Originally Posted by captiva303

who said i would let that happen? i would die trying to prevent it, but what you asked me to do was to imagine if we were in the same position as Palestine...
and to be honest i would probably be a terrorist if i was in Palestine,but being an outsider i am able to see the fact that although trying to get their land back is justifiable it is ultimately futile. this is because the Israelis now have lived there long enough for them to have a claim (atleast in their own minds) to their currently occupied lands(not including newer settlements they should stop and should be ripped up). i would suggest going back to a two state solution similar to the one drawn up in 1948 just to keep it simple and it would require both sides to compromise.
what do you suggest as your solution? where do you think all the jews are going to go? you cant exactly send them back to their ancestors country of origin.

Back where they came from like all illegal immigrants. If any country should heve been made to give them a homeland, it should have been Germany. What did the Palestinians ever do to deserve this.

It would be the same as if my home were to be destroyed by some other person(s), and for the Government to say, "That's OK, you can just take captiva303's house and property". We don't think he wants it.

At the very least the Israelis should withdraw to the 1948 borders, surrender their war criminals to the world court, and then be prepared to negotiate down. (Be made to compensate the original inhabitants, plus give them equal rights and a veto vote in the Knesset) Even so they would still be getting a poor deal. Remember, "It is their country"

It doesn't take much imagination, just put yourself in the Palestinian 's position for a minute.

response in bold...

Originally Posted by senojekips

Back where they came from like all illegal immigrants. If any country should heve been made to give them a homeland, it should have been Germany. What did the Palestinians ever do to deserve this.

what about the ones that have been born in Israel what happens to them. the Palestinians did nothing to deserve this,they were just a victim of international guilt and sympathy. i like the Germany idea pitty you weren't running the show back then i actually think tat is a good idea

It would be the same as if my home were to be destroyed by some other person(s), and for the Government to say, "That's OK, you can just take captiva303's house and property". We don't think he wants it.

not quite it is more like the government kicking me out of my house, you move in and then my great grand kids want it back from your great grand kids...

At the very least the Israelis should withdraw to the 1948 borders, surrender their war criminals to the world court, and then be prepared to negotiate down. (Be made to compensate the original inhabitants, plus give them equal rights and a veto vote in the Knesset) Even so they would still be getting a poor deal. Remember, "It is their country"

i agree with this part except for the veto part if they got their own country it wouldn't be to big of a deal,and "it was their country" owning something is derived from the ability of preventing others from taking it from you in our society we get this
ability assured by the law which gives us an equal playing field...
unfortunately in Palestine's circumstances the law isn't able to be enforced...

It doesn't take much imagination, just put yourself in the Palestinian 's position for a minute.
i think i did

Originally Posted by Captiva303

what about the ones that have been born in Israel what happens to them.

Originally Posted by Captiva303

the Palestinians did nothing to deserve this,they were just a victim of international guilt and sympathy. i like the Germany idea pitty you weren't running the show back then i actually think tat is a good idea

So, you feel that the answer is to just let it slide, it's all too hard? In law, a person who unknowingly buys or comes into posession of stolen goods has no legal claim to them.

not quite it is more like the government kicking me out of my house, you move in and then my great grand kids want it back from your great grand kids...

But the answer is the same is it not?

i agree with this part except for the veto part if they got their own country it wouldn't be to big of a deal,and "it was their country" owning something is derived from the ability of preventing others from taking it from you in our society we get this
ability assured by the law which gives us an equal playing field...
unfortunately in Palestine's circumstances the law isn't able to be enforced...

You've missed the point, the Palestinians already do have their own country, it's just that they have an occupying power in charge of it. I can't imagine the Lebanese being real happy is we were to say, "Ahhh well,.... The Palestinians can have half of your country". The only land that is really viable is presently occupied by the Israelis.

You've got to get the simple stuff sorted before you can expect to try and solve the more complex issues.

The first issue is that the land actuually belongs to the Palestinians and has done for at least 1300 years probably much longer.

When I say "Palestinians", I mean those persons including those Jews who have lived there for hundreds of years prior to the flood of the European Jews who first arrived claiming it was their "promised land" soon followed by those fleeing persecution 1930-Present. The people who physically owned and used the land.

I believe the situation in Isreal is a tender one because of the Influx of Jewish people following the conclusion of WWll. I mean, I feel for them because following the war, why would you want to the live in a community that just tried to eradicate you? Or under the Iron Curtian of the Soviet Union also with harsh religious intolerance. The question must have been something like "were to now?"

But the Palestians were there along the small population of Jewish inhabitants first, the influx of people of a different culture must have been a shock for them. Then when the State of Isreal become official right under their feet. Yea I would be kinda angry to. But the fact is you can't really condem Isreal of genocide and massive war crimes.

