As with so much else, you'd be quite wrong!

Anyways, today the psycho again denied the Holocaust and insulted the US and Europe. Because of W's vanity war/oil grab and the subsequent incompetence by our civilian leadership in Iraq, the US military, the best in the world, is in no shape to deal with him and his nation of 71 million people right now. By the time we are ready, Ahmadinejad, who also again said he was determined to have nukes, will have them. He's obviously taking a page from another nutcase with pretensions to godliness, Kim Jong-Il.

Oh, I also heard this morning on the radio that one Iranian truck full of doctored ballots for tomorrow's vote was stopped at the Iran-Iraq border, but at least two others crossed in! Ahmadinejad and the ayatollahs know who they want to win--the Islamicists in the South--and it sounds like they're doing whatever they can to ensure a victory. "A landmark in the history of freedom" indeed!

[ December 14, 2005, 01:48 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

His holocaust denial is disgusting. However, the question about why the U.N. decided to give away the land of the Palestinians for the crimes of Europeans is a fair one.

MIB, where does all this "nuking" and other destruction you seem to enjoy fit in your plan for world peace? That is, after all, what you are interested in, isn't it? Do you have a plan? Or do you just enjoy shooting off your mouth, regardless of consequences? Please explain, as I am sure many are wondering.

Someone makes statements about wiping Israel off the map, then asks a question about why the UN "gave away the land of the Palestinians"...not surprising that the question seems fair in comparison.

When considering the question, first consider the question. Is it an unbiased question, or does it contain prejudice? In this instance, the UN did not "give away" land Jews already owned. And Jews owned land in what was then a British territory. Signficant amounts of land, enough to form the basis for a Jewish territory in that land.

It makes an interesting historical study. But it is history, so you would do well to reexamine why 2 states were envisoned, one Jewish, the other Arab, and then examine why only one formed. Then consider as well why the Arab states surrounding Palestine, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, occupied Gaza and the West Bank from 1948-67, yet never formed a Palestinian state.

Btw, thought he denied that the Holocaust even happened. So how is it that he's saying the land was "given away for the crimes of the Europeans"? Can there be a crime when nothing actually happened?

He said this about the holocaust: Although I am disgusted by his anti-Semitism, I think that the basic question is valid. How could the holocaust be a reason to establish Israel in Palestine? It is true that some European Jews had colonized Palestine during the period of British control. But, I still don't think this justifies what happened to the indigenous population of Palestine. The Palestinians had nothing to do with the holocaust. I think that the establishment of Israel in Palestine was a huge mistake and a major contributing factor to our current problems in the region.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Powerful intellect I have. Much wisdom I possess.

For the record, Jews have lived in Palestine for thousands of years. The recent history of Jewish migration from Europe began decades before the British took control, which was only during World War I. At that time the Balfour Declaration established the principle of support for a homeland for Jews and also a homeland for Arabs in the territory. Once having migrated and then their children having been born there, the Jews were also indigenous people (I am very American in that...the Old World often doesn't accept that people settling in a new land actually belong there as much as those who lived there before...see France and the Arab/Africans, Germany/Sweden and the Turks, Arabs and the Jews in Palestine). The Holocaust and the horrors of the genocide were significant factors in gathering United Nations support for partitioning the land. However, the drive for a Jewish state was in full force and existed prior to WWII.

Reread his statement. He disingenously asks the question, but look at how he asks. Occupiers of Jerusalem? Not East Jerusalem, which had been the part originally designated for Arab control, but Jerusalem. Framing by his question that Israel has no right to be in Jerusalem at all. Of course, since he wants to wipe Israel off the map, such a framing fits his perspective. However, it is dangerous to treat such questions as valid without challenging the questioner. In the same way that the Ersatz Israel idea, one that Israel should include all of the current territory, plus the West Bank, plus Gaza, plus more, must be challenged if you believe the Palestinians also have rights there.

I emphasize that because the acceptance of such questions, without understanding his intent, often leads to hardening of positions rather than understanding. It also leads to the implicit acceptance of anti-Semitism toward Israel. And in the end contributes to leaving the Palestinians mired, since outsiders want them to be victims.

Israel has been in existance for 57 years. It isn't going anywhere. Why is he saying these things now? Recognize that his approach does nothing to help the Palestinians (history repeats itself so often in that regard). What does he gain by raising the question, particularly emphasizing European responsibility? Perhaps he's trying to play on European guilt and on European desire to show independence from the US in foreign affairs. Not a bad way to gets things stirred up for future developments. Wonder how the Iranian nuclear weapon development is going, with the Europeans being significant in opposing it? Things that make me go 'Hmmmmmm.'

Good Hands, I understand his intent and find it horrifying. And of course you are correct about the colonization of Palestine going back to Balfour. But, no one consulted the Palestinians as the decisions were being made. Neither the British nor the UN had a right to give away parts of Palestine and the results of those bad decisions haunt us today. This old article from the Onion is a funny take on the absurdity of the whole process.
West Bank homlands
The colonization of Palestine can't be undone. Who know's if the violence it has caused will end?

