How to shut up an anti-semite.......

[Sirotnikov]

Most left because they were trying to avoid the fighting, just as happens in every war

Then how is this Israel's fault?

The war itself was initiated by the Arabs.

But then again, if you do blame Israel for those who left, I demand that the PA pays money to all those who left Israel due to the terracts.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
And where have they all disappeared?

The offers were rejected, Siro. The Zionist movement had no interest in becoming part of an Arabic state.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

And where have they all disappeared?

As DD said, the offers were all rejected by the Zionist movement. They wanted a Jewish state, not to be a minority within yet another state. Second, Syria was oeverthrown by the Allies and carved up. Abdullah never recindinded his offer and kept making it up until the outbreak of the '48 war.

The real leaders, such as the Mufti al-Hussaini, were all too busy with anti-Jewish propoganda, later tying knots with the Nazi government.

As I have written many times, the Husseini family was anti-Jewish and anti-British. The Brits put one of them in charge trying to buy the loyalty of the family. Had they chosen a Nashishibi, the other candidate for Grand Mufti, history would have been rather different. This was a tactical and strategic error on the part of the British, but that does not validate your claim that the Arabs were always anti-Jewish.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

Quote:

Most left because they were trying to avoid the fighting, just as happens in every war

Then how is this Israel's fault?

The war itself was initiated by the Arabs.

And continued by the Israelis. The Israelis continued the policy of clearing the land between the collapse of Palesinian resistence March of '48 and the outbreak of war. Furthermore, after the Arabs were beaten in the first period of war, the Israelis went on to break every truce until the US and USSR stepped in. They attacked areas that weren't involved in the fighting, such as in Western Galilee. The war would have been over after one month, had Israel not chosen to continue attacking and attacking only it had acheived all of its objectives.

But then again, if you do blame Israel for those who left, I demand that the PA pays money to all those who left Israel due to the terracts.

There's nothing stopping them from returning to Israel, unlike the Palestinian refugees. But I see nothing wrong with that, as long as Israel makes reparations for its crimes against the Palestinians.

[laurentius]

Siro, let me put it this way: I'm have nothing against you. Just yuo're intentions. Easy it broe..

[chequita guevara]

Siro, better send me that PM again. Or just IQC me. I'm invisible. If I'm on, I'll respond.

[Sirotnikov]

Please stop being invisible.

That PM was important

There's nothing stopping them from returning to Israel, unlike the Palestinian refugees. But I see nothing wrong with that, as long as Israel makes reparations for its crimes against the Palestinians.

Sure there is - the fear of further terracts.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by laurentius
Siro, let me put it this way: I'm have nothing against you. Just yuo're intentions. Easy it broe..

I have nothing against you.

If I meet you outside of ME debate, I won't ahve anything agianst you.

However, you continuosly keep ignoring my factual posts, and then when I get upset and slightly mouth you, you blaim me for not facing the issues.

Should I be ignoring your posts just like you are ignoring mine?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Please stop being invisible.

That PM was important

No way, hoser, 'eh. Bein' invisible stops me from getting porno spammed.

Quote:

There's nothing stopping them from returning to Israel, unlike the Palestinian refugees. But I see nothing wrong with that, as long as Israel makes reparations for its crimes against the Palestinians.

Sure there is - the fear of further terracts.

God, you Israelis are such whimps. Tell you what, you can have all our crime, we'll take all your terroracts. I guarantee you'll be begging the Palestinians to come back.

[Keygen]

Originally posted by Pekka

I have a great solution to this of my own. Lets develop a new bomb called 'memoryloss' and bomb israel and palestine with it.

Then when they all wake up, they don't remember a thing. Then we destroy all the newspapers etc, and say they're the best

friends.
And while we're at it, we should also bomb this memorybomb to all countries. No one would remember differencies, or history,

wars etc. Before we do that, let's destroy all other weapons too.
Before bombing we should also remake some stuff like forget the idea of national borders and nationalities. Also new

priorities that are different from power and money and ownership and products.
Who wants to see this bomb used ? I do!

