60 years on, can Israel find peace? REALPOLITIK: Trevor Royle WARFARE AND Israel have been the horse and cart of the Middle East for so long that it's impossible to think of one without the other. Depressingly, that's one way of looking at the country as it remembers that tumultuous May week in 1948 when the founding fathers fulfilled their ambition of creating Eretz Yisrael, the state of Israel, sacred to the Jewish people since the times of the Old Testament. Almost immediately they had to fight for their lives as the surrounding Arab states of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Transjordan (now Jordan) attempted to stifle the fledgling state at birth and warfare between Israel and one or other of those neighbours has been a fact of life ever since.
No sooner had the British mandate over Palestine come to an end on May 15, 1948, than fighting broke out as soldiers of the British-officered Transjordanian Arab Legion attempted to secure the Old City of Jerusalem and the road to Jericho. It's a curiosity of military history that the operations saw the Israeli forces being repulsed at Latrun, the one and only time when an Arab army was able to inflict a decisive defeat on them. In that sense it was a first and a last, for in the years ahead the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) might have been shaken by their Arab opponents, but in all other respects they remained the masters of the field.
All the time there was a drawing and redrawing of borders as countries tried to nibble away at Israel, and inevitably the IDF won back what had been lost. At the end of the first round of fighting Gaza fell under Egyptian control, while the neighbouring Transjordanians won control of East Jerusalem and the West Bank. They were short occupations. Following the six-day war of 1967 Israel retrieved the lost lands and added Sinai and the Golan Heights to its territorial portfolio. From then on matters got worse, with fighting in Lebanon, the inexorable rise of Palestinian opposition and the steady descent into insurgency warfare that continues to this day.
Of course there have been lighter interludes. Over the years Egypt and Jordan have signed up to peace accords that have done much to erase the earlier and bleaker memories. To borrow Edmund Burke's noble words, there have been times too when "the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice, in a contemptible struggle". Into that category falls former US president Jimmy Carter, the facilitator of the Camp David accords, and those who signed them in 1978 - president Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Israel's prime minister, Menachem Begin. The late King Hussein of Jordan, a boy at the time of Israel's birth, also deserves a mention in despatches, as do Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres.
The tragedy is that for all the work that has been put into creating a workable agreement that will allow Israeli and Arab to live in something approaching harmony there has never been a moment when any proposal looked like working. The original partition plan of 1948 was agreed by the Jewish leader David Ben-Gurion but dismissed by the countries of the Arab League. In itself this was not surprising, as the United Nations had given the Jewish population the lion's share, including the fertile coastal strip between Haifa and Jaffa, the Plain of Esdraelon and eastern Galilee. At the same time, the majority Arab population had been granted western and central Galilee, Samaria, the Judaean Hills and Gaza, while Jerusalem would have become an international city.
Given the goodwill of the UN and an ability to deploy forces to impose the plan, it could have worked, but already the region was on the road to perdition.
Backed by their principal ally, the US, the Israelis decided to fight for what they needed to hold on to. The Arabs hated the plan like the very devil, but each country had its own agenda and continued to pursue it to the detriment of any unity. As for the Palestinians, who remember those events as al-Naqba, the day of catastrophe, there was the slow descent into a lifetime of subjugation and dependency. For many of them the only hope came to be found in the sights of a Kalashnikov or a rocket-propelled grenade.
And yet, there was nothing particularly wrong with the original UN proposal that might have introduced a two-state solution all those years ago. This week, when George W Bush arrives in Jerusalem for what will surely be his final visit as president of the US, the concept is still on the table, albeit in a modern version. It's probably the last hope, and it could still be the best hope for many a year - but only if lions on both sides are prepared to forget their natures and learn to live with the lamb.
|
|
Posted by: heady on 8:09am Sun 11 May 08
Certainly Israel can find peace - first by stopping its racist war crimes and appartheid at home and secondly by getting off all the land it has stolen and extorted from others.
Certainly Israel can find peace - first by stopping its racist war crimes and appartheid at home and secondly by getting off all the land it has stolen and extorted from others.
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 10:03am Sun 11 May 08
[quote]And yet, there was nothing particularly wrong with the original UN proposal that might have introduced a two-state solution all those years ago.[/quote]
Sorry Trevor but there was something fundamentally wrong with that proposal. The newly fledged UN and the victorious allies had no legal right or authority to give away a people's country on the basis of a 3,000 year old fairy story! From Balfour to UN 181 the concept of imposing an artificial state in another people's land was based on the colonial arrogance of the west. The original Kingdom of the Israelites was probably no more than a city state, comprising Jerusalem and some surrounding country.
Hint. Maps and map making didn't exist then, nor did SatNav, people walked everywhere and knew little if anything beyond a day's travel of where they lived.
Whether Israel finds peace is down to her, not the Palestinians of the Arabs, it is Israel that's the aggressor and colonial power supported by the west. They can continue to fight but ultimately will only destroy themselves as it's not a viable long term social or financial option. People will just get sick of it and leave the country.
Israel has a further social problem which counts against it and it's chances for peace. It's a densely populated country with intensive agriculture that demands water, a lot more than there now is in the Middle East. So Israel is left with the option of either starting more wars for water resources or learning to live within the restraints of their environment.
Finally, it is the people of the Middle East who will decide the future of Israel and not the US and Europe. Israel, if it continues to exist is a Middle Eastern country and will ultimately need the goodwill and support of it's neigbours, not their hatred and revulsion.
And yet, there was nothing particularly wrong with the original UN proposal that might have introduced a two-state solution all those years ago.
Sorry Trevor but there was something fundamentally wrong with that proposal. The newly fledged UN and the victorious allies had no legal right or authority to give away a people's country on the basis of a 3,000 year old fairy story! From Balfour to UN 181 the concept of imposing an artificial state in another people's land was based on the colonial arrogance of the west. The original Kingdom of the Israelites was probably no more than a city state, comprising Jerusalem and some surrounding country.
