59
   

Can you look at this map and say Israel does not systemically appropriate land?

 
 
Setanta
 
  0  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2009 02:19 pm
@Foofie,
Here, i'll explain to you exactly what i have posted in this thread. I won't explain why i've posted it, because that should be implicit in the subjec of the thread, which is Israeli land grabs.

The first thing i commented on is that the Zionists have had a plan to seize the land shown in the maps which RG posted, and more, for a long time. Eventually, i found the document i was looking for, which was dated early in 1919. I also pointed out that Israel has never observed the terms of UN GA Resolution 181, which provided for the formation of a state of Israel within the Palestinian/Transjordan Mandate. I provided a link to that, so that people could read if for themselves--but primarily, i was pointing out that they haven't lived up to it. One can draw one's own conclusions, but i suspect the Israelis ignored UN GA Resolution 181 because of the Zionist expansion plans implicit in the 1919 map i posted.

Then, in response to Frank's comments, i thought i'd take the time to point out some home truths about the history of the relations between public opinion in the western democracies and Israel. I pointed out that Truman had recognized the state of Israel very likely for political reasons (he recognized Israel in 1948, when he was in a tight run for re-election), and that initially, the public opinion of western democracies was uncertain about the formation of the state of Israel, most likely because they (the Israelis) had ignored the Resolution which authorized the formation of that state.

Then i traced the growth of admiration for the state of Israel in the public opinion of western democracies, which had the effect of encouraging the hawks in Israeli government, and radical, militant Zionists. I also pointed out that admiration for Israel began to decline, especially after the 1978 invasion of the Lebanon, which many observers then, and many scholars since, consider a principle, if not the principle cause of the Lebanese civil war, which raged for 15 years.

Quote:
But, regarding the Soviet Union and Israel. Why do you not include the Soviet Union in the "significant factors" in mid-east politics? I think that the Soviet Union, having been the mentor of some Arab states, would be quite significant, if Israel thought the Soviet Union would invade to protect an Arab ally


I seriously doubt that anybody in Israel with a firm grip on reality ever thought that the Soviet Union would "invade" Israel. Look at a map, and tell me how they were going to get there. Israel repeatedly invaded "Arab" states, and the Soviet Union did not directly intervene, and i doubt that they ever considered doing so. Israel has occupied those territories which it seized for more than 40 years, with the exception of the Sinai, and there is no reason to assume that the Soviets ever contemplated direct military intervention.

I did not say that the Soviet Uni0n was not a significant factor in middle eastern politics. I was addressing public opinion in the western democracies, and it's effect on the attitudes of members of Israeli government and on the attitudes of militant Zionists. Public opinion in the Soviet Union was not a matter which would have much affected decision makers and Zionists in Israel, given that the Soviet Union did not provide material support to Israel, and therefore there was no reason for Israel to care what the Russians thought of them, or to curry Soviet favor.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2009 05:27 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:

To this day, I still encounter many people who believe that the mid-east conflict is about terrorism and security, or about religious animosity but who don't realize the territorial aspect of the dispute.

Look at this map:

http://img71.imageshack.us/img71/7748/israelstealingpalestinexw9.jpg

The first image is prior to the creation of Israel, and the second image was the planned partition of the land between Jews and Palestinians. The third image, is the 1967 borders that have been the basis of negotiation since, and the last image includes portions of the West Bank and Gaza that are currently under Israeli control.


That progression of maps is slightly misleading because it gives the impression of a continued erosion of Palestinian territory.

After 1967, there should be a map that is all white, because Israel controlled it all. The 2000 map reflects that territory that Israel *gave back* as part of the peace negotiations.

And Israel would have given back a LOT more had the negotiations been allowed to continue. (The negotiations of course collapsed because the Palestinians were more interested in killing Israeli children than they were in negotiating.)





Robert Gentel wrote:
Israel has every right to defend herself, and a great deal of blame should be put on Palestinian extremists who have given Israel all the excuses needed to prevent Palestinian statehood, but it's foolish not to recognize the extremist element of Israeli society that also rejects the Palestinian's right to exist (see the Likud party's resolution to never allow a Palestinian state) and that has opposed every de-escalation of this conflict. It's foolish not to recognize that the Palestinian people have been under a blockade that constitutes an act of war for most of the last 50 years. And it's foolish to ignore that there are extremist Israeli settlers systemically settling the best Palestinian land that they can.

As long as there is conflict these extremists who reject a two-state solution can continue to redraw their borders. They even objected to the Israeli security wall because they feared it would become a limit to Israeli territory that they wanted to keep appropriating from Palestinians.

This element of Israeli society deserves to be recognized for their consistent efforts to prolong and escalate this conflict. "Greater Israel" advocates deny the Palestinians' right to exist just as the extremists in Palestine deny the right of Israel to exist.


You are correct to point out that those extremists exist.

But it should also be pointed out that the only reason these extremists have any hope of retaining control over Palestinian areas is because the Palestinians destroyed the effort to negotiate peace when they kept sending suicide bombers to murder Israeli children, and because the Palestinians destroyed the effort to pull out of Palestinian areas unilaterally when they turned Gaza into a giant artillery battery as soon as Israel pulled out of Gaza.
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2009 05:35 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
That progression of maps is slightly misleading because it gives the impression of a continued erosion of Palestinian territory.
After 1967, there should be a map that is all white, because Israel controlled it all.