I mean if you lets say, ask a preacher and a boxer what to do with violence, you will get two radically different answers, based on the developted attitude they both have. Same with Isreal, multiple wars agianst her Arab neighbors, and the threat of anhilation every day. Numerous military operations against terrorism in the region.

Well, that said, it makes perfect sense why Isreal is alittle harsh to the Palistine issue. On the flip side, at this piont the Palistinians have proven they are more than willing to continue the struggle for their own state. So I belive nomatter how small, they should have it, and their own government, and Isreal should be made to leave them alone, and the same for Palistine.

one important point. "palestine" was the name given to the region by the romans after they drove the majority of the jews out. the region was populated and depopulated over the next 2000 years through war, famine, and disease.
in 1800 there was a small population there. there were arabs and jews who had either a)been there forever or b) moved there back there throughout the middle ages.
when the jews, at the turn of the century, started making the area liveable by getting rid of malaria, building up the economy, region etc... a whole bunch of arabs took the opportunity and flooded the region.
so your huge numbers is largely due also to arabs MIGRATING to the region.

The term “Palestine” is believed to be derived from the Philistines, an Aegean people who, in the 12th Century B.C.E., settled along the Mediterranean coastal plain of what are now Israel and the Gaza Strip. In the second century C.E., after crushing the last Jewish revolt, the Romans first applied the name Palaestina to Judea (the southern portion of what is now called the West Bank) in an attempt to minimize Jewish identification with the land of Israel. The Arabic word Filastin is derived from this Latin name.3
The Hebrews entered the Land of Israel about 1300 B.C.E., living under a tribal confederation until being united under the first monarch, King Saul. The second king, David, established Jerusalem as the capital around 1000 B.C.E. David’s son, Solomon, built the Temple soon thereafter and consolidated the military, administrative and religious functions of the kingdom. The nation was divided under Solomon’s son, with the northern kingdom (Israel) lasting until 722 B.C.E., when the Assyrians destroyed it, and the southern kingdom (Judah) surviving until the Babylonian conquest in 586 B.C.E. The Jewish people enjoyed brief periods of sovereignty afterward before most Jews were finally driven from their homeland in 135 C.E.
Jewish independence in the Land of Israel lasted for more than 400 years. This is much longer than Americans have enjoyed independence in what has become known as the United States.4 In fact, if not for foreign conquerors, Israel would be more than 3,000 years old today.
Palestine was never an exclusively Arab country, although Arabic gradually became the language of most of the population after the Muslim invasions of the seventh century. No independent Arab or Palestinian state ever existed in Palestine. When the distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testified against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said: “There is no such thing as ‘Palestine’ in history, absolutely not.”5
Prior to partition, Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity. When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, the following resolution was adopted:
We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds.6
In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: “There is no such country as Palestine! ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.7
The representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the United Nations submitted a statement to the General Assembly in May 1947 that said, Palestine was part of the Province of Syriaand that, politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity. A few years later, Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, told the Security Council: “It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria.”8
Palestinian Arab nationalism is largely a post-World War I phenomenon that did not become a significant political movement until after the 1967 Six-Day War and Israel’s capture of the West Bank.
Palestinian claims to be related to the Canaanites are a recent phenomenon and contrary to historical evidence. The Canaanites disappeared from the face of the earth three millennia ago, and no one knows if any of their descendants survived or, if they did, who they would be.
Sherif Hussein, the guardian of the Islamic Holy Places in Arabia, said the Palestinians’ ancestors had only been in the area for 1,000 years.9 Even the Palestinians themselves have acknowledged their association with the region came long after the Jews. In testimony before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, for example, they claimed a connection to Palestine of more than 1,000 years, dating back no further than the conquest of Muhammad’s followers in the 7th century.10 And that claim is also dubious. Over the last 2,000 years, there have been massive invasions (e.g., the Crusades) that killed off most of the local people, migrations, the plague, and other manmade or natural disasters. The entire local population was replaced many times over. During the British mandate alone, more than 100,000 Arabs emigrated from neighboring countries and are today considered Palestinians.
By contrast, no serious historian questions the more than 3,000-year-old Jewish connection to the Land of Israel, or the modern Jewish people’s relation to the ancient Hebrews.
For many centuries, Palestine was a sparsely populated, poorly cultivated and widely-neglected expanse of eroded hills, sandy deserts and malarial marshes. As late as 1880, the American consul in Jerusalem reported the area was continuing its historic decline. “The population and wealth of Palestine has not increased during the last forty years,” he said.12
The Report of the Palestine Royal Commission quotes an account of the Maritime Plain in 1913:
The road leading from Gaza to the north was only a summer track suitable for transport by camels and carts...no orange groves, orchards or vineyards were to be seen until one reached the Jewish village of Yabna Yavne....Houses were all of mud. No windows were anywhere to be seen....The ploughs used were of wood....The yields were very poor....The sanitary conditions in the village were horrible. Schools did not exist....The western part, towards the sea, was almost a desert....The villages in this area were few and thinly populated. Many ruins of villages were scattered over the area, as owing to the prevalence of malaria, many villages were deserted by their inhabitants.13
Surprisingly, many people who were not sympathetic to the Zionist cause believed the Jews would improve the condition of Palestinian Arabs. For example, Dawood Barakat, editor of the Egyptian paper Al-Ahram, wrote: “It is absolutely necessary that an entente be made between the Zionists and Arabs, because the war of words can only do evil. The Zionists are necessary for the country: The money which they will bring, their knowledge and intelligence, and the industriousness which characterizes them will contribute without doubt to the regeneration of the country.”14
Even a leading Arab nationalist believed the return of the Jews to their homeland would help resuscitate the country. According to Sherif Hussein, the guardian of the Islamic Holy Places in Arabia:
The resources of the country are still virgin soil and will be developed by the Jewish immigrants. One of the most amazing things until recent times was that the Palestinian used to leave his country, wandering over the high seas in every direction. His native soil could not retain a hold on him, though his ancestors had lived on it for 1000 years. At the same time we have seen the Jews from foreign countries streaming to Palestine from Russia, Germany, Austria, Spain, America. The cause of causes could not escape those who had a gift of deeper insight. They knew that the country was for its original sons (abna’ihi l asliyin), for all their differences, a sacred and beloved homeland. The return of these exiles (jaliya) to their homeland will prove materially and spiritually [to be] an experimental school for their brethren who are with them in the fields, factories, trades and in all things connected with toil and labor.15
As Hussein foresaw, the regeneration of Palestine, and the growth of its population, came only after Jews returned in massive numbers.
Moreover, not all Arabs opposed the Jews' return:
Emir Faisal, son of Sherif Hussein, the leader of the Arab revolt against the Turks, signed an agreement with Chaim Weizmann and other Zionist leaders during the 1919 Paris Peace Conference. It acknowledged the “racial kinship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people” and concluded that “the surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations is through the closest possible collaboration in the development of the Arab states and Palestine.” Furthermore, the agreement looked to the fulfillment of the Balfour Declaration and called for all necessary measures “...to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil.”21
Faisal had conditioned his acceptance of the Balfour Declaration on the fulfillment of British wartime promises of independence to the Arabs. These were not kept.
Critics dismiss the Weizmann-Faisal agreement because it was never enacted; however, the fact that the leader of the Arab nationalist movement and the Zionist movement could reach an understanding is significant because it demonstrated that Jewish and Arab aspirations were not necessarily mutually exclusive.

