One reason is that TODAY the inhabitants have the rights of citizenship, something the palestinians in question DO NOT.



No, you do not. That's why it's called a claim. At least if the diplomatic history of the world is any guide. France and Germany had claims to Alsace-Lorraine and swapped it several times. Both the indians and the Pakistanis CLAIM Kashmir. Saddam Hussein claimed Kuwait (a British creation) by ancient precedent. China claims Taiwan! Ad infinitum.



I think they would be best off merging with Jordan, but as has been mentioned the Jordanians don't want them. And neither do the Israelis AS FULL CITIZENS. And that is why, again, your above comparison is not well taken. The world community would not be able to condemn Israel as it has if the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza had been given full rights (instead of being stateless, rightless, non-entities for the past THIRTY FIVE YEARS - 3 times longer than the Jews plight under Hitler's reign). Anyway, that may be why the people in question feel as they do about wanting their own state.



Wasn't the Trojan war fought over a woman?



According to many Jewish groups TODAY who are seeking the return of land in Europe taken by the Nazis, yes. Even when the original claimants are deceased they are still seeking it.



To weaken other nations (in the case of  European wars where land was not taken) and in the case of the modern world, to remove tyrannies from power.  

NH2112 was absoultely right. The British egged on the situation. They didn't like the Jews, so they played the Arabs and Jews against each other. Unfortunately, it worked all too well.

Historically, unlike what we are conditioned to believe, the Jews and Arabs got along quite Peaceably. If the Brits and the UN had stayed out of it, perhaps the Jews and Arabs could have formed a joint government and a single state. Instead the Brits stirred up trouble and the UN partitioned the area creating even more trouble.

They should have left Palestine as one territory and not stirred up the Arabs. Then, possibly the Arabs and Jews could have shared power. We forget that Jordan and Isreal was a subdivision of Palestine. Jordan was overwhelmingly Arab and Isreal Jewish. By subdividing it in such a way that made both sides unhappy, they created problems. If it had remained one country, perhaps the 2 major ethnic groups could have worked together.

As you leave that as a general statement and do not get into specific nation states and cultures... I would have to disagree. They were tolerated under Muslim rulers as long as they paid a special tax, but were never been able to rise to the positions of wealth and POLITICAL power than they did in Europe. And I am not talking about the 20th century.

The statement is also questionable on the grounds of simple human interest. Jews migrated where they thought their interests lay. It's not a coincidence that the vast majority of jews chose Europe over the muslim world, or elsewhere (12 tribes and all) where they fell off the map, historically speaking. To be that wrong over a period of two millennia... feet don't fail me now!

[

This is the truest thing said in this thread. But the Arabs have tunnel vision and do not see anything we have done as good. Our military aid to Israel makes us culpable in their eyes, wiping out all the things we've done to assist them, even save their butts at times...

Lest we forget, Isreal has been a Nation for 55 Years. The "oppression" began 20 Years later, when terrorism became a fad. Before that, when Isreal was attacked it was by a foreign army and the war was military-vs-military. After, the Palestinians began adhering to terrorism, Isreal cracked down to protect its own stability. If the Palestinians were today to give up Terrorism and disavow it, I am willing to bet, they would regain free movement and alot of other rights they have lost. Then again, hell'll freeze over before the terrorism ends. Outside forces (Iran, Libya, Al Qaeda, Iraq, etc...) are controlling the terrorism. Only if they are crushed can we hope that Palestinians will end their terrorist attacks.

Yes, I usually am glued to my short wave, eagerly lapping up every word he speaks on our special frequency.



Or Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, and a myriad of other nationalities with varying religions. But the Jews were usually permitted to practice their religion without interference.



No, it wasn't. You're obviously historically challenged. Before the Ottomans (their empire fell after WW1, not ww2) it was the Mamelukes, and the muslims moved across the middle east seven hundred years before the Ottoman Empire was even formed... but you could just skip that and go straight back to the Roman destruction of the temple almost two thousand years ago, and subsequent diaspora (when the Jews actually started moving to Europe, as you mentioned), which is I think the event that you are looking for...don't be so fixated on the Ottoman Empire!



Please. The English would not have had to try very hard! Again, they were attempting to manage a disfunctional situation and please both sides. Someone was always going to be displeased.



