubt that someone here - except some few right-wings - ever said so.

Since 60 years, we are glad to got rid of that fatal expansion policy which has been a topic from the existance of Germany in 1871 onwards.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 02:40 pm
Asherman wrote:
Nonsense. Hezzbolah is a terrorist organization dedicated to the extinction of Israel. It has operated, under the auspices of Syria and Iran for decades, and relinquished control of southern Lebanon to the Lebanese government. They have indeed been guilty of cross border incursions and terrorism inside Israel. So, finally they tried to put one too many straws on the camels back. They provoked the Israeli's into an attack, and then whined about the result. Hezzbolah chose to place its missiles in schools, mosques, quiet neighborhoods and hospitals ... and they did that on purpose. It would not have served their propaganda to protect the civilian population, and they did not. They used their own children as shields, and those heartless Israelis targeted all those poor innocents.

Which came first, the Israeli attacks upon southern Lebanon and Palestine, or the terrorist bombs that regularly were set off inside Israel by terrorists? Did Hezzbolah and Hamas kidnap and hold for ransom Israelis, or did Israel just make the whole thing up? Who fired the first rocket, Hezzbolah and Hamas, or was it Israel.

Way, way back in 1947-48, was it Israel who embarked on a 60 year campaign to exterminate the Palestinians, or was it the Arab world that has spent all those years trying to violently murder as many Israelis as possible?

Is my recollection of the history of the region really a complete fabrication, or is the propaganda of the terrorist organizations and their sponsors the "real" story?


So you are now content to accuse me of peddling the propaganda of terrorist organizations? So much for your declared civility.

I have pointed out more than once, and despite your intentional mischaracterizations of what i have written, that Hezbollah claims to represent all of the Shi'ites of the Lebanon, but that this is undoubtedly not true.

I'd say your recollection of the events in 1948 are very odd, indeed. Three battalions of Palestian Jews fought with the British Eighth Army in World War II, and were later (1944) brigaded to form the Jewish Brigade of the Eighth Army in Italy. Originally, the intent was to recruit evenly from among Arabs and Jews in the Palestine Mandate, but three times as many Jews volunteered as did Arabs. Although the English initially formed an Arab battalion, they soon disbanded it, because of their fear that the Arabs of the middle east in general were sympathetic to the Axis. The Jewish battalions fought in Egypt, Lybia, Sicily and Italy. When the 1948 war rolled around, Isreal had more than 10,000 veteran troops, and more than 100,000 members of a home guard organized by the English before the Second World War began. More than a quarter of a million European Jews migarted to Palestine from 1944-48, and the ludicrous image you peddle of an heroic people battling against overwhelming odds, and winning a miraculous victory are closer to propaganda than anything i've posted.

Should i take a page from your book, and describe you as a shill for Israeli propaganda? After all, given what you imply about me, sauce for the goose does make sauce for the gander.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 02:52 pm
Thanks for the maps, folks. Unfortunately, they don't quite answer my question, or maybe I just think they don't. Ican said that the Jews chose only a small portion of the land for themselves when they declared their state. I wondered what exactly their chosen borders were since they weren't accepting the partition plan. The declaration of the state simply says it is in Eretz-Israel, which encompasses pretty much everything, including Jordan. So if they chose only a small portion for themselves before they were attacked, what was that small portion? Or is everyone saying that they declared a state with the borders defined in the partition plan?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 02:56 pm
Asherman wrote:
Yhat Syria and the other Arab States weren't exactly equal to what the U.S., Britain, or the Soviet Union could field at the time does not mean that they weren't far better organized, armed and led than infant Israel. They thought that Israel could be choked to death in the crib. They were wrong.

Saying that those beastly Jews were the aggressor and all the Arab "armies" were victims just isn't true ... and you know that as well as I do.