What a great idea!!! Let's do it right now! Let's forget all those morons that lived before us, work so hard and spilled their sweat and blood so we can enjoy their fruits, what we call science, justice and independence, etc. Who cares for those dead romantic idiots anyway...

Don't worry Pekka, that bomb has been fallen already. How many people do you think that they know what our ancestors did?
When you deepen in historal issues people turn into that sweet face of theirs ->

Originally posted by Echinda

His point is that the people who live there now are the ones that matter. Not someone with a claim based on some long dead ancestor. So, certainly he would have the right to kick you out of his house, but he wouldn't have the right to kick you out of a house that some ancestor of his was kicked out of 3000 years ago.

Hebrews came to Palestine 3000 years ago. If they had been kicked out 3000 years ago also then we wouldn't do that conversation, would we?
Hebrews have a contining presence ther for 3000 years with small breaks, longer than the Palestinians have so why the hell shouldn't deserve to live there as well and have their own state? Why shouldn't let those Hebrews that suffered under the Nazis leave Europe and go there? Why shouldn't permit them to return to their holy land?

Originally posted by Echinda

My ancestors on my paternal grandmothers side had a farm taken from them when they fled the US due to being United Empire

Loyalists (i.e. they were on the losing side of the US revolution). My dad did some digging around and found the old deeds.

It is quite clear that the farm is now covered by a good chunk of urban Boston. Should I be able to claim it back?

Go ahead! I'll suport you!

[Keygen]

Originally posted by DarkCloud

People should do what they can and not be weak jerks and claim that they have "rights" to own land in certain areas because some grandparent 1000 years ago owned a hovel on the spot.

Your example is poor DarkCloud. You can't equate some grandparents with an entire nation.
Hebrews have a continuing presence for 3000 years either as majority or minority.

Originally posted by DarkCloud

All that matters in regards to land claims is the present.

Well for the presence Israel exists and the Palestinians have autonomy and human rights respected as long as they are not fighting each other. Then none side's human rights are respected.
Those that doesn't seems to see the presence but the past are the Palestinians...

Originally posted by DarkCloud

No. If Germany conquered the land- it would be, by rights theres.

If you give rights to the Germans then what is your objection for Israelis doing the same?

Originally posted by DarkCloud

It may not be easy, but it should be done- for if it is done then it would be excessively easier to live together without someone hating someone, then reading up on how he is a Slav, then telling everyone how evil the Slavically decended peoples are, then getting them to gang up on him and his family
and restarting the cycle of violence.

Peace can exists between nations as well war between the people of the same nation.
Nationality is a source of war but not the only one...

Originally posted by DarkCloud

"Returning to their homeland"
Why cant they make a real homeland!
Why do they have to return to the homeland of their Grandparents!

Hebrews are religious people. According to their scripts Palestine is their holy land.
The same goes aroung for the muslims. If you can't understand this then you will not be able to fully understand why those people are fighting each other. It might be for land but the most important is that it is their holy land, for both.
Tradition DarkCloud. Every body have some kind of.

Originally posted by DarkCloud

And Yes, Might and Conquest do make right.

They do make mountains of innocent deads as well

Originally posted by DarkCloud

If there were no Nationalities or REligions, there would be no problem... hmm...

Are you sure?

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


No way, hoser, 'eh. Bein' invisible stops me from getting porno spammed.

Then put me on your visible list

God, you Israelis are such whimps. Tell you what, you can have all our crime, we'll take all your terroracts. I guarantee you'll be begging the Palestinians to come back.

Deal.
Crime is much less deadly. Our police is very good. And there is no ****ing way that crime will get the same international support palestinian terror does.

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

If for 2000 years, france appeared in italian literature and song and prayers as their homeland, then I would say they have a right to france.

Posh!
I can argue that MY ETHNIC GROUP has a right to ISRAEL. In fact I could argue that my ethnic group "has a right" to pretty much any place.
Isn't it time that people saw beyond "ethnic groups" and realized that the only thing that matters is them.

There is no reason for one group to claim another area- this is why we have wars.
Alsace-Lorraine-> WWI
The Continuing Conflict In the Middle East
etc. ad. infinitum.