Yes, where did you think people thought them to be? This is the reason that the Israeli's do not want to legally and fully incorporate the West Bank and Gaza into Israel, and thus have to give the Palestinians who live there the vote... as Palestinians inside Israel proper have. It would be a disaster, and they know it, hence thirty-five years of "the occupied territories."

And actually the Golan Heights has a population of 30,000, equally divided between Jews and Druze. The Syrian population fled with the last war.



Back to the Mexicans, eh? Another bad analogy. Uh, perhaps level Tijuana with a B-52 strike? Mexico is a sovereign nation. The Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are an occupied people who want to become a nation, and do not even enjoy the rights of a Mexican citizen, however meager they may be. Apples and oranges.



Put yourself in the place of someone who has had the only home they've ever known destroyed FOR NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN and is made homeless and destitute. Many have no family relation to any terrorists at all. Seven hundred with this last bulldozing by the IDF. I'm sure they were all terrorists or at least sympathizers, right? But that wouldn't really matter to you.

Golan Heights: Taken after Isreali cities came under repeated Rocket and Mortar attacks from the Heights.

West Bank: Taken after it was used to stage an attack on Jeruselam.

Gaza Strip: Taken after used by Egyptians to attack Isreal.

It is not like Isreal up and entered Ramallah one day. They were attacked and the territories were captured while pushing out the enemy. They chose to keep them because it keeps the Palestinians away from Jewish areas.

If we were to say any country that holds territories that don't get to vote is evile. Then, you must include the U.S. because last time I checked Puerto Rico has no Electoral Votes.

Then again, we seized PR after we were attacked. OH wait, that is exactly what Isreal did.

I am detecting a double standard here.

Not a bad analogy. The West Bank was part of Jordan, Golan Heights of Syria, Gaza of Egypt. All these were soveirgn nations when they attacked Isreal. These attacks directly lead to the capture of these territories. The same as if Rockets were launched from Tijuana. You know damn well, the U.S. would flood into Tijuana and take it. Whether it would be later returned would depend on America's Safety. In Isreal's case, the attacks will begin anew if these territories are ever ceded. That is why Isreal must mantain some symbalince of control of the area.

I never said the Ottaman Empire fell after WWII. It was on the wrong side of WWI. In fact, even around the time of the Crusades (1000 AD), Muslims and Jews were living peaceably together in Isreal. Jews continued to live along side Arabs in Isreal into the 17th and 18th centuries when a large number left for Europe. Granted some left earlier and some later. Some still stayed. These Jews live there through today. The rest of the Jews began migrating back as thing began to get worse in Europe. That would be 1935 or so. They continued migrating to get out of Europe until Hitler rounded up those still in Europe and sent them to Death Camps. Had that not happened, they would have migrated at a steadier rate. Insteaf, the flow almost dried up. Then they migrated in much larger numbers following 1945. The largest being 1946 - 1948. Instead of accepting them, the British tried to block them at sea. They slipped through. Once in Palestine they settled there. So, the Brits tried to whip up the Arabs. They figured the Jews might leave if they felt like they were unsafe there. Then, the UN decided (not the Jews) to subdivide Palestine into Isreal and Jordan. Had it remained one state, they would have been better off.

Of course, we wouldn't have to worry about all this crap if America would have let Isreal finish off the terorists when they wanted too. Instead we held them back and now things have degraded. It is time to let the Isrealis finish the job. Let them demolish terrorist hideouts. Once they have no place to hide, they will have to come out in the open and be destroyed.

Take note that a number of the buildings destroyed were Police Stations, etc...where attacks were planned.

If you'll go back to my first posts, you'll notice that I condemn terrorists (a.k.a. suicide bombers [i]et al[/i]).  But If you don't understand my post regarding the rock-throwing then let me clarify it for you:

If I hadn't done anything to anyone, and someone tried to bulldoze my house, I'd shoot and kill every last one of those pieces of shit, and when I ran out of bullets, I'd start stabbing and cutting throats until I died defending my freedom.  And I'd be praying for more arms shipments to come to the rest of my people so that this doesn't have to happen to other families.  So to clarify your misunderstanding, yes, I would throw rocks.