And i didn't say that, as you well know. What i pointed out was that the Arab states which attacked Israel were poorly equipped and poorly lead, and had no experience of war, and that is the truth whether you are willing to acknowledge it or not. Iraq sent about 15,000 men, barely a division. Jordan contributed about 6000 to 8000, at most a reinforced brigade. Syria contributed about 12,000 troops, a scant division. The Lebanon contributed fewer than 4000 troops, not even a decent brigade. Egypt contributed about 40,000 troops, not quite three divisions. They lacked modern arms and equipment, and their officers had no experience of war.

By contrast, there were more than 10,000 veterans of the Second World War among the Jews in Palestine. Since 1936, the British had organized police forces and paramilitary forces in Palestine from among the Jews which totalled more than 30,000 troops, and had provided arms for a "home guard" force of 100,000. They did that precisely because the Arab nations of the middle east were seen as potential allies for the Axis. Palestinian Jews fought on some of the most bitterly contested battlefields of World War Two, in Egypt and Lybia at Tobruk, at Bardia and at both battles of El Alamein. After the landings in Sicily, they fought with the Eight Army there, and they fought with the Eighth Army throughout the brutal slogging battles as the Allies drove north into Italy. Arab officers and soldiers had no equivalent experience, and they were not equipped by the British, who had made a point of arming and training Palestinian Jews since before the Second World War began.

I have never denied that Israel was attacked by the Arab states. I have never stated nor even suggested that the state of Israel ought to be destroyed. I have never denied that Hezbollah is an organization dedicated to the destruction of Isreal.

What i have pointed out is that it is a crock of **** to say that Lebanese children had to die because their parents provoked a justified attack from Israel. That's bullshit, plain and simple.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 03:10 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
Thanks for the maps, folks. Unfortunately, they don't quite answer my question, or maybe I just think they don't. Ican said that the Jews chose only a small portion of the land for themselves when they declared their state. I wondered what exactly their chosen borders were since they weren't accepting the partition plan. The declaration of the state simply says it is in Eretz-Israel, which encompasses pretty much everything, including Jordan. So if they chose only a small portion for themselves before they were attacked, what was that small portion? Or is everyone saying that they declared a state with the borders defined in the partition plan?


I can't really answer your question, FD as I have no better maps than those already posted.

I do know that Eratz-Israel means "land of the people" or "land of Israel".

Without commenting on the accuracy of the information, the following is rather tedious reading, but it does give a somewhat different perspective from what is generally posted in this thread re the partitioning of the land, however:

The view of the establishment of Israel by a Jewish rabbi who denies that the UN established Israel after the Holocaust:
http://www.rosenblit.com/CREATE%20ISRAEL.htm

The view of the same rabbi re the partition of the land by the UN.
http://www.rosenblit.com/Law.htm
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 03:32 pm
While Herzl originally was more vague about Israels borders, the "Zioniste Organisation's Statement on the borders of Palestine" at the Paris Peace Conference 1919 were quite definetive.

Here quoted from the Jewish Library website

Quote:
SCHEDULE

The boundaries of Palestine shall follow the general lines set out below:

Starting on the North at a point on the Mediterranean Sea in the vicinity south of Sidon and following the watersheds of the foothills of the Lebanon as far as Jisr El-Karaon thence to El-Bire, following the dividing line between the two basins of the Wadi El-Korn and the Wadi Et-Teim, thence in a southerly direction following the dividing line between the Eastern and Western slopes of the Hermon, to the vicinity west of Beit Jenn, then eastward following the northern watersheds of the Nahr Mughaniye close to and west of the Hedjaz Railway.

In the east a line close to and west of the Hedjaz Railway terminating in the Gulf of Akaba.

In the south a frontier to be agreed upon with the Egyptian Government.

In the west the Mediterranean Sea.

The details of the delimitations, or any necessary adjustments of detail, shall be settled by a Special Commission on which there shall be Jewish representation.
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 03:44 pm
All right, Set if it makes you happy ....

After the partition of Palestine, the infant country was attacked from all sides by its Arab neighbors and Palestinians who fully expected to drive the Jew into the sea. The Israeli's surprised them by their toughness and fighting ability. Does that meet your exacting standard of accuracy?