Hint. Maps and map making didn't exist then, nor did SatNav, people walked everywhere and knew little if anything beyond a day's travel of where they lived.
Whether Israel finds peace is down to her, not the Palestinians of the Arabs, it is Israel that's the aggressor and colonial power supported by the west. They can continue to fight but ultimately will only destroy themselves as it's not a viable long term social or financial option. People will just get sick of it and leave the country.
Israel has a further social problem which counts against it and it's chances for peace. It's a densely populated country with intensive agriculture that demands water, a lot more than there now is in the Middle East. So Israel is left with the option of either starting more wars for water resources or learning to live within the restraints of their environment.
Finally, it is the people of the Middle East who will decide the future of Israel and not the US and Europe. Israel, if it continues to exist is a Middle Eastern country and will ultimately need the goodwill and support of it's neigbours, not their hatred and revulsion.
Posted by: someone,else on 11:03am Sun 11 May 08
[quote][bold]McSomeone[/bold] wrote:
[quote]And yet, there was nothing particularly wrong with the original UN proposal that might have introduced a two-state solution all those years ago.[/quote] Sorry Trevor but there was something fundamentally wrong with that proposal. The newly fledged UN and the victorious allies had no legal right or authority to give away a people\'s country on the basis of a 3,000 year old fairy story! From Balfour to UN 181 the concept of imposing an artificial state in another people\'s land was based on the colonial arrogance of the west. The original Kingdom of the Israelites was probably no more than a city state, comprising Jerusalem and some surrounding country. Hint. Maps and map making didn\'t exist then, nor did SatNav, people walked everywhere and knew little if anything beyond a day\'s travel of where they lived. Whether Israel finds peace is down to her, not the Palestinians of the Arabs, it is Israel that\'s the aggressor and colonial power supported by the west. They can continue to fight but ultimately will only destroy themselves as it\'s not a viable long term social or financial option. People will just get sick of it and leave the country. Israel has a further social problem which counts against it and it\'s chances for peace. It\'s a densely populated country with intensive agriculture that demands water, a lot more than there now is in the Middle East. So Israel is left with the option of either starting more wars for water resources or learning to live within the restraints of their environment. Finally, it is the people of the Middle East who will decide the future of Israel and not the US and Europe. Israel, if it continues to exist is a Middle Eastern country and will ultimately need the goodwill and support of it\'s neigbours, not their hatred and revulsion.[/quote] Israel can just buy in water and us in Scotland should start sellig it as we have enough. Yes they will start a war just for water, you have warped view my friend.
McSomeone wrote:
And yet, there was nothing particularly wrong with the original UN proposal that might have introduced a two-state solution all those years ago.
Sorry Trevor but there was something fundamentally wrong with that proposal. The newly fledged UN and the victorious allies had no legal right or authority to give away a people\'s country on the basis of a 3,000 year old fairy story! From Balfour to UN 181 the concept of imposing an artificial state in another people\'s land was based on the colonial arrogance of the west. The original Kingdom of the Israelites was probably no more than a city state, comprising Jerusalem and some surrounding country. Hint. Maps and map making didn\'t exist then, nor did SatNav, people walked everywhere and knew little if anything beyond a day\'s travel of where they lived. Whether Israel finds peace is down to her, not the Palestinians of the Arabs, it is Israel that\'s the aggressor and colonial power supported by the west. They can continue to fight but ultimately will only destroy themselves as it\'s not a viable long term social or financial option. People will just get sick of it and leave the country. Israel has a further social problem which counts against it and it\'s chances for peace. It\'s a densely populated country with intensive agriculture that demands water, a lot more than there now is in the Middle East. So Israel is left with the option of either starting more wars for water resources or learning to live within the restraints of their environment. Finally, it is the people of the Middle East who will decide the future of Israel and not the US and Europe. Israel, if it continues to exist is a Middle Eastern country and will ultimately need the goodwill and support of it\'s neigbours, not their hatred and revulsion.
Israel can just buy in water and us in Scotland should start sellig it as we have enough. Yes they will start a war just for water, you have warped view my friend.
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 11:37am Sun 11 May 08
[quote]Israel can just buy in water and us in Scotland should start selling it as we have enough. Yes they will start a war just for water, you have warped view my friend.[/quote]
Do you thinks so? You do know that the 2006 invasion of Lebanon was about water, extending the borders of Israel to the Litani River, so they could control it. Why do you thing that Israel holds on so tightly to the Golan Heights and are trying to take, by stealth the Jordan Valley? If you haven't grasped it yet, in the Middle East water and control of it is far more important and valuable than oil ever will be. Have you tried to drink oil, irrigate your crops with it?
Many wars have already been fought over water resources and many, even more vicious wars are going to be fought over that most vital of resources. When Israel invaded the Lebanon in the 1980's to instal a christian falangist government, part of the agreement was that the new government cede the Litani river and all land between the border and the river to Israel. The aquifiers in Israel and the occupied territories have been depleted by around sixty percent due to Israel's voracious demands for water and the rainfall in the regions has decreased so much that there isn't enough to replenish them.
We can live without oil but not water!
PS. Even if the Union splits, I think England and much of Europe are going to want a say in Scotland's and Europe's water resources and how and where they are distributed as much of southern Europe will also suffer serious drought.
Israel can just buy in water and us in Scotland should start selling it as we have enough. Yes they will start a war just for water, you have warped view my friend.