[(:|)]

But it's just not rock-throwing.  They put the little kids with the rocks in front, and the guys with the rifles are behind.

Who's "They", and where's your proof of their policy (written or unwritten)?

[(:|)]

In the picture I am trying to show here.

Take the url please:

[img]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20011215/capt.1008421388mideast_israel_palestinians_xlr108.jpg[/img]

in case that only a red X is displayed please click here...

[url]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20011215/capt.1008421388mideast_israel_palestinians_xlr108.jpg[/url]

Sorry to delude you, but in Ha'aretz you will find many articles that are criticizing the actual Govt. of Israel. I followed the press campaign before the elections, and for months Ha'aretz warned Israeli public opinion against Sharon. Now is happening exactley what they predicted. The Israeli were too angry for the chance to have peace Barak offered and that mr. Arafat throwed in the garbage can...

I have been to Isreal recently and I must say this is true.  There can be no peace for the palestinians. The former PM of Israel tried to compromise. The palestinians keep pushing and pushing for more land. They want it all with Israel gone, plain and simple. The arabs attack and when Israel retaliates they say look at how evil they are  and try to play to the bleeding heart liberals.

Ok, again I'll ask, who's "they" and where's your proof of an established policy where the children are placed in front and the men sit in back with rifles.  All I see is a fuzzy picture, and I still await the proof of your statement that they place the children in the front.  Like I said, it doesn't have to be proof of a written policy, just proof of the policy you described.  Thank you.

[(:|)]

What do you think "Intifada" means?
The Palestinians are well aware that it is IMPOSSIBLE to defeat the Isralis with rocks and Molotovs.
So why do they do it?
Out of frustration?
No.
They have stated openly, that the intifada is meant to raise the sympathies of the Arab world.
Haven't you seen the pictures of children (even infants) being dressed as martyrs?
Palestinian children are quite OBVIOUSLY not being told by their parents to stay home, and out of the areas where the conflicts occur.

Is there a written document that I can source?
No.
Just open your damned eyes, folks.

Ah yes, another Israel vs the Palistinians thread.  I see Eric the Zionist and all the usual suspects are here once again to tell all of us how morally defective we are for not supporting the Jews.  Oi vey! Avent you herd of ze Holycost?

And once again I will say to hell with them both. I can't decide which side I find more repugnat, although at least the Pals don't piss on your back, tell you its raining, and ask for money so they can buy a raincost (USS Liberty, Johnathan Pollard, et nausium). Truth be told, I hope they kill each other off, that way the world will finally be rid of the whole stinking lot of 'em.  They diserve each other.

The Palestinians will dance on your grave.

And the Jews will try to arrange it so they  can sell tickets to your funeral, what's your point?  

I love how bigoted people try to turn this into some religious issue.
.
.
.
There was this thing called the crusades, EVERY moral problem that Richard and the Pope had with the Arab tribes, still exists today. But your motives have nothing to do with morality. You are one of those people who finds justification for your views with the bible. You use the bible as a crutch to prop up a defective moral structure.




I guess self-defense is an ok thing for everyone but the jews eh?

Have you been privy to Palestinian indocrination first-hand or are you going by what you see on TV and read in the papers.  Not that they would lie or have an agenda or anything, of course.

[(:|)]

Well, I wouldn't exactly call bulldozing the homes of families, leaving 500 homeless, in retaliation for a few extremists "self-defense".  But I must agree with you, this issue can certainly be looked at accurately without the invocation of religious differences, although it certainly does play a part.

[url]http://www.angelfire.com/ak/BaltoMuslims/israelterror.html[/url]

[(:|)]

Negative ghostwriter.  I never said a damn thing about the bible, religion, or anything of the sort.  Heck, I don't even go to church.  I suggest you either try and come up with another convenient category to put me in or realize that many people have perfectly reasonable cause for saying to hell with Israel that's not based on ignorance, jealousy, religion, or whatever other negative pigeon hole your world view can offer as an explaination.    

I hardly think criticizing any government disqualifies a publication's credibility.  Otherwise, the Federalist Papers would fall into the same category.  Again, I agree with you.  The article is a good one, and has much merit.  If their predictions are accurate, I would say they show considerable insight, but I didn't really scour their website.