And your point being?

Originally Posted by Sukio

I believe the situation in Isreal is a tender one because of the Influx of Jewish people following the conclusion of WWll. I mean, I feel for them because following the war, why would you want to the live in a community that just tried to eradicate you? Or under the Iron Curtian of the Soviet Union also with harsh religious intolerance. The question must have been something like "were to now?"

But this is the problem, the movement of Jews out of Europe to effectively annex a territory none of them have anything more than a fairy tale claim to, it would be like all of the worlds Catholics moving into and taking over Italy because they have always had a presence there in the form of the Vatican.

The fact is that for the most part the world does not recognise religion as a race or ethnicity but it does organise its nations along racial and ethnic lines and as such the Jews/Muslims/Christians that lived relatively peacefully together in the region for the past 2000 years are a completely different bunch to the lot that moved in during the 1930s and 40s.

But the Palestians were there along the small population of Jewish inhabitants first, the influx of people of a different culture must have been a shock for them. Then when the State of Isreal become official right under their feet. Yea I would be kinda angry to. But the fact is you can't really condem Isreal of genocide and massive war crimes.

How about small war crimes?
We are still hunting down 90 year old ex-Nazi's for the murder of "3" civilians during WW2 why is Israel (or any other nation) exempt from the same standards?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...urt-rules.html

I mean if you lets say, ask a preacher and a boxer what to do with violence, you will get two radically different answers, based on the developted attitude they both have. Same with Isreal, multiple wars agianst her Arab neighbors, and the threat of anhilation every day. Numerous military operations against terrorism in the region.

Do you consider the French, Dutch, Yugoslav, Cretan (plus all the others) resistances to be terrorists?
They killed German civilians and soldiers alike, they didnt wear uniforms or have structured front lines, they were just fighting to free their country of an invader, hell many books describe these people as true patriots yet Palestinians get the tag of "terrorist" for doing exactly the same thing.

Well, that said, it makes perfect sense why Isreal is alittle harsh to the Palistine issue. On the flip side, at this piont the Palistinians have proven they are more than willing to continue the struggle for their own state. So I belive nomatter how small, they should have it, and their own government, and Isreal should be made to leave them alone, and the same for Palistine.