Do you thinks so? You do know that the 2006 invasion of Lebanon was about water, extending the borders of Israel to the Litani River, so they could control it. Why do you thing that Israel holds on so tightly to the Golan Heights and are trying to take, by stealth the Jordan Valley? If you haven't grasped it yet, in the Middle East water and control of it is far more important and valuable than oil ever will be. Have you tried to drink oil, irrigate your crops with it?
Many wars have already been fought over water resources and many, even more vicious wars are going to be fought over that most vital of resources. When Israel invaded the Lebanon in the 1980's to instal a christian falangist government, part of the agreement was that the new government cede the Litani river and all land between the border and the river to Israel. The aquifiers in Israel and the occupied territories have been depleted by around sixty percent due to Israel's voracious demands for water and the rainfall in the regions has decreased so much that there isn't enough to replenish them.
We can live without oil but not water!
PS. Even if the Union splits, I think England and much of Europe are going to want a say in Scotland's and Europe's water resources and how and where they are distributed as much of southern Europe will also suffer serious drought.
Posted by: Danny, Australia on 3:52pm Sun 11 May 08
McSomeone, its people like you who will keep conflict alive in the Middle East for a long time. Try reading some balanced versions of history before you try to leave your unwanted one sided views.
People were trading goods in far away lands even in those days and sure as heck knew the way back through citys and towns that they passed through.
Do you also think the Jews had some thing to do with the downfall of the dinosaurs??
McSomeone, its people like you who will keep conflict alive in the Middle East for a long time. Try reading some balanced versions of history before you try to leave your unwanted one sided views.
People were trading goods in far away lands even in those days and sure as heck knew the way back through citys and towns that they passed through.
Do you also think the Jews had some thing to do with the downfall of the dinosaurs??
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 4:15pm Sun 11 May 08
[quote][bold]Danny[/bold] wrote:
McSomeone, its people like you who will keep conflict alive in the Middle East for a long time. Try reading some balanced versions of history before you try to leave your unwanted one sided views. People were trading goods in far away lands even in those days and sure as heck knew the way back through citys and towns that they passed through. Do you also think the Jews had some thing to do with the downfall of the dinosaurs?? [/quote] I have thank you and also spoken to British soldiers who served in Palestine.
Yes there were traders moving around Canaan and Phoenicia, it was a military crossroads for the Hittites, Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Mittites and many others, as well as being the main trade and migration route into eastern Europe. That doesn't change the basic premise that the original Israelite kingdom wasn't much bigger than 20 to 50 square miles around Jeruselam.
Oh and it's not people like me who keep the conflict alive but the greedy and ambitious politicians and soldiers in Tel Aviv and Jeruselam.
Danny wrote:
McSomeone, its people like you who will keep conflict alive in the Middle East for a long time. Try reading some balanced versions of history before you try to leave your unwanted one sided views. People were trading goods in far away lands even in those days and sure as heck knew the way back through citys and towns that they passed through. Do you also think the Jews had some thing to do with the downfall of the dinosaurs??
I have thank you and also spoken to British soldiers who served in Palestine.
Yes there were traders moving around Canaan and Phoenicia, it was a military crossroads for the Hittites, Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Mittites and many others, as well as being the main trade and migration route into eastern Europe. That doesn't change the basic premise that the original Israelite kingdom wasn't much bigger than 20 to 50 square miles around Jeruselam.
Oh and it's not people like me who keep the conflict alive but the greedy and ambitious politicians and soldiers in Tel Aviv and Jeruselam.
Posted by: a r u biased, Glasgow on 6:58pm Sun 11 May 08
By what proof do you state "That doesn't change the basic premise that the original Israelite kingdom wasn't much bigger than 20 to 50 square miles around Jeruselam."(check spelling! Jerusalem) considering that archaeologists have and continue to find evidence of Jewish habitation from 3000+ years ago all over modern day Israel,& west bank. Also the fact that the "3000 year old fairy tail" as you put it has archaeological evidence (Dead Sea Scrolls, Cyrus Scroll (in The British Museum, London).
Also recent history provides evidence of continued efforts by Israel to have peace with those who deny the very right of Israel's existence. When did Israel pose a threat to Iran? and yet Iran's leader calls for a 2nd Holocaust while denying the 1st. Has Israel taken Iran's water? No! look deeper and you will find your arguments don't hold water.
By what proof do you state "That doesn't change the basic premise that the original Israelite kingdom wasn't much bigger than 20 to 50 square miles around Jeruselam."(check spelling! Jerusalem) considering that archaeologists have and continue to find evidence of Jewish habitation from 3000+ years ago all over modern day Israel,& west bank. Also the fact that the "3000 year old fairy tail" as you put it has archaeological evidence (Dead Sea Scrolls, Cyrus Scroll (in The British Museum, London).
Also recent history provides evidence of continued efforts by Israel to have peace with those who deny the very right of Israel's existence. When did Israel pose a threat to Iran? and yet Iran's leader calls for a 2nd Holocaust while denying the 1st. Has Israel taken Iran's water? No! look deeper and you will find your arguments don't hold water.
Posted by: sam, greenock on 8:09pm Sun 11 May 08
[quote][bold]a r u biased[/bold] wrote:
By what proof do you state "That doesn't change the basic premise that the original Israelite kingdom wasn't much bigger than 20 to 50 square miles around Jeruselam."(check spelling! Jerusalem) considering that archaeologists have and continue to find evidence of Jewish habitation from 3000+ years ago all over modern day Israel,& west bank. Also the fact that the "3000 year old fairy tail" as you put it has archaeological evidence (Dead Sea Scrolls, Cyrus Scroll (in The British Museum, London). Also recent history provides evidence of continued efforts by Israel to have peace with those who deny the very right of Israel's existence. When did Israel pose a threat to Iran? and yet Iran's leader calls for a 2nd Holocaust while denying the 1st. Has Israel taken Iran's water? No! look deeper and you will find your arguments don't hold water.[/quote] U R BIASED
So you'll be supporting Scottish independence then, native americans regaining control, aussie aborigines reagining control, maoris regaining control, many many indigenous peoples regaining control over their lands too then.
