@vivify saidWrong. You are jumping to the Nakba. We are not there yet.
That's because of the Nakba, which I'm sure you're familiar with, where 700,000 Palestinians were violently forced from their homes
From the UN's website:
https://www.un.org/unispal/about-the-nakba/
[quote] The Arab world rejected the plan, arguing that it was unfair and violated the UN Charter. Jewish militias launched attacks against Palestinian villages, forcing th ...[text shortened]... the first attack. But again, Israel had already started taking land despite Palestinian objections.
So far we have the following facts:
1. British controlled Palestine from 1916 to 1947
2. UN Partition Plan passed in Nov1947
3. Arabs rejected it [thats their right]
4. Jews accepted {also their right]
5. The Arabs formed a coalition of armies.
Over the next few days, contingents of four of the seven countries of the Arab League at that time, Egypt, Iraq, Transjordan, and Syria, invaded the former British Mandate of Palestine and fought the Israelis. They were supported by the Arab Liberation Army and corps of volunteers from Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Yemen.
6. The British exited Palestine in May 1948
7. Fighting began.
On May 15, 1948, the British evacuated Palestine, and Zionist leaders proclaimed the state of Israel. Neighboring Arab states (Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq) then invaded Israel claiming that they sought to “save” Palestine from the Zionists.
8. Nakba. The Nakba came after the war.
@Rajk999 saidThe Nakba started at the same as the of war.
The Nakba came after the war.
Let's keep this simple:
1) Israel received legal basis for the land under the Partition
2) The Arabs rejected the Partition plan
3) The Partition was never fully implemented as a result of Arab objection
4) Legally speaking, Israel still had a more significant claim to the land than Palestinians, especially given the U.S. officially recognized Israel and the Resolution passed.
Can we both agree on this?
1 edit
@vivify saidOk. Agreed. Im doing some reading up so it appears from all the reports that after the UN resolution was passed in Nov 1947 :
The Nakba started at the same as the of war.
Let's keep this simple:
1) Israel received legal basis for the land under the Partition
2) The Arabs rejected the Partition plan
3) The Partition was never fully implemented as a result of Arab objection
4) Legally speaking, Israel still had a more significant claim to the land than Palestinians, especially given the U.S. officially recognized Israel and the Resolution passed.
Can we both agree on this?
- the Arabs immediately refused and started organised coalition forces
- the Nakba started in a trickle - Arabs fled as Jewish militia attacked
- from Nov 1947 to May 1948 about 150,000 Arabs left Palestine
- Arab coalition forces attacked after the British left, the Jews declared Independence and from May 1948 to Nov 1949, the real Nakba happened after the Arabs realised that they could not win the war. It was in this period about 600,000 Arabs fled.
Not sure what you mean by the Jews having more significant claim. They both had equal rights to their portion which was about 53/47. The Jews got a bunch of desert. The borders did change after the war.
@vivify said" Legally speaking, Israel still had a more significant claim to the land than Palestinians, especially given the U.S. officially recognized Israel and the Resolution passed."
The Nakba started at the same as the of war.
Let's keep this simple:
1) Israel received legal basis for the land under the Partition
2) The Arabs rejected the Partition plan
3) The Partition was never fully implemented as a result of Arab objection
4) Legally speaking, Israel still had a more significant claim to the land than Palestinians, especially given the U.S. officially recognized Israel and the Resolution passed.
Can we both agree on this?
No, you are fast forwarding past the League of Nations. The allies who won the war created the League of Nations. No surprise the LON divided up Ottoman and German territory lost in the war for colonization. The allies set up puppet governments to take the brunt of the backlash of their imperialist agenda.
Israel is one of those puppet governments that lasted unlike those in Iraq and Syria at that time after WW1. The League of Nations was just puppet of the allies so there was no legal right. All you have are promises and those were broken. The British Empire promised the whole Arabian Peninsula to the Arabs in return for helping them fight the Ottoman Empire.
You need to explain what makes something a legal right.
@eye-of-horus-42 saidThanks, but I dont need more information on why Hamas was born.
@Rajk999 ONE SHOULD LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL PROBLEM IN MIDDLE EAST AND WHY HAMAS WAS BORN!! RE: LOUIS THEROUX,DOCUMENTARY IN ISRAEL AND PALESTINE.
@Metal-Brain saidThats all a bunch of irrelevant nonsense. We are trying to establish a factual timeline of what happened from the time the British decided, with UN to partition Palestine, to the Nakba when Palestinians fled or were expelled. Who started the terrorism. So all your foolishness that you constantly repeat about, puppet govt, LON v UN, Imperialist agenda, broken promises ... seriously nobody cares and it has no bearing on anything.
" Legally speaking, Israel still had a more significant claim to the land than Palestinians, especially given the U.S. officially recognized Israel and the Resolution passed."
No, you are fast forwarding past the League of Nations. The allies who won the war created the League of Nations. No surprise the LON divided up Ottoman and German territory lost in the war for c ...[text shortened]... r helping them fight the Ottoman Empire.
You need to explain what makes something a legal right.
4 edits
@Rajk999 said1. British controlled Palestine from 1916 to 1947
Wrong. You are jumping to the Nakba. We are not there yet.
