The Israel/Palestine Conflict Mk. IV

It was no accident, you can find the video of the sniping on the BBC. They revel in imitating the child they have just shot. These are but several of the crimes the Israeli 'Defence' Force have committed in their occupation. You criticise Hamas who hide weaponry amongst civilian infrastructure-where else is it supposed to go? Gaza isn't renowned for the abundance of space and to put weapons out in the open would make them sitting ducks.

Israel are the aggressors. Israel are the occupiers. Israel are the war criminals. They have no right being where they are and they have no right to obstruct the recognition of Palestine as a sovereign state. Why should civilians in Palestine be denied food and cement to rebuild what the Israelis destroyed?

Every inch of Judea & Samaria is covered with Jewish artifacts, Jewish ruins, Jewish synagogues, tombs etc.

Not a single shred of anything points to a so-called 'palestinian' people. Nothing. No civilisation, no currency, no kings, leaders - nothing.

There is no such thing as 'palestinians'.

Israel aren't the aggressors. Palestine could have had a state in peace with Israel since 1948 if they'd accepted the UN's partition plan.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/binyamin-netanyahu-s-victory-means-we-must-recognise-the-state-of-palestine-1.2144344?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Interesting opinion piece in The Irish Times by a former high ranking British diplomat, Sir Vincent Fean. I'm in agreement with him here. I have no love for Hamas but if Abbas and the PLO recognise the State of Israel then why continue to build settlements in the West Bank and why refuse to recognise Palestine?

Ask Hamas why. The jihadist group running the Gaza strip is why concrete is not allowed into the Gaza strip.

Israel aren't the aggressors. Palestine could have had a state in peace with Israel since 1948 if they'd accepted the UN's partition plan. They could have had a state since 1993. Why did they choose not to? Because they didn't want a Jewish state on their doorstep. If Israel had been set up as an Islamic state, there would currently be no Israel-Palestine conflict at all.

They chose not to because funnily enough they didn't like the idea of their land being carved up and allocated to the Zionist lobby. What bad things will the Palestinians do with concrete? Build a naughty statue of Netanyahu? What bad things will they do with food? Throw it at the IDF snipers?


Posted from TSR Mobile

Setting aside the tactical wisdom of accepting/rejecting the plan for now, why should they have accepted it? Why should they have agreed to gerrymandered borders (drawn to accommodate virtually all Jews within the Jewish state, while more or less ignoring how many Arabs would be left outside the Arab state) that gave away more than half the country to the proposed Jewish state when Arabs outnumbered Jews two to one (and even this is ignoring that the bulk of the Jewish population had just arrived)?

Furthermore, despite the official acceptance of the plan by the Jewish Agency and Haganah (no-one ever mentions that the other two Zionist paramilitaries that later formed the IDF, Irgun and Lehi, both rejected the plan), they more or less straight away started preparing to subvert it, intending to expand into more territory and expel the Arabs within it.

"Their" land? Why did the land belong to the Palestinians (or "Arabs" as they were then known) any more than it belonged to the Zionists? Neither had a country beforehand, after all.

You avoided the question. Giving any kind of humanitarian aid to a jihadist group is often not a good idea. I won't bother spelling this out any further. What you should be complaining about is the fact that a jihadist group runs the Gaza strip.

The Arabs already lived there, the Zionists didn't-that is the primary difference. You may also be interested to know that other sites were considered before Palestine, Argentina and Uganda among them.

I would also like your evidence for Hamas being jihadis. Have they declared themselves to be such like ISIS have? Not even British media calls them such, the worst being 'militants'. At any rate, you would not be providing humanitarian aid for these people but for the civilians trapped in Gaza. The Red Cross still provided aid to Syrians despite the country being ruled by a tyrant so why can't the same go for Palestine? Still we could keep allowing the IDF to snipe children without consequence.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Didn't they propose multiple border-drawing scenarios? They even proposed one where the Jewish state was a tiny bit at the top, near Lebanon, as I recall.

"Their" land? Why did the land belong to the Palestinians (or "Arabs" as they were then known) any more than it belonged to the Zionists? Neither had a country beforehand, after all.

Ask Hamas why. The jihadist group running the Gaza strip is why concrete is not allowed into the Gaza strip.

Israel aren't the aggressors. Palestine could have had a state in peace with Israel since 1948 if they'd accepted the UN's partition plan. They could have had a state since 1993. Why did they choose not to? Because they didn't want a Jewish state on their doorstep. If Israel had been set up as an Islamic state, there would currently be no Israel-Palestine conflict at all.

The Arabs already lived there, the Zionists didn't-that is the primary difference. You may also be interested to know that other sites were considered before Palestine, Argentina and Uganda among them.

I would also like your evidence for Hamas being jihadis. Have they declared themselves to be such like ISIS have? Not even British media calls them such, the worst being 'militants'. At any rate, you would not be providing humanitarian aid for these people but for the civilians trapped in Gaza. The Red Cross still provided aid to Syrians despite the country being ruled by a tyrant so why can't the same go for Palestine? Still we could keep allowing the IDF to snipe children without consequence.


Posted from TSR Mobile

I think you're talking about the 1937 Peel Commission, which was turned down by both sides (and even those leading Zionists who did favour it, such as Ben-Gurion, only considered them temporary borders to be expanded later). As with the 1947 Plan, it gave disproportionate land to the proposed Jewish state relative to their population; and furthermore it explicitly called for the 225,000 Arabs living in the area assigned to the Jewish state to be forcibly expelled (while calling for just 1,250 Jews to move in the other direction).

I disagree. I think it's clear that the Zionist leadership wanted at least the bulk of Palestine for a Jewish state and would not have been content with as small a chunk as proposed by Peel (though whether they could have accepted it as a temporary, tactical measure is a different debate).

Before. By the time the British left, Israel was declared and the surrounding Arab states got involved, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians had already been forced from their homes. And the idea that the creation of a Jewish state would have to involve forcible expulsion of most of its Arab population (not necessarily all of them, but enough to create an unassailable Jewish demographic majority) was hardly new to Zionist thinking in 1947.

There's never been an independent country called Wales either, but few would dispute that the land belongs more to the Welsh people than any hypothetical political movement wanting to take part or all of Wales for recent/future migrants for a different purpose.

Does that justify Israel banning hummus with pine nuts entering too?

An interesting read. My position is that some crimes were committed and the Arabs did suffer, but nowadays the Israelis have the moral high ground and the Palestinians should try to live in peace and stop fighting wars against Israel. (I.e. stop supporting jihad and start supporting liberal democracy.)

There is a country called Wales though. There was no country called Palestine, it was just a territory claimed by many empires throughout history...

Some Arabs lived there for centuries. Some Jews lived there for centuries. Other Arabs migrated there in the recent past. Other Jews migrated there in the recent past.