After all using your reasoning for Israel existing is equally good for all the peoples mentioned above, or can't you see beyond the zionist hoodlums.
a r u biased wrote:
By what proof do you state "That doesn't change the basic premise that the original Israelite kingdom wasn't much bigger than 20 to 50 square miles around Jeruselam."(check spelling! Jerusalem) considering that archaeologists have and continue to find evidence of Jewish habitation from 3000+ years ago all over modern day Israel,& west bank. Also the fact that the "3000 year old fairy tail" as you put it has archaeological evidence (Dead Sea Scrolls, Cyrus Scroll (in The British Museum, London). Also recent history provides evidence of continued efforts by Israel to have peace with those who deny the very right of Israel's existence. When did Israel pose a threat to Iran? and yet Iran's leader calls for a 2nd Holocaust while denying the 1st. Has Israel taken Iran's water? No! look deeper and you will find your arguments don't hold water.
U R BIASED
So you'll be supporting Scottish independence then, native americans regaining control, aussie aborigines reagining control, maoris regaining control, many many indigenous peoples regaining control over their lands too then.
After all using your reasoning for Israel existing is equally good for all the peoples mentioned above, or can't you see beyond the zionist hoodlums.
Posted by: a r u biased, Glasgow on 8:57pm Sun 11 May 08
Sam,
I am merely pointing out that there is evidence of the Jewish Kingdom being far greater than insinuated, and there is also evidence that there is more than a fairy tale backing it up. There is also evidence for a continued Jewish presence in the land which pre-dates the re-establishment of the state of Israel.
As for all the other issues you use to try to de-legitimize the state of Israel, I don't believe that is what was being discussed and by using the term "Zionist Hoodlums" you show a lack of knowledge (most of it found in British history books at the local library as Britain was instrumental in the re-establishment of Israel)concerning the historic events surrounding the re-birth of Israel.
Sam,
I am merely pointing out that there is evidence of the Jewish Kingdom being far greater than insinuated, and there is also evidence that there is more than a fairy tale backing it up. There is also evidence for a continued Jewish presence in the land which pre-dates the re-establishment of the state of Israel.
As for all the other issues you use to try to de-legitimize the state of Israel, I don't believe that is what was being discussed and by using the term "Zionist Hoodlums" you show a lack of knowledge (most of it found in British history books at the local library as Britain was instrumental in the re-establishment of Israel)concerning the historic events surrounding the re-birth of Israel.
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 9:03pm Sun 11 May 08
[quote]considering that archaeologists have and continue to find evidence of Jewish habitation from 3000+ years ago all over modern day Israel,& west bank. Also the fact that the "3000 year old fairy tail" as you put it has archaeological evidence (Dead Sea Scrolls, Cyrus Scroll (in The British Museum, London).[/quote]
There is No evidence of "Israelite" habitation in ancient Palestine 3000 years ago, just human habitation. Even Israeli archeologists now admit there is no proof in or under the ground to support Israeli claims, just as there is no supporting evidence for the Jewish exodus from Egypt. The Dead Sea Scrolls and other documents do not prove anything, just that some people believed in a god. They were written by men and not a god, and as academics can only roughly guess as their true meaning others will interpret them to support their own beliefs.
[quote]Also recent history provides evidence of continued efforts by Israel to have peace with those who deny the very right of Israel's existence.[/quote]
What about the Arab League Peace offerings of 2002 and 2007, in return for recognition of Israel? The Israelis say that they cannot accept peace on Arab terms yet demand that the Arabs accept peace on their terms or not at all! The Israelis will not even negotiate. Hamas offered a ten year cease fire, which was also rejected out of hand. Israeli no more wants peace than it wants recognised borders. At Oslo, Arafat conceded everything but the Israelis weren't satisfied they wanted more, the same at Camp David. Always Israel wants more concessions and even then it is never enough!
[quote]When did Israel pose a threat to Iran?[/quote]
Oh then why is the Israeli lobby in Washington calling for a strike on Iran, claiming they're trying to produce a nuclear weapon to threaten Israel, who only possess a few hundred nuclear weapons. Also it is Israel who has always been the aggressor in the Middle East.
[quote]and yet Iran's leader calls for a 2nd Holocaust while denying the 1st.[/quote]
No he hasn't called for a second holocaust. He said that [italic]the Zionist Regime presently occupying Jeruselam will disappear from the pages of history.[/italic] He did not call for the destruction of Israel. I don't think that he denied they Holocaust, just the scale of it and the number of Europeans who died in it. Europeans of the Jewish faith weren't the only victims of the nazis. Also that no Israelis died in any of the camps, which is what I think much of it was about as Israel uses the holocaust to detract any criticism of it own policies in the occupied territories.
[quote]Has Israel taken Iran's water? No! look deeper and you will find your arguments don't hold water.[/quote]
[bold]I made no claim that Israel had taken Iran's water![/bold] That would be a tad difficult as they would be required to fight an extremely vicious guerrilla campaign across Syria and Iraq to acquire it and I don't think that Iran would capitulate that easily. If Israel and America do decide to attack Iran and use tactical nuclear weapons Israel will pay an extremely costly and bloody price with a long drawn out and vicious guerrilla war, which will change the map of the Middle East forever. At some point in the future the Pan Arab League is going to morph into an Arabic Union, stretching from Turkey to the Persian Gulf and From North Africa (Morocco) to Pakistan and may well comprise of 15 to 20 countries. What then will Israel do?
considering that archaeologists have and continue to find evidence of Jewish habitation from 3000+ years ago all over modern day Israel,& west bank. Also the fact that the "3000 year old fairy tail" as you put it has archaeological evidence (Dead Sea Scrolls, Cyrus Scroll (in The British Museum, London).