[(:|)]

Look,
I’ve had this debate on this very site more than once. It all boils down to the fact that Syria, Jordan and Egypt are using the ‘Palestinian’ people as an excuse to conduct surrogate warfare along Israelis border.

They don’t want a Palestinian state because state sponsored terror is an act of war.  

The current batch of ‘Palestinians’ moved from areas hundreds of miles away in relocation programs sponsored by Syria, Jordan and Iraq.

All Israel has to do to end this is give the land back to Jordan and Egypt. Tell those states that the next attacks would be viewed as an act of war by those nations.

There would be war and Israel would have to wipe out Jordan and drive Egypt back past the Sinai again.


But Israel does NOT want war.

Agreed.  And the Palestinians do NOT want their homes bulldozed.

[(:|)]

I’m puzzled.
You agree that Israel would end up fighting a war because these people are incapable of leaving them to live in peace.

Yet you find something wrong with removing homes built by Jordan and Egypt for the sole purpose of launching those attacks. They had been used for that, just days before.

These people are not innocent, they are active participants in the murder of several Israelis.


Whence comes your objection?
The fact that they wont be able to use those places to kill Israelis anymore or the fact that those people will have to move back to Egypt?  

Wrong.  I never agreed to anything other than your assertion that the Isrealis do not war.  Go back and read my posts if you are confused.



No, the majority of Palestinians, like the majority of Jews, are not combatants or terrorists.  They simply want peace as well.  Yet, in the case of the bulldozing, the innocent civilians are paying the price for a few terrorists.  The Isrealis have a right to retaliate against those responsible, but should not bulldoze the homes of the families that had nothing to do with the violence.



My objection comes from the fact that the Palestinian people are paying the price for the actions of a few militants.  The Isrealis energy would be better spent hunting down those that are responsible (and the Mosaad is quite good at this), than bulldozing the homes of families that are already living in dire poverty.

[(:|)]

If you read the reports on the links submitted earlier you will find that those homes were used by snipers to cover the insertion of several hamas ters. Those same ters killed several and wounded more.

Those people allowed it to happen – They are paying a price for that.

If one of my neighbors sniped at me, I would probably do more than just destroy his house… silly me

If you want to buy into the “boo hoo they destroyed my house propaganda” so be it. I gave up on a cure for that nonsense a long time ago.
 
Oh BTW: In debate, not objecting to something is agreement. By objecting, you must show that my assertions are wrong but I digress.

Major-Murphy,
Intifada means Uprising

I seriously doubt that all of the 500 people displaced by the Isrealis bulldozing of their homes were snipers.  I certainly hope that I'm not held responsible for the crimes committed by the guy that lives in the apartment above me.  He's quite a bastard.



Wrong again.  There are many posts on this forum that I disagree with, but I never object or even reply to them.  That certainly doesn't mean that I agree with them.

[(:|)]

Listen. I can try to talk even with deaf people. But I cannot talk with a person that see and hear very well but doesen't want to see and to hear.
This picture is a little bit more of the evidence you asked.
The only thing I see is that when something is pro Palestine it Ok for you, when is against Palestinians no evidence is OK...

Home land my BUTT!

Look if it's ok for the rag headed apes to have guns it's ok for the  Israeli bulldozers demolished whatever.

Anybody that thinks the way you do on this is a lier or a fool.

You act as if you don't know what they think about the 1,000s of dead Americans,do you feel bad for Binny boy too?

Palestinians are nothing if not "combatants",did you not see them dance in the streets.

I don't give a crap about what the Palestinians say about peace,it's they who will not stop wanlking in to malls and and getting on to busses with bombs.

They send there kids out to fight for them with rocks and they fight with masks on like cowards.
what every they get form the Isrealis is just to bad.

If you don't want your house  bulldozed, don't let anybody shoot out of your windows.

That picture isn't proof of anything.  I could easily say that the picture is proof that the Palestinians are yelling at the kids to dodge the incoming fire.  In case you've forgotten, Here's the quote:

"But it's just not rock-throwing. They put the little kids with the rocks in front, and the guys with the rifles are behind."