Thanks for the dialogue. I appreciate your staying with it. It's difficult for me to piggy back on comments of a hate mongerer to discuss an issue such as Israel/Palestine. Such an issue (if you can call it that) is so filled with history, tension, different valid perspectives, that it is a difficult enough discussion without the venom.

I have wondered for years when the Palestinians would finally say enough to the violence, enough of being pawns of Arab governments who claim the cause and support it as an outlet for tension in their own societies, and actually recognize the reality. And I've wondered if they would ever see that they'd probably have more success in dialoging with Israel, rather than in standing on the intenable position of "driving the Jews into the sea." They will not achieve that. In finally accepting Israel and creating their own state, they can actually shape their own destiny (to the extent any country or people can).

I think immigration is a better term than colonization, since Jews came as individuals, not in the name of another country. Then many of them came as a result of violence against them by Arabs in the lands of their ancestors, such as Yemen, Iraq, Egypt, Syria.

I actually don't know about consulting the Palestinians at the time the UN partitioned the land. The Egyptians, Jordanians, Iraqis, Syrians, Lebanese representatives were promiment in attacking Jews immediately upon the declaration of independence by Israel. Were they not representing the people there? Didn't the Palestinians have agencies, etc., that worked on behalf of their own people, like the Jews did?

Extremely complicated situation. The violence will end only when enough people from within those societies oppose it and not celebrate it.

I have a question: Could an Israeli state have been established peacefully, given the tumultuous events that created it?

[ December 19, 2005, 12:08 AM: Message edited by: sportinlife ]

I think the term colonization is more accurate because it was done under the authority and encouragement of the colonial power (Britain) and then of the UN without consultation with the indigenous people. The basic fact that Palestine was given away by an occupying power against the wishes of the natives is beyond dispute. Once the colonists were established, they used terrorist ativities against both the British and the natives in order to seize political control of the country. I'm amazed that this injustice doesn't seem to bother most Americans. For some reason, Israel is in a special category that exempts it from criticism. And it is clear that our uncritical support of Israel and denial of the justice of many Palestian claims has played a major role in destablizing the region and souring our relations with surrounding countries. Even now, as some timid moves are made toward Palestinian statehood, Israel gets to decide which bits of Palestine the Palestians get to have. Were I a Palestinian, I can't imagine that I would be anything less than outraged and enraged.

Of course, it is outside of my power to correct so I think I'll just put it out of my mind as I head off for a little vacation. I hope that everyone has a safe and pleasant holiday.

Um....wait a minute. The British forbade Jewish immigration for years, including after WWII, did they not? The idea that the British fostered Jewish immigration is at least questionable, if not actually a distortion. Jews did it, on their own, from their own impulses and drive.

As a result of such changes, there was and is conflict. Unfortunately that is almost inevitable and has been repeated many times in history (immigrants to this hemisphere, Australia, NZ, etc. engaging in conflict with the people who had been here before, Arabs and Africans in Europe now, Muslims and Hindus in India/Pakistan, among other examples).

Jewish terrorists committed atrocities against Arabs before 1948 and during the war, particularly killing indiscriminately among non-combatants. Those acts were/are deplorable. Many people never forgave or trusted Begin because of his role in those acts. And yet his example was also why many people continued to give Arafat chance after chance to prove that he would forgo the path of terror to help craft an actual peace between the Israelis and Palestinians.

As a point of historical truth, Arabs also attacked and killed Jews in riots/pogroms in the 20s and 30s, including Jews who had been there for generations. Neither side was innocent or always noble in their actions.

So how does that affect today? Are there enough people among the Palestinians who will stand up and die for peace? Not war, but peace. Sadat died for peace. Rabin died for peace. Who among the Palestinians will be willing and able to say: we will not try to destroy Israel, but we will have our own country, we will no longer be used as pawns by the Arab/Muslim leaders in other countries, we will not celebrate as martyrs men and women who blow themselves up. If they are able to do that, they could not only create their own country, but they could serve as models for so many other conflicts around the word, such as Bosnia, Northern Ireland, Kashmir, Chechnya, among others.

As a Canadian friend noted, it’s not always about us, or whether or not there’s enough external criticism of Israel…the Palestinians can shape their own destiny, as the Jews did a century ago. In fact, they are shaping their destiny now. One can only hope that they will have something to show for it in 30 years other than more suicide bombers.

Chaos in the Palestinian government might seem like an advantage for Israel among some of it's most ardent supporters. But I suspect it could lead to the opposite. The worst the situation gets the more likely the most violent party will achieve dominance. That would be Hamas. That would mean no recognition of Israel and no Palestinian state acceptable to the powers that be in the West. This is not good.

I love coming to this website. I learn something new every day. It's amazing how much was left out of the history classes that I took in high school.