There is No evidence of "Israelite" habitation in ancient Palestine 3000 years ago, just human habitation. Even Israeli archeologists now admit there is no proof in or under the ground to support Israeli claims, just as there is no supporting evidence for the Jewish exodus from Egypt. The Dead Sea Scrolls and other documents do not prove anything, just that some people believed in a god. They were written by men and not a god, and as academics can only roughly guess as their true meaning others will interpret them to support their own beliefs.
Also recent history provides evidence of continued efforts by Israel to have peace with those who deny the very right of Israel's existence.
What about the Arab League Peace offerings of 2002 and 2007, in return for recognition of Israel? The Israelis say that they cannot accept peace on Arab terms yet demand that the Arabs accept peace on their terms or not at all! The Israelis will not even negotiate. Hamas offered a ten year cease fire, which was also rejected out of hand. Israeli no more wants peace than it wants recognised borders. At Oslo, Arafat conceded everything but the Israelis weren't satisfied they wanted more, the same at Camp David. Always Israel wants more concessions and even then it is never enough!
When did Israel pose a threat to Iran?
Oh then why is the Israeli lobby in Washington calling for a strike on Iran, claiming they're trying to produce a nuclear weapon to threaten Israel, who only possess a few hundred nuclear weapons. Also it is Israel who has always been the aggressor in the Middle East.
and yet Iran's leader calls for a 2nd Holocaust while denying the 1st.
No he hasn't called for a second holocaust. He said that
the Zionist Regime presently occupying Jeruselam will disappear from the pages of history. He did not call for the destruction of Israel. I don't think that he denied they Holocaust, just the scale of it and the number of Europeans who died in it. Europeans of the Jewish faith weren't the only victims of the nazis. Also that no Israelis died in any of the camps, which is what I think much of it was about as Israel uses the holocaust to detract any criticism of it own policies in the occupied territories.
Has Israel taken Iran's water? No! look deeper and you will find your arguments don't hold water.
I made no claim that Israel had taken Iran's water! That would be a tad difficult as they would be required to fight an extremely vicious guerrilla campaign across Syria and Iraq to acquire it and I don't think that Iran would capitulate that easily. If Israel and America do decide to attack Iran and use tactical nuclear weapons Israel will pay an extremely costly and bloody price with a long drawn out and vicious guerrilla war, which will change the map of the Middle East forever. At some point in the future the Pan Arab League is going to morph into an Arabic Union, stretching from Turkey to the Persian Gulf and From North Africa (Morocco) to Pakistan and may well comprise of 15 to 20 countries. What then will Israel do?
Posted by: sam, greenock on 10:04am Mon 12 May 08
[quote][bold]McSomeone[/bold] wrote:
[quote]considering that archaeologists have and continue to find evidence of Jewish habitation from 3000+ years ago all over modern day Israel,& west bank. Also the fact that the \"3000 year old fairy tail\" as you put it has archaeological evidence (Dead Sea Scrolls, Cyrus Scroll (in The British Museum, London).[/quote] There is No evidence of \"Israelite\" habitation in ancient Palestine 3000 years ago, just human habitation. Even Israeli archeologists now admit there is no proof in or under the ground to support Israeli claims, just as there is no supporting evidence for the Jewish exodus from Egypt. The Dead Sea Scrolls and other documents do not prove anything, just that some people believed in a god. They were written by men and not a god, and as academics can only roughly guess as their true meaning others will interpret them to support their own beliefs. [quote]Also recent history provides evidence of continued efforts by Israel to have peace with those who deny the very right of Israel\'s existence.[/quote] What about the Arab League Peace offerings of 2002 and 2007, in return for recognition of Israel? The Israelis say that they cannot accept peace on Arab terms yet demand that the Arabs accept peace on their terms or not at all! The Israelis will not even negotiate. Hamas offered a ten year cease fire, which was also rejected out of hand. Israeli no more wants peace than it wants recognised borders. At Oslo, Arafat conceded everything but the Israelis weren\'t satisfied they wanted more, the same at Camp David. Always Israel wants more concessions and even then it is never enough! [quote]When did Israel pose a threat to Iran?[/quote] Oh then why is the Israeli lobby in Washington calling for a strike on Iran, claiming they\'re trying to produce a nuclear weapon to threaten Israel, who only possess a few hundred nuclear weapons. Also it is Israel who has always been the aggressor in the Middle East. [quote]and yet Iran\'s leader calls for a 2nd Holocaust while denying the 1st.[/quote] No he hasn\'t called for a second holocaust. He said that [italic]the Zionist Regime presently occupying Jeruselam will disappear from the pages of history.[/italic] He did not call for the destruction of Israel. I don\'t think that he denied they Holocaust, just the scale of it and the number of Europeans who died in it. Europeans of the Jewish faith weren\'t the only victims of the nazis. Also that no Israelis died in any of the camps, which is what I think much of it was about as Israel uses the holocaust to detract any criticism of it own policies in the occupied territories. [quote]Has Israel taken Iran\'s water? No! look deeper and you will find your arguments don\'t hold water.[/quote] [bold]I made no claim that Israel had taken Iran\'s water![/bold] That would be a tad difficult as they would be required to fight an extremely vicious guerrilla campaign across Syria and Iraq to acquire it and I don\'t think that Iran would capitulate that easily. If Israel and America do decide to attack Iran and use tactical nuclear weapons Israel will pay an extremely costly and bloody price with a long drawn out and vicious guerrilla war, which will change the map of the Middle East forever. At some point in the future the Pan Arab League is going to morph into an Arabic Union, stretching from Turkey to the Persian Gulf and From North Africa (Morocco) to Pakistan and may well comprise of 15 to 20 countries. What then will Israel do?[/quote] Thanks McS but the supporters of the "Zionist Hoodlums" won't be listening. It's never their fault always someone elses.