I disagree with you about nationalities. I think humanity is too young to co-exist as one nationality.

This makes no sense.
If humanity was young, then there would be less opportunity to divide.

People want to devide themselves according to their customs and history - why shouldn't they?

Okay, I understand WHY people divide themselves. It gives them a sense of "identity" and "security" but it also causes strife and problems because invariably one group will say that they are better than another or have a "right" to an area.

No one has a right to an area because their ancestors lived there.
You can not and should not right wrongs that occurred thousands of years ago. If that happened then everyone would be going around blind and toothless.

People should merely do things that affect them particularly. If they can right the wrong in their lifetime, then they should do as such unless they are willing to forgive. If not, then there are no reasons for their family to continue the feud.

(And yes, I do have some minimal understanding about Jewish ideas about inherited sins of their fathers; and no, I do not agree with it, thus, I have a feeling that unless I can disprove that Idea, I cannot truly argue with you- correct?)

Quote:

So? How do past events affect the future- the people who conquer the land have the right to own the land. The people who are conquered have the right to dissent. That is the way things are. I do disagree with, however, the way that the Palestinians were wholesaledly forced to leave their homes by the British and Jewish peoples.

The palestinains were not forced to leave their homes, until the very war in 1948.

Most people who left, left on thier own, fearing an attack by Arab forces on the Jewish cities, and not wanting to get in the cross fire.

If that is "ethnic cleansing" then by all means, now the Palestinians are thenically cleansing Israel.

Thousands of Israelis have left Israel, fearing the terracts and the soon approaching wars.

They are both ethnic cleansing.
As I said before, I am neither pro-palestinian nor pro-israeli. Athough I will note that In an intenet test I scored as such:
Pro-Peace Palestinian- 60%
Pro-Peace Israeli- 50%
etc. Palestinian alternating with Israeli in the Neutral and the conservative elements of the test.

Quote:

Listen, everyone should live together- correct? But I can see why the Palestinians were angered- there was no real war- yes there was a war, but it was not excessively large (at least as I understand it->apologies because most of my experience is limited to survey knowledge->I study European History more than Jewish history) However, The Palestinians were forced to leave their homes.

There were little examples of palestinians being forced to leave, and this only during the war in 1948.

Most left in advance.

But fearing war, no?
Since they still owned the legal rights to their property, then they do have a right to demand it (at least the owners themselves do)

Quote:

Religion and politics dont mix when there are too many diverse religions in each sector. The Jews and Muslims should co-govern the land; not split it up more.

That has proved impossible and none of the sides want it.

Why should you with your universal ideas force people to live together?

Because if people dont live together, it leads to war.
If you ahve ever watched Demolition Man and seen the society of the future in that movie- that is my idea of a perfect society.
No one is forced to be moral and good, if they want they can die and live in the caves, but the people who are enjoy their lives above ground.

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


That's not exactly true, Siro. The Palestinians have not been constantly hostile to the Jewish population.

The Zionist movement took place during the time that the Ottoman Empire was breaking up. This encouraged Arabs to espouse nationalism for lands that the Turks formally dominated. At the time, the Palestinians believed themselves to be part of Syria, and because the Turks had objected to Jewish settlement, the Palestinians were willing to consider Jewish immigration as an expression of Syrian nationalism.

Yes, World War I also resulted in the Germans blaming things on the Jews not because of any particular reason, they had been one of the most tolerant nations, but because they couldn't blame their own farmers for the surrender and they saw a few rich Jewish people who were exceptionally smart and blamed their surrender on them.

-
And about the Jewish settlement- I would truly doubt that I would be happy if suddenly a new nation sprung up right next to my country- and not just any nation- but a nation founded on a religion. (I do realize that many others were) but especially in my holy land.

I see nothing wrong with a Jewish nation if they want some land which is 90% jewish and HAS BEEN and which the people would be glad to have;
as long as it isn't going to be a religious nation on "holy ground"

I could care less about "holy Ground"
it is nice to have, I will agree.
But I wouldn't necessarily want to live in it- why cant these people just pilgrimage?