But once again the argument comes back to how much of your country would you give to someone you see as an occupying force to get peace?
Be honest here, 50%, 60%, 75%, 90%?

I did'nt mean to make it seem like i was calling the Palestinians terroists, I was talking about like the operation in 2006 against the Hamas militant group and similar organizations.

Its going to be hard to maintain the state of Isreal without majorly shafting the people of Palestine. On the flip side, it will be very hard to create a Palestine state and then do what with Isreal? You wud fix one problem of people being forced to be leave their homes by forcing other people to leave their homes behind? It's a little late for an eviction notice, the people are now as was mentioned in this thread before, on their third or fourth generation from the immigrants from Europe after WW ll. Were do they go? And how do you help two divided populatoins (Isrealis and Palestinians) to somehow come to a noviolent situation.

BOTH have instigated bloodshed at one point or another, I dont care what the reason, and I am sure that at some point, although one maybe more than the other, have performed crimes against humanity. But what the wests real conern should be is not slapping Isreal on the wrist we she is about to attack, but looking at the bigger struggle of the ground that Isreal is standing on, maybe those desions in 1948 should have been looked at a little more closley.

I am not saying I dislike either faction, I don't want either to disapear of the face of the Earth or be consumed in oppression or bloodshed. I just wud like to see the problems that have been going on for decades be realized seriously on the world stage, and not just talked about, just some sort of action taken. Heck I would volunteer to do something.

Really look at it, people get reall heated over this issue, really really steamed, and I don't care what anyone says, I bet, almost garuntee, that there was a point in time somewhere where a better descion could have been made, by someone, or communication made between two peoples that would have help avoid all this tension, anger, and conflict and bloodshed.

Originally Posted by captiva303

regardless of whether what was done was legal or not it happened so we will have to deal with the current circumstances rather than trying to restore the past...

I agree with you dude. I'm tired of these Israel/Palestine threads. What's done is done and there's no use in "reversing" the past. No one is just going to pick up their stuff and move just because a group of people tell them to. And if we're going to play the "It was so-and-so's land first" game, then the U.S. should surrender its territories to the Native Americans/Eskimos because the Americans have only been there for about 200 years or so whereas the Palestinians have a lofty 1000 years.

I know it's harsh of me for asking, but if the Palestinians loved their land so much, then why didn't they do a better job of defending it when "the world" divided it up? If you've been around for 1000 years or so, I would hope that your collective intelligence and basic territorial needs would compel you to find/develop means of defending yourself and possibly expanding.

Originally Posted by ASTRALdragon

I agree with you dude. I'm tired of these Israel/Palestine threads. What's done is done and there's no use in "reversing" the past. No one is just going to pick up their stuff and move just because a group of people tell them to. And if we're going to play the "It was so-and-so's land first" game, then the U.S. should surrender its territories to the Native Americans/Eskimos because the Americans have only been there for about 200 years or so whereas the Palestinians have a lofty 1000 years.

I know it's harsh of me for asking, but if the Palestinians loved their land so much, then why didn't they do a better job of defending it when "the world" divided it up? If you've been around for 1000 years or so, I would hope that your collective intelligence and basic territorial needs would compel you to find/develop means of defending yourself and possibly expanding.

well the reason they didn't defend it feicely at first was because they were liberated from the Turks by the allies at the end of ww1 and the was no such thing at that time in their minds of a Palestinian people or nation as far as they were concerned they were all Arabs. however they felt the British rule was a major improvement on that of the turks.but from what i can tell from what you have said is that we may actually disagree because i am in fact in support of of an Israeli nation aswell as a Palestinian one.

You've missed the point, the Palestinians already do have their own country, it's just that they have an occupying power in charge of it. I can't imagine the Lebanese being real happy is we were to say, "Ahhh well,.... The Palestinians can have half of your country". The only land that is really viable is presently occupied by the Israelis.

You've got to get the simple stuff sorted before you can expect to try and solve the more complex issues.

The first issue is that the land actuually belongs to the Palestinians and has done for at least 1300 years probably much longer.

When I say "Palestinians", I mean those persons including those Jews who have lived there for hundreds of years prior to the flood of the European Jews who first arrived claiming it was their "promised land" soon followed by those fleeing persecution 1930-Present. The people who physically owned and used the land.

have i missed the point?
what is the point.
senojekips it will be impossible to deport every person who has arrived since 1948 and quite frankly there was no such thing as Palestinian nationalism until after the jewish people gained control. so what needs to happen is Palestine needs to be recognized as a nation Israel must stop its interference in Palestine also the Palestinians must stop their interference in Israel , criminals on both side need to be brought to justice.

then we can all move on...