It's all down to anti-semitism you know. Noting to do with the zionists at all, they're 100% innocent - aye right
McSomeone wrote:
considering that archaeologists have and continue to find evidence of Jewish habitation from 3000+ years ago all over modern day Israel,& west bank. Also the fact that the \"3000 year old fairy tail\" as you put it has archaeological evidence (Dead Sea Scrolls, Cyrus Scroll (in The British Museum, London).
There is No evidence of \"Israelite\" habitation in ancient Palestine 3000 years ago, just human habitation. Even Israeli archeologists now admit there is no proof in or under the ground to support Israeli claims, just as there is no supporting evidence for the Jewish exodus from Egypt. The Dead Sea Scrolls and other documents do not prove anything, just that some people believed in a god. They were written by men and not a god, and as academics can only roughly guess as their true meaning others will interpret them to support their own beliefs. Also recent history provides evidence of continued efforts by Israel to have peace with those who deny the very right of Israel\'s existence.
What about the Arab League Peace offerings of 2002 and 2007, in return for recognition of Israel? The Israelis say that they cannot accept peace on Arab terms yet demand that the Arabs accept peace on their terms or not at all! The Israelis will not even negotiate. Hamas offered a ten year cease fire, which was also rejected out of hand. Israeli no more wants peace than it wants recognised borders. At Oslo, Arafat conceded everything but the Israelis weren\'t satisfied they wanted more, the same at Camp David. Always Israel wants more concessions and even then it is never enough! When did Israel pose a threat to Iran?
Oh then why is the Israeli lobby in Washington calling for a strike on Iran, claiming they\'re trying to produce a nuclear weapon to threaten Israel, who only possess a few hundred nuclear weapons. Also it is Israel who has always been the aggressor in the Middle East. and yet Iran\'s leader calls for a 2nd Holocaust while denying the 1st.
No he hasn\'t called for a second holocaust. He said that the Zionist Regime presently occupying Jeruselam will disappear from the pages of history. He did not call for the destruction of Israel. I don\'t think that he denied they Holocaust, just the scale of it and the number of Europeans who died in it. Europeans of the Jewish faith weren\'t the only victims of the nazis. Also that no Israelis died in any of the camps, which is what I think much of it was about as Israel uses the holocaust to detract any criticism of it own policies in the occupied territories. Has Israel taken Iran\'s water? No! look deeper and you will find your arguments don\'t hold water.
I made no claim that Israel had taken Iran\'s water! That would be a tad difficult as they would be required to fight an extremely vicious guerrilla campaign across Syria and Iraq to acquire it and I don\'t think that Iran would capitulate that easily. If Israel and America do decide to attack Iran and use tactical nuclear weapons Israel will pay an extremely costly and bloody price with a long drawn out and vicious guerrilla war, which will change the map of the Middle East forever. At some point in the future the Pan Arab League is going to morph into an Arabic Union, stretching from Turkey to the Persian Gulf and From North Africa (Morocco) to Pakistan and may well comprise of 15 to 20 countries. What then will Israel do?
Thanks McS but the supporters of the "Zionist Hoodlums" won't be listening. It's never their fault always someone elses.
It's all down to anti-semitism you know. Noting to do with the zionists at all, they're 100% innocent - aye right
Posted by: a r u biased, Glasgow on 12:30pm Mon 12 May 08
The truth is out there you just have to be willing to look.
Thursday, August 3, 2006; 10:49 AM
PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday the solution to the Middle East crisis is to [bold]destroy Israel[/bold] .
Last week Ahmadinejad questioned whether the Nazi destruction of 6 million European Jews during World War II occurred and said Israel should be moved to Europe. In October he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."(source one of the many internet sites which report the news)
The truth is out there you just have to be willing to look.
Thursday, August 3, 2006; 10:49 AM
PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday the solution to the Middle East crisis is to
destroy Israel .
Last week Ahmadinejad questioned whether the Nazi destruction of 6 million European Jews during World War II occurred and said Israel should be moved to Europe. In October he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."(source one of the many internet sites which report the news)
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 2:32pm Mon 12 May 08
[quote][bold]a r u biased[/bold] wrote:
The truth is out there you just have to be willing to look. Thursday, August 3, 2006; 10:49 AM PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday the solution to the Middle East crisis is to [bold]destroy Israel[/bold] . Last week Ahmadinejad questioned whether the Nazi destruction of 6 million European Jews during World War II occurred and said Israel should be moved to Europe. In October he called for Israel to be \"wiped off the map.\"(source one of the many internet sites which report the news)[/quote] I get the impression that you really want a war with Iran. As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for because you might just get it and with war it never ever goes as you plan or anticipate, no one walks away unscathed or undamaged. Iran is a far larger country than Israel and can absorb far more punishment. Israel can and probably will use nuclear weapons but if you do don't expect any safe havens around the world for the people of Israel, they will be unwelcome wherever you go. Iran is unlikely use nuclear weapons against Israel as it would not just be Israel that suffers but also Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Egypt and all countries around Israel and the Eastern Mediteranean. Like America Israel relies on modern technology to fight it's wars so needs a constant supply of high tech materials and gold, Iran doesn't and can fight for longer and cheaper and accept far higher casualties than israel can.
Think about it before you wish for it!
Can Israel afford the price of total war on that scale, especially one that will drag in many other nations and enlarge the conflict, leading to greater hatred of Israel?