If the borders of Israel were completely open to anyone and they hadn't kicked the Palestinians out- I would support them 95%. As it is, it is 50-50.

[DarkCloud]

Sirotnikov- you are showing what damage comes of religion and nationalities- you are generalizing the Arabs into all haters of Jewish peoples- you are also showing that you think your people "have a right to this land"
well... Unless you have a deed- and bought the land from the previous owners then you don't.

The fleeing arabs became refugees- they wanted to come home. (from what I understand)

Lets say that I find some ancient scrolls- and it says that Norway has a right to Denmark... Do I have the right to take over denmark- kick all the Danes out and replace them iwth Norwegians? Just because of some useless old scroll that is only good for historical knowledge and study?

[Keygen]

Originally posted by DarkCloud

Posh!
I can argue that MY ETHNIC GROUP has a right to ISRAEL. In fact I could argue that my ethnic group "has a right" to pretty much any place.
Isn't it time that people saw beyond "ethnic groups" and realized that the only thing that matters is them.

There is no reason for one group to claim another area- this is why we have wars.
Alsace-Lorraine-> WWI
The Continuing Conflict In the Middle East
etc. ad. infinitum.

That would be the ideal world DarkCloud.
I hope we could live in such a world.
But that doesn't happen. When a group of people leave their land and take by force their neighbor's land I give the right to the latter to claim it back. What would you do if your neighboring country would decide to invade your country and conquer it by force? Would you accept that?

Perhaps if there had been no conquers at all there had been no re-claims as well.

Originally posted by DarkCloud

as long as it isn't going to be a religious nation on "holy ground"

Holy ground is not necessary a religion matter.

Originally posted by DarkCloud

Lets say that I find some ancient scrolls- and it says that Norway has a right to Denmark... Do I have the right to take over denmark- kick all the Danes out and replace them iwth Norwegians? Just because of some useless old scroll that is only good for historical knowledge and study?

It's not the same. It is not an ancient scroll that was found and mentioned that long ago Hebrews or Palestinians lived once in Palestine. We are talking for a long continuing presence there from both sides. Hebrews have been inhabiting there for 3000 continuing years and Palestinians for 1400 years. Since antiquity and until 1948 none had a state. The Hebrews grew more, the Palestinians and the rest of the Arabs got worried, the war started and the Hebrews won and formed their independed state. In the meanwhile United Nations tried to share the lands between them but none agreed. War broke and continued, the Americans supported Israel for their own interests, All the surroundings were extremely hostile and didn't want any Hebrew at all in the area so it end up in this detonating situation. I give the right to both sides but the wars were started by the Arabs, maybe justified or not. I am not into the very details.

[DarkCloud]

But Keygen, the right to the land goes to the owners- regardless of how they received it.

The problem with the argument I wrote in the sentence above, I do realize is that it gives BOTH palestine and Israel equal claims.

Thus, the easiest thing to do is to create a cooperative non-religious, non-ethnic government which ignores the ethnic groups and relies instead upon merit for granting land.

The merit being the deeds, etc. that still remain.

We are talking for a long continuing presence there from both sides. Hebrews have been inhabiting there for 3000 continuing years and Palestinians for 1400 years.

BUt keygen, it is the natural thing of people to move around. People move. Groups move. That is why no one group should be able to claim one area unless they currently possess it.

As I have said before, the sooner ethnic groups are done away the better. Sadly, I do not have many solutions for them to live together nowadays- I doubt anyone does, they would have to be experts on all groups to do such a thing.

I merely suggest that there become none.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Posh!
I can argue that MY ETHNIC GROUP has a right to ISRAEL. In fact I could argue that my ethnic group "has a right" to pretty much any place.

I bet you couldn't

Isn't it time that people saw beyond "ethnic groups" and realized that the only thing that matters is them.

I disagree.
A group, any group, gives one security, and a force bigger than him.

Since conflicts are a part of life, one has to have a group supporting him, or else he will lose.

There is no reason for one group to claim another area- this is why we have wars.

We have wars because they are conflicts on a large scale.