So if Hezzbolah isn't responsible for using Lebanese children as human shields and as fodder for cynical propaganda, who is responsible? With the same regard to exactness as you've demanded, I don't think I ever said that the children's parents were to blame. The whole of the area was controlled by Hezzbolah, and used as a staging ground for continual attacks on the Israeli population.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 03:45 pm
Good lookin' out, Walter.

http://www.mideastweb.org/map_zionistpal.gif

The map above comes from the Mideast-web-dot-org page on the 1919 Zionist Organization statement regarding Palestine. The Mideastweb is an organization of Arabs and Jews, Americans, Palestinians and Israelis and many, many others, dedicated to peace in the middle east. For those who find them a suspect source, Walter's source is the Jewish Virtual Library (a source i have frequently used, and have quoted in this thread), and it agrees in all particulars with the borders proposed by the Zionists in 1919, as shown in the map above.

Not a lot of room for the Arabs in that version of the Jewish state.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Sep, 2006 03:55 pm
Asherman wrote:
All right, Set if it makes you happy ....

After the partition of Palestine, the infant country was attacked from all sides by its Arab neighbors and Palestinians who fully expected to drive the Jew into the sea. The Israeli's surprised them by their toughness and fighting ability. Does that meet your exacting standard of accuracy?


It is not a case of quibbling here, Ash. Your earlier remarks were snide and insulting in the extreme, and you implied that i had said the evil Isrealis provoked an attack on themselves by the Arab states. I had said nothing of the kind. You then claimed that the Israelis, with little to no military resource, defeated well equipped Arab armies which attacked them. Neither of those statements is true, and i particularly resented your inferential claim that i am peddling the propaganda of terrorist organizations. Face it, Ash, you lost your cool big time for a moment there.

Quote:
So if Hezzbolah isn't responsible for using Lebanese children as human shields and as fodder for cynical propaganda, who is responsible?


This is one of those "have you stopped beating your wife?" type of questions. If i attempt a straight answer to that one, i would be acknowledging a contention that the only people who died in the Lebanon in this recent war were those who were being used as human shields by Hezbollah--and there is no good reason for me to believe that is true. It may not have been your intent, but your spreading propaganda again. A hell of a lot of Lebanese got killed or maimed because they had the misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and it had nothing to do with being used as human shields.

Quote:
With the same regard to exactness as you've demanded, I don't think I ever said that the children's parents were to blame.


In fact, this is what you wrote:

Asherman wrote:
Recently, Israel has been criticized by some here because so many Lebanese/Palestinian children die in a little war their parents provoked. That's meant to demonstrate how heartless and vicious the Israelis are. What it actually shows is that Israel has take great care to preserve their civilian population from attack, while the terrorist organizations used their own population as a shield for unguided missiles fired at population centers. Ah, those wicked, wicked Jews always looking for non-Jewish children to sacrifice in their worship of evil.


So that was indeed what you said.

Quote:
The whole of the area was controlled by Hezzbolah, and used as a staging ground for continual attacks on the Israeli population.


This is more propaganda. Israel bombed indiscriminately throughout the Lebanon from Beirut south to the border. It is completely false to claim that the whole of that area was under the control of Hezbollah. Israel attacked the airport in Beirut. Do you claim Hezbollah controlled the airport? Israel blockaded the Lebanon from the sea, do you claim that Hezbollah controlled all of the coastal waters of the Lebanon and used them as a staging ground for attacks on Israel?

In fact, this incident has been an extraordinary reaction on the part of the Israeli government, and their punishment of the Lebanese went far beyond the areas controlled by Hezbollah. On the very first day of this war, the government of Israel declared that they considered the entire nation of the Lebanon to be responsible and that they would attack the entire nation of the Lebanon. Once again, don't make things up.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Israel's Reality - Discussion by Miller
THE WAR IN GAZA - Discussion by Advocate
Israel's Shame - Discussion by BigEgo
Eye On Israel/Palestine - Discussion by IronLionZion
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 04:40:04