Again, think about it before you wish it!
a r u biased wrote:
The truth is out there you just have to be willing to look. Thursday, August 3, 2006; 10:49 AM PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Thursday the solution to the Middle East crisis is to destroy Israel . Last week Ahmadinejad questioned whether the Nazi destruction of 6 million European Jews during World War II occurred and said Israel should be moved to Europe. In October he called for Israel to be \"wiped off the map.\"(source one of the many internet sites which report the news)
I get the impression that you really want a war with Iran. As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for because you might just get it and with war it never ever goes as you plan or anticipate, no one walks away unscathed or undamaged. Iran is a far larger country than Israel and can absorb far more punishment. Israel can and probably will use nuclear weapons but if you do don't expect any safe havens around the world for the people of Israel, they will be unwelcome wherever you go. Iran is unlikely use nuclear weapons against Israel as it would not just be Israel that suffers but also Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Egypt and all countries around Israel and the Eastern Mediteranean. Like America Israel relies on modern technology to fight it's wars so needs a constant supply of high tech materials and gold, Iran doesn't and can fight for longer and cheaper and accept far higher casualties than israel can.
Think about it before you wish for it!
Can Israel afford the price of total war on that scale, especially one that will drag in many other nations and enlarge the conflict, leading to greater hatred of Israel?
Again, think about it before you wish it!
Posted by: a r u biased, Glasgow on 6:28pm Mon 12 May 08
Sir,
Because I quote the Iranian President's remarks you assume I want war! These were not my words but his.
Sir,
Because I quote the Iranian President's remarks you assume I want war! These were not my words but his.
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 6:53pm Mon 12 May 08
You go on about Ahmadinejad's reported threat but what about Tzipi Livni's call for the expulsion of all Palestinians living in Israel, or Avigdor Lieberman's call for the extermination of all Palestinians.
I take it you agree with them?
No you and the other zionists want a war with Iran because it presents a future risk to Israel's hegamony in the Middle East. Even if Iran never acquires a nuclear capability it will be a threat as it has the wealth in oil and gas reserves, an educated population and is capable of providing the Middle East with leadership. Our problem is you want the west to fight it for you because you know full well it isn't one you can start and hope to win.
You go on about Ahmadinejad's reported threat but what about Tzipi Livni's call for the expulsion of all Palestinians living in Israel, or Avigdor Lieberman's call for the extermination of all Palestinians.
I take it you agree with them?
No you and the other zionists want a war with Iran because it presents a future risk to Israel's hegamony in the Middle East. Even if Iran never acquires a nuclear capability it will be a threat as it has the wealth in oil and gas reserves, an educated population and is capable of providing the Middle East with leadership. Our problem is you want the west to fight it for you because you know full well it isn't one you can start and hope to win.
Posted by: a r u biased, Glasgow on 8:32pm Mon 12 May 08
Quotes please, for the following,
" Tzipi Livni's call for the expulsion of all Palestinians living in Israel, or Avigdor Lieberman's call for the extermination of all Palestinians."
remember the Iranian President's threats are also against Europe.
“We have advised the Europeans that the Americans are far away, but you are the neighbors of the nations in this region. We inform you that the nations are like an ocean that is welling up, and if a storm begins, the dimensions will not stay limited to Palestine, and you may get hurt,” he said. (from msnbc)
"Our problem is you want the west to fight it for you because you know full well it isn't one you can start and hope to win."
You assume that I am both Jewish and Israeli, of which I am neither.
Quotes please, for the following,
" Tzipi Livni's call for the expulsion of all Palestinians living in Israel, or Avigdor Lieberman's call for the extermination of all Palestinians."
remember the Iranian President's threats are also against Europe.
“We have advised the Europeans that the Americans are far away, but you are the neighbors of the nations in this region. We inform you that the nations are like an ocean that is welling up, and if a storm begins, the dimensions will not stay limited to Palestine, and you may get hurt,” he said. (from msnbc)
"Our problem is you want the west to fight it for you because you know full well it isn't one you can start and hope to win."
You assume that I am both Jewish and Israeli, of which I am neither.
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 9:25am Tue 13 May 08
[quote]Quotes please, for the following,[/quote]
http://www.haaretz.c
om/hasen/spages/9253
28.html
http://www.haaretz.c
om/hasen/pages/ShArt
.jhtml?itemNo=712521
http://www.alternet.
org/bloggers/joshua/
44543/
Others who also called for it.
http://www.revisioni
sthistory.org/palest
ine5.html
I assume you'll accept Haaretz as a legitimate source?
Answer the question, do you approve of what they suggest? If no answer then I'll assume by default that you do!
[quote]We have advised the Europeans that the Americans are far away, but you are the neighbors of the nations in this region. We inform you that the nations are like an ocean that is welling up, and if a storm begins, the dimensions will not stay limited to Palestine, and you may get hurt,” he said. (from msnbc)[/quote]
Hardly what I would call a threat, more a warning not to interfere in matters outside their sphere of influence. These kind of diplomatic speeches are given by all world leaders, haven't you read any of those given by Bush, Olmert, Blair, Brown, Berlusconi, Harper and Howard to Iran and Syria. Jeez, are you really so politically ignorant?
[quote]You assume that I am both Jewish and Israeli, of which I am neither.[/quote]
Am assuming nothing, just don't like people who approve of colonial genocide, oppression and torture.
Quotes please, for the following,
http://www.haaretz.c
om/hasen/spages/9253
28.html
http://www.haaretz.c
om/hasen/pages/ShArt
.jhtml?itemNo=712521
http://www.alternet.
org/bloggers/joshua/
44543/
Others who also called for it.
http://www.revisioni
sthistory.org/palest
ine5.html
I assume you'll accept Haaretz as a legitimate source?
Answer the question, do you approve of what they suggest? If no answer then I'll assume by default that you do!