You can not avoid that.

You simply can try and not have any random wars, or try and suggest other solutions.

But war is here to stay. For ever. Period.

This makes no sense.
If humanity was young, then there would be less opportunity to divide.

Now you make no sense.

So the developement of humanity gives more opportunity to divide?
This is counters your point of human future being in togetherness.

Okay, I understand WHY people divide themselves. It gives them a sense of "identity" and "security" but it also causes strife and problems because invariably one group will say that they are better than another or have a "right" to an area.

strife and such exist because we are social beings.

I am not a group. I sometimes too have conflicts with other people.

No one has a right to an area because their ancestors lived there.

Everyone has a right to have a place to live. Groups too.

If a group has a tie to a land, and has no other place to be in, they should get a right in that place.

You can not and should not right wrongs that occurred thousands of years ago.

but the wrong of the Jewish people hasn't occured 2000 years ago.

The whole point is that it "continued".

It's not that we suddenly wanted a state. We had none - and we suffered.

So sometime, we said enough is enough.

If that happened then everyone would be going around blind and toothless.

I don't know..

People should merely do things that affect them particularly. If they can right the wrong in their lifetime, then they should do as such unless they are willing to forgive. If not, then there are no reasons for their family to continue the feud.

I agree, but the relations between groups are different.
Groups work on larger scales of place, quantity and time.

(And yes, I do have some minimal understanding about Jewish ideas about inherited sins of their fathers; and no, I do not agree with it, thus, I have a feeling that unless I can disprove that Idea, I cannot truly argue with you- correct?)

Not correct.

First - it's an idea which you can't "disprove".
You can support or resist it, and we can argue, but there is nothing you can disprove to show it is wrong. That's the whole point.

And personally, I disagree with inherited sins, and some of the writers of the bible do too.

They are both ethnic cleansing.

Fine then -reinstate Israelis.

As I said before, I am neither pro-palestinian nor pro-israeli. Athough I will note that In an intenet test I scored as such:
Pro-Peace Palestinian- 60%
Pro-Peace Israeli- 50%
etc. Palestinian alternating with Israeli in the Neutral and the conservative elements of the test.

Oh well.
You're a leftist.
there are leftists Israelis.

The palestinians aren't really leftist, but are using the leftist's ideas for their propoganda war.

But fearing war, no?
Since they still owned the legal rights to their property, then they do have a right to demand it (at least the owners themselves do)

Tsk tsk.

Most never owned legal rights to their property.

Until the jews and brittish came, the idea of "owning" land wasn't all too popular.

Most of the land in the ottoman empire was "leased" to the people, which could use it as they saw fit.

Meaning - if you come and a place is free, you can settle there. So many people simply came and settled.

Jews however, didn't have such rights, and therefore had to purchase land, esp. when they wanted to "own" it for themselves.

The arabs however, didn't understand how could we have come and bought land, and then want it for ourselves. They saw the grass and water as God-given. And then some muslim ideas, about muslim land having to stay in muslim hands, kicked in as well.

Because if people dont live together, it leads to war.
If you ahve ever watched Demolition Man and seen the society of the future in that movie- that is my idea of a perfect society.

Well your idea is sick.
I would get bored to death in a perfect society.

Not to mention this will NEVER happen. EVER.

No one is forced to be moral and good, if they want they can die and live in the caves, but the people who are enjoy their lives above ground.

Sure.

No one is forced to be moral and good here too. If they want, they can live in jails.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
And about the Jewish settlement- I would truly doubt that I would be happy if suddenly a new nation sprung up right next to my country- and not just any nation- but a nation founded on a religion. (I do realize that many others were) but especially in my holy land.

If they bought the land, it's their right.
Jews bought land.

In any case, the idea of a jewish state was to devide palestine, and cooperate with a neighbouring arab states, allowing arabs to live in Israel, if they want.

It failed since instead, the arabs decided to have only one state - their own.

If the borders of Israel were completely open to anyone and they hadn't kicked the Palestinians out- I would support them 95%. As it is, it is 50-50.

Look, we hadn't "kicked" anyone out.