So far we have the following facts:
1. British controlled Palestine from 1916 to 1947
2. UN Partition Plan passed in Nov1947
3. Arabs rejected it [thats their right]
4. Jews accepted {also their right]
5. The Arabs formed a coalition of armies.
Over the next few days, contingents of four of the seven ...[text shortened]... t they sought to “save” Palestine from the Zionists.
8. Nakba. The Nakba came after the war.
- Balfour Declaration in 1917
2. UN Partition Plan passed in Nov1947
3. Arabs rejected it [thats their right]
4. Jews accepted {also their right]
5. The Arabs formed a coalition of armies.
Over the next few days, contingents of four of the seven countries of the Arab League at that time, Egypt, Iraq, Transjordan, and Syria, invaded the former British Mandate of Palestine and fought the Israelis. They were supported by the Arab Liberation Army and corps of volunteers from Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Yemen.
6. The British exited Palestine in May 1948
7. Fighting began.
On May 15, 1948, the British evacuated Palestine, and Zionist leaders proclaimed the state of Israel. Neighboring Arab states (Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq) then invaded Israel claiming that they sought to “save” Palestine from the Zionists.
8. Nakba. The Nakba started in a trickle - Arabs fled as Jewish militia attacked
- from Nov 1947 to May 1948 about 150,000 Arabs left Palestine
- Arab coalition forces attacked after the British left, the Jews declared independence
Agreed?
1 edit
@vivify saidAgreed. Now to the question of who started the terrorism. If we accept that both sides are guilty of terrorism ie by targeting civilians, then it is a matter of degree.
1. British controlled Palestine from 1916 to 1947
- Balfour Declaration in 1917
2. UN Partition Plan passed in Nov1947
3. Arabs rejected it [thats their right]
4. Jews accepted {also their right]
5. The Arabs formed a coalition of armies.
[i]Over the next few days, contingents of four of the seven countries of the Arab League at that time, Egypt, Iraq, Transjordan, ...[text shortened]... - Arab coalition forces attacked after the British left, the Jews declared independence
Agreed?
@Rajk999 saidUh. No.
Agreed. Now to the question of who started the terrorism. If we accept that both sides are guilty of terrorism ie by targeting civilians, then it is a matter of degree.
Murdering children is, per definition, wrong.
It’s a form of generic punishment. Which is illegal.
And morally abhorrant.
@vivify saidI hope you not going to jump the gun here and make sweeping statements [bordering on nonsense] and go off course.
Which ever side started the terrorism: murder their children?
What kind of terrorism did the Arabs engage in from 1949 after Nakba, to say the Munich Olympics in 1972 ? Here is some information :
Among the many children of the Six-Day War, the most frightening is international terrorism. Of course, terrorism, including Palestinian terrorism, predated 1967, but the war changed its scope, scale, and very nature. Before the war, Palestinian terrorists struck at targets in Israel, often in cooperation with neighboring states. After the war, the Palestinians used terrorism to internationalize the conflict, hijacking and destroying airplanes, holding diplomats hostage, and even attacking Israelis at the 1972 Munich Olympics.
Terrorism expert Bruce Hoffman dates modern international terrorism to July 22, 1968, when the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hijacked an Israeli El Al flight traveling from Rome to Tel Aviv. From 1968 through 1976, Palestinian groups would hijack 16 airplanes, and also attack other aviation targets such as El Al offices. Hijacking was not new, but most hijackers had simply sought to divert a plane to Cuba or another desired location. This time the hijackers sought to trade the passengers for Palestinian terrorists imprisoned in Israel and proclaimed that a civilian jet was a legitimate target because it was a symbol of the Israeli state. This combination of extra-territoriality and claims that civilian targets are legitimate because they are symbolic would spread, leading to more and more Palestinian hijackings and increasingly becoming the norm among terrorist groups. Global targeting would also spread beyond hijacking. Most dramatically, in 1972 the Black September Organization, a front for Yasser Arafat’s Fatah, killed 11 Israeli athletes and a German policeman at the Munich Olympics, capturing the attention of the world media that had gathered for the games.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-1967-war-and-the-birth-of-international-terrorism/
@shavixmir saidYes.
Uh. No.
Murdering children is, per definition, wrong.
It’s a form of generic punishment. Which is illegal.
And morally abhorrant.
Getting the timeline of events was fun but ultimately this is the truth.
@Rajk999 saidRemember how unwilling you were to condemn the Israeli terrorists in the West Bank? Whatever reasons you have for doing so, the same can be applied to Palestinians.
I hope you not going to jump the gun here and make sweeping statements [bordering on nonsense] and go off course.
What kind of terrorism did the Arabs engage in from 1949 after Nakba, to say the Munich Olympics in 1972 ? Here is some information :
Among the many children of the Six-Day War, the most frightening is international terrorism. Of course, terrorism, incl ...[text shortened]... es.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-1967-war-and-the-birth-of-international-terrorism/
@vivify saidThat is actually a load of rubbish. Here it is :
Yes.
Getting the timeline of events was fun but ultimately this is the truth.
Murdering children is, per definition, wrong.
It’s a form of generic punishment. Which is illegal.
And morally abhorrant.
Terrorists murdered Jewish children ... that is wrong.
Gaza is in full support of these terrorists
Gazans believe in a form of generic punishment of Jews.
What Hamas did supported by Gazans is morally abhorrent.
So that hypocrisy.
You want to do it Jews, but you dont want it done to you.
The world does not work like that. Sorry.