"slightly misleading"!!!!!

Facts are really hard on thought processes that consist of vacuously repeating canards. In this day and age the vast majority of people believe that take land by force is not an equitable thing to do.


oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2009 06:12 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
oralloy wrote:
That progression of maps is slightly misleading because it gives the impression of a continued erosion of Palestinian territory.
After 1967, there should be a map that is all white, because Israel controlled it all.


"slightly misleading"!!!!!


It wasn't too bad. It just wrongly gave the impression of a continued erosion of Palestinian control.



JTT wrote:
Facts are really hard on thought processes that consist of vacuously repeating canards.


So I've noticed. You wouldn't believe some of the childish reactions I get when I present facts that some people find unwelcome.
JTT
 
  -4  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2009 06:48 pm
@oralloy,
Keep on suckin', oralloy.
oralloy
 
  2  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2009 07:16 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
Keep on suckin', oralloy.


As I said, you wouldn't believe some of the childish reactions I get when I present facts that some people find unwelcome.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  2  
Reply Sat 10 Jan, 2009 07:52 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:


I seriously doubt that anybody in Israel with a firm grip on reality ever thought that the Soviet Union would "invade" Israel. Look at a map, and tell me how they were going to get there. Israel repeatedly invaded "Arab" states, and the Soviet Union did not directly intervene, and i doubt that they ever considered doing so. Israel has occupied those territories which it seized for more than 40 years, with the exception of the Sinai, and there is no reason to assume that the Soviets ever contemplated direct military intervention.



I believe it was the closeness of the U.S. to Israel that kept the Soviet Union from ever contemplating an invasion.

Anyway, as they said when I was a kid, flipping baseball cards, "No backsies, no do overs!"
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2009 12:43 pm
Quote:
Following the Six-Day War, the Israeli government contemplated moving hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from Gaza and resettling them in the West Bank. That could have made the present situation infinitely less convoluted. But the plans remained on paper because some of the most powerful members of the Israeli government, including the right-wing leader Menachem Begin and Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, believed that the West Bank should be reserved exclusively for Jewish settlement.

This was probably the worst mistake in Israel's history. With nearly 300,000 Israelis living in the West Bank today and an additional 200,000 living in the formerly Arab part of Jerusalem, it is almost impossible to draw sensible borders and achieve peace

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/09/AR2009010902324.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

So I suppose we can look at the fact that there are still Palestinians in the West Bank as a glass half full kind of thing, because many powerful Israelis want/wanted them gone.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2009 02:22 pm
Foofie wrote:
Anyway, as they said when I was a kid, flipping baseball cards, "No backsies, no do overs!"

Unless, of course, you do just that.
talk72000
 
  0  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2009 02:42 pm
@Foofie,
Breshnev's wife was Jewish.
Foofie
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2009 09:04 pm
@talk72000,
talk72000 wrote:

Breshnev's wife was Jewish.


And the inference, if any, is?
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2009 09:05 pm
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:

Foofie wrote:
Anyway, as they said when I was a kid, flipping baseball cards, "No backsies, no do overs!"

Unless, of course, you do just that.


Not if the other kid is bigger.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2009 09:09 pm
@Foofie,
Big bullies, little bullies, they all get their due.
Foofie
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2009 09:18 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Big bullies, little bullies, they all get their due.


The world does not work that way usually. Only in fairy tales.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Jan, 2009 09:18 pm
@Foofie,
Soviet Union will not do any invasion of Israel if means Breshnev being put in the dog house.
Fountofwisdom
 
  0  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2009 08:04 am
@talk72000,
Your in a time warp right? The soviet Union vanished 20 years ago. It is unlikely to invade Israel as there is no border. You're American right?
0 Replies
 
Fountofwisdom
 
  0  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2009 08:07 am
@oralloy,
Not people. Americans. They just dont understand reality.
Fountofwisdom
 
  0  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2009 08:13 am
@Setanta,
Any talk of the Soviet Union is laughable: it is now Russia. It has ceased to be Communist. Since the 90's. The Soviet Union, is a myth which is only believed in America, so republicans can peddle paranoia and sell arms.
I agree with your analysis. Here is my prediction. All the people who disagree will be American.
0 Replies
 
masterk17
 
  0  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2009 10:10 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
It is my firm opinion that so long as Israel (not saying Jews here, just the state!) remains in the Middle East…no sustainable peace will ever prevail.


Finally i get to find some commone sense that is thinking practical and not just trying to justify what is happening, as sometimes people get overwhelmed by the reasons they creat in order to justify any clue, I respect your transperancy Frank,
djjd62
 
  2  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2009 10:18 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
It is my firm opinion that so long as Israel (not saying Jews here, just the state!) remains in the Middle East…no sustainable peace will ever prevail.


i'll go one better than that

it is my firm opinion that so long as humans remain on the earth, no sustainable peace will ever prevail


0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Eye On Israel/Palestine - Discussion by IronLionZion
"Progressives(TM)" and Israel - Discussion by gungasnake
Israel's Reality - Discussion by Miller
Israel's Shame - Discussion by BigEgo
Abbas Embraces the Islamists - Discussion by Advocate
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 02/24/2020 at 09:43:37