We did make sure for some to leave, which was because of tactical goals during the 1948 war.

But then, we couldn't simply allow everyone to return. Because we didn't have any peace agreements, we couldn't know whether those arabs returning would be a fifth-column.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Sirotnikov- you are showing what damage comes of religion and nationalities- you are generalizing the Arabs into all haters of Jewish peoples- you are also showing that you think your people "have a right to this land"

Each time I speak of palestinians or arabs, I mean that as a group name for those whom I mean, simply because that's the best I have.

It would be stupid to each time say "a group among the palestinians which is limited by such and such opinions and has performed this and this, performed this and this".

well... Unless you have a deed- and bought the land from the previous owners then you don't.

First = i think people do have a right to a land.
Historically - Jews have a right to this land much more than most palestinians.

Practically - Jews had right to the land they purchased, and the land that was attributed to them by the UN.

However, since, on the eve of 1948, the arabs decided to solve this using might, then I think they should accept the results.

It's quite two-faced of them. First they resort to might, and when it fails, suddenly they say that might ain't right.

I assure you, that had the arabs won, they would have slaughtered and deported the last jews, and there would be none here now.

The fleeing arabs became refugees- they wanted to come home. (from what I understand)

It would surprise you, that often refugees don't come home?

The arab countries however, were most unpleasant, and disallowed many to live as human beings, and instead insisted on making them live in camps, for over 50 years.

They just worsened the problem.

In 48, they were some 500,000 people.

Today they are some 4.5 million!
Israel can't possible reinstate their belongings, not to mention, 4.5 million people will not fit into the homes of 500,000 people.

Nor can Israel realistically support 4.5 million more people. Esp. hostile ones.

Lets say that I find some ancient scrolls- and it says that Norway has a right to Denmark... Do I have the right to take over denmark- kick all the Danes out and replace them iwth Norwegians?

Who said anything about kicking out?

Jews never intended to do such things.

However this is what the war caused. Instead of perpetuating the refugee status, it should have been resolved back then.

But it isn't possible to return any of them, until peace is signed.

Just because of some useless old scroll that is only good for historical knowledge and study?

It depends, on whether the norwegians have need for this.

Recently, there were found scrolls which proved that the Jewish foundation had rights to a plot of land in Syria. People jokingly suggested to give it back to them in exchange for the Syrians giving up the Golan heights.

[Keygen]

Originally posted by DarkCloud

Thus, the easiest thing to do is to create a cooperative non-religious, non-ethnic government which ignores the ethnic groups and relies instead upon merit for granting land.

DarkCloud, I am not a religious man and I strongly support the European integration but I cannot condamn poeple for believing in a religion or nationality. It's their right. What they should do is cooperate. You can't have without give.

Originally posted by DarkCloud

BUt keygen, it is the natural thing of people to move around. People move. Groups move. That is why no one group should be able to claim one area unless they currently possess it.

Yes, I agree. People move and they should move but peacefully. Regarding the owning part I think Siro answered that but poeple own only a part of a country. The rest belong to a the state. Palestine was under Ottoman and British ownership and now is owned by the Israeli state.

Originally posted by DarkCloud

As I have said before, the sooner ethnic groups are done away the better. Sadly, I do not have many solutions for them to live together nowadays- I doubt anyone does, they would have to be experts on all groups to do such a thing.

I merely suggest that there become none.

I see only two solutions. Either both live equally and peacefully together or form their own independed states. But I have the feeling that the hate between them is too strong to let either solution be viable.

I just quote the words of both sides on a recent Greek journalistic mission in Palestine:

Palestinian (survived after an Israeli attack in his office afew months ago): "What ever they do to us, the assasinations of civilians are unjustified. When you face cruelty with cruelty you become the same with your enemy."

Israeli ( Reserve official, deny to serve in the occupied areas): "I will fight to defend my country from any attack. But I will not go as conqueror, in the lands of another nation, who now is fighting as we were fighting the English conquerors once."

I am sure that there are other people who think like them too from both sides.

The leadership from both sides if would have the dare to listen words like these then things could be better down there...