I want to know WHO put the "little kids" in the front.  WHO told those kids to get in the front?  How do we even know that anyone told the kids to go stand in front?  I could claim that the picture could be used as weak proof that the Isrealis are shooting at kids.  But I'm not, because I don't know that, just like you don't know that THEY put the "little kids" in front.  Here's the quote again:

"But it's just not rock-throwing. They put the little kids with the rocks in front, and the guys with the rifles are behind."

???????????????

[(:|)]

Nice characterization of a culture.



I guess you meant "liar".  If thinking so make you happy then that's fine by me.



No, I hope they skin Bin Laden alive.  Because I don't hold the entire people of Palestine responsible for his action(s), I can keep an open mind and not lump all "rag headed apes" together.  Not every "rag headed ape" supports Bin Laden.

[(:|)]

The WTC was attacked becasue it was the most prominant symbol of western political and economic power.  They see that influence squarely in the pocket of Israel, and if Sharon's own comments are any indication, they are correct.  Striking a blow at the U.S., to them, is striking a blow at Israel. Pat Buchannan once called Capitol Hill "Israeli occupied territory."  

Incidently, what about all those Israelis rounded up by the FBI after 9/11?  Scuttlebutt has it that the Israeli intelligence community knew something was up.  You don't honestly think Israel had no idea something was comming?  Where was our "ally" Israel?  Gee, we sure got our money's worth out of them huh?  Americans died because a lot of very weathy and influential people in this country are using us to further their own selfish agenda in the middle east.  Allowing this to happen without warning the U.S. would defiantely help their cause, and I sure as hell wouldn't put it past them based on their past actions.  

The Brits didn't need to whip up the Arabs, the enourmous number of refugees was doing that already, which is why they started stopping ships. Some did "slip through," but most were let in from the beginning or eventually accommodated. Sounds like our immigration policy, and the Arabs reacted as many people do here today. It is a very small piece of land, as Netanyahu says all the time. All of these people would not have been able to "settle" there had the Brits not permitted it, in the same way we do. Right back they would have been shipped, understand? They were trying to handle both sides, and in the end they gave up AND LEFT. I don't blame them!



That was until the Arabs realized what the Jews had in mind. Once the numbers emmigrating became great, they became hostile. You can put any spin you want on it, but it's history. And certainly don't ask the Arabs, what would their opinion count for, you'll speak for them.



Pie in the sky fantasy. There is no way it could have been subdivided ("in such a way") that would have pleased the Arabs. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Has nothing to do with the British. And if it had remained one country the Jews would have been a minority. No "Jewish state," no Israel, and that was not acceptable to the Jews. There was no way to please both sides... from a distance and in a modern context you could certainly say the Jews were more reasonable.



I understand why you say that, but, again, you are incorrect. The first war was hardly a "military-vs-military" affair. ON BOTH SIDES it was also military vs civilian, and civilian vs civilian, with atrocities and massacres of entire villages. I agree with the rest of what you said btw.



This is what you said. Now, how many "palestinians" are there in the Golan?

BTW I could care less if Israel EVER gives back the Golan to Syria. The situation is stable and the population quiet. Idiots like Netanyahu (when he was PM) thought that THAT was a more serious issue than the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza - Syria being a country and the Palestinians not of any great security concern...

Here's one viewpoint- [url]http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp441.htm[/url]

Quote taken from the exec. summary:

"The appearance of Palestinian children in these riots, it will be demonstrated, is not accidental. The Palestinian Authority has intentionally mobilized Palestinian children to man the front line in its struggle against Israel, frequently using them as shields to protect Palestinian gunmen. This mobilization of Palestinian youth has, moreover, been facilitated by the long-term impact of Palestinian Authority (PA) curricula, government-controlled media, and summer camp programs, which indoctrinated the youth for armed confrontation with Israel even prior to the current crisis."



Does this help?

Once again a terrible comparision. Puerto Ricans enjoy rights AS US CITIZENS (under commonwealth status) that Palestinians can only dream of (what nation-state are they a citizen of again?). The only rights they do not have is to vote for President and Congress, and in return ARE EXEMPTED FROM ALL FEDERAL INCOME TAX. And oh yeah, they receive $10 BILLION A YEAR IN FEDERAL SOCIAL BENEFITS paid for by you and me. It's surprising more people don't want to become Puerto Rican. The IRS would probably intervene.

As to voting, yes they do. They have been given the opportunity, and voted to remain as they are, TWICE, and not become either independent, or on the other hand become a state TAKING ON ALL OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES such as those pesky federal taxes. The Palestinians have not had similar options (not too mention largesse - the opposite in fact), where they could just vote to become independent, a part of Israel or Jordan, whatever. Puerto Rico is a gravy train. I especially appreciate legislation passed that resulted in chemical and other companies to move their operations there, for no real economic reason, only to take advantage of the benefits of the legislation itself. If not a US possession that would have never happened.



Yes. You are supporting it!



No, it wasn't! It hadn't been for almost two thousand years! Geez you are a character.



Dude, they were displaced 600 years BEFORE the muslims made their move gobbling up the mid-east, Spain, etc.. The "large number" left then, and not in the 17th and 18th centuries.



Take note that those are not the buildings we are talking about.



I should have caught that before I started arguing with you, thinking you might be open-minded. Like all true believers any pesky facts that get in the way will just be ignored.

No need to clarify. I was addressing Paolo and not you. I was agreeing with you :)



Or blame the English of all people for the entire conflict and call them anitsemitic to boot! If not for the English... it's unlikely there would be any jews living today. At least that's what Steven Spielberg said when he was over there praising them at the time he was making Saving Private Ryan.



Tell that to the state department under any administration. We could save some foreign aid. And leave Jordan out of that equation.



Please give me some documentation of this. The IDF has been bulldozing for a long time, all across the territories. I didn't know all the houses (and some caves also I suppose) were built by Jordan and Egypt for that purpose. They must've had great foresight to see where Israelis would like to make a settlement ten, fifty, a hundred years after their construction. Neato!



The IDF has never claimed that they were all used for that purpose. There usual excuse before this past intifada (and during) has been that they are retalliating against the families of suspected terrorists to deter others from thinking of becoming terrorists... or the buildings are in violation of Israeli housing code - to which jews are then coincidentally given the land, and houses built posthaste, without a Palestinian owner having any possiblity of addressing the bogus code excuse. This is how they have regained so much of Jerusalem itself, from Arab hands. Environmental terrorism.

What?!!?  Who are you referring to?  

Last I heard, American foreign policy was decided by the President and Congress.

Read my post.  The Kosher community, who do you think I mean?  Yes Congress and the Pres make the decisions, but who has the money to get them elected?  Who owns the major media corporations?   The jewish community has an incredible amount of power and influence in this country.  How else did Mark Rich get a pardon?  It was bought.  Ariel Sharon and Pat Buchannan, amoung other, are on record comenting about the vast amount of power the jews have over the political dialogue in this country.  If it weren't for the small percentage of jews in this country and their power and influence, I doubt few other people here would give a stripper clip about the Israel/Palistinian conflict or what happens to Israel.  

What it all boils down to, apparently, is that there's simply a lot of people who don't like Jews. Whether here in this country, or across the globe on the West Bank, Gaza, and the rest of Islamdom.

The Israelis, 20% of whom are American or American-born, support the United States, support democracy, support women's rights to education, women's participation in politics, women's participation in religion, support freedom of the press (have you ever read the various, divergent Israeli newspapers?), support freedom of religion, support the peace process (so long as it's not a long walk to a short gallows), oppose Bin Laden, oppose Islamic fundamentalism, oppose Jewish and Christian fundamentalism, oppose the Soviets (when they were around), oppose communism, and oppose terrorism.

Now can the same be said for Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and the rest of Islamdom?

Not on your life, brother!

Eric The(PayAttention,[i]Cretina![/i])Hun[>]:)]

Their ties to the U.S. do not automatically make them infallible (at least not to me).  Neither Noriega nor Marcos were infallible just because they supported the U.S (at least not to me).

[(:|)] Political(Please, no more McCarthyism)Science

Thanks, Eric.  Very well said.  

That's what I thought you [b]meant[/b], but didn't say.  Kinda big on ZOG conspiracy theories, are ya?  Next, you'll be trying to convince us all how Jews secretly eat Christian babies.

Post from PoliticalScience -

Who said they were infallible? Only the Pope and I are infallible! Oh yeah and Miz Hun!

BTW, what does 'McCarthyism' mean to you?

Eric The('CauseItMeansLittleToMe)Hun[>]:)]