We have advised the Europeans that the Americans are far away, but you are the neighbors of the nations in this region. We inform you that the nations are like an ocean that is welling up, and if a storm begins, the dimensions will not stay limited to Palestine, and you may get hurt,” he said. (from msnbc)
Hardly what I would call a threat, more a warning not to interfere in matters outside their sphere of influence. These kind of diplomatic speeches are given by all world leaders, haven't you read any of those given by Bush, Olmert, Blair, Brown, Berlusconi, Harper and Howard to Iran and Syria. Jeez, are you really so politically ignorant?
You assume that I am both Jewish and Israeli, of which I am neither.
Am assuming nothing, just don't like people who approve of colonial genocide, oppression and torture.
Posted by: a r u biased, Glasgow on 12:15pm Tue 13 May 08
Thank-you for providing those links,
In answer to your question,like it or not Israel is a democracy and as such their people have the freedom to voice their opinion (as you see even Arab MK's), something which is denied many in the states surrounding Israel. Can Jews live freely in Gaza now Hamas rules? What are the allowances for Jewish continuation of life in the "West Bank" after 'Palestinian rule' comes into force?
What about Saudi? can a Jew live there? No!
and yet Israel has a large Arab population with all the rights and responsibilities of citizenship (apart from army duty which may involve them violating their 'principles' by having to defend Israel against fellow Arabs).
I do not say Israel is perfect. But I do look beyond all the anti-Israel propaganda at the Jewish historic, archaeological and yes even Biblical claim upon that Land.
Thank-you for your lively responses.
Thank-you for providing those links,
In answer to your question,like it or not Israel is a democracy and as such their people have the freedom to voice their opinion (as you see even Arab MK's), something which is denied many in the states surrounding Israel. Can Jews live freely in Gaza now Hamas rules? What are the allowances for Jewish continuation of life in the "West Bank" after 'Palestinian rule' comes into force?
What about Saudi? can a Jew live there? No!
and yet Israel has a large Arab population with all the rights and responsibilities of citizenship (apart from army duty which may involve them violating their 'principles' by having to defend Israel against fellow Arabs).
I do not say Israel is perfect. But I do look beyond all the anti-Israel propaganda at the Jewish historic, archaeological and yes even Biblical claim upon that Land.
Thank-you for your lively responses.
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 2:09pm Tue 13 May 08
Israell isn't a democracy, it's a religious aparthied colony in someone elses land, taken by force and held by force. Israeli Arabs have few rights within Israel, even though Israel pays lip service to "democracy". They make up twenty percent of the population but have only two or three percent of seats in ther Knesset. Bedouin serve in the IDF but are not popular or trusted. Arab areas of Israel are often run down and deplete of resources, education and health and like Black South Africans restricted to what they can do, where they can go and who they can marry. If they leave Israel they have no guarantee of being allowed back in.
Jews still lived in Iraq until our invasion and still continue to live in Iran and Morocco and some other countries in the Middle East. They were never driven out by the Arabs but told, bribed of forced to leave by the Israeli government. You do know that many of the so called anti semite bombings of synegogues in the Middle East in the late forties and fifties were carried out by Mossad to encourage Jews to leave their homes?
There is no distinct Jewish archeology that supports Israel's claims to the Middle East and holy scripture were written by men and not gods. The Israelites were just another bunch of settlers who saw a good land and settle, just like the Canaanites and Phoenicians. That does not give them the right to claim the land as being exclusively theirs to the detriment of anyone else.
As for Israelis not being allowed to live in the West bank, they now, contrary to International Law taken over 87% of it for their illegal settlements.
Further you do know about the Khazars being converted to Judaism in the 9th century and that the majority of European (Ashkanazis) are descended from them and not from the Israelites or Hebrews? Judaism is a religion NOT a people. Would you call the catholics a people?
I'm assuming that you approve of the hate speeches by Avigdor Lieberman and Tzipi Livni as being reasonable, while Ahmadinejad is pure evil.
Israell isn't a democracy, it's a religious aparthied colony in someone elses land, taken by force and held by force. Israeli Arabs have few rights within Israel, even though Israel pays lip service to "democracy". They make up twenty percent of the population but have only two or three percent of seats in ther Knesset. Bedouin serve in the IDF but are not popular or trusted. Arab areas of Israel are often run down and deplete of resources, education and health and like Black South Africans restricted to what they can do, where they can go and who they can marry. If they leave Israel they have no guarantee of being allowed back in.
Jews still lived in Iraq until our invasion and still continue to live in Iran and Morocco and some other countries in the Middle East. They were never driven out by the Arabs but told, bribed of forced to leave by the Israeli government. You do know that many of the so called anti semite bombings of synegogues in the Middle East in the late forties and fifties were carried out by Mossad to encourage Jews to leave their homes?
There is no distinct Jewish archeology that supports Israel's claims to the Middle East and holy scripture were written by men and not gods. The Israelites were just another bunch of settlers who saw a good land and settle, just like the Canaanites and Phoenicians. That does not give them the right to claim the land as being exclusively theirs to the detriment of anyone else.
As for Israelis not being allowed to live in the West bank, they now, contrary to International Law taken over 87% of it for their illegal settlements.
Further you do know about the Khazars being converted to Judaism in the 9th century and that the majority of European (Ashkanazis) are descended from them and not from the Israelites or Hebrews? Judaism is a religion NOT a people. Would you call the catholics a people?
I'm assuming that you approve of the hate speeches by Avigdor Lieberman and Tzipi Livni as being reasonable, while Ahmadinejad is pure evil.
Posted by: a r u biased, Glasgow on 8:56pm Tue 13 May 08
"Israeli Arabs have few rights within Israel,"
[bold]I guess that is why Jerusalem Arabs seek Israeli citizenship.[/bold]
http://www.haaretz.c
om/hasen/spages/9214
28.html
http://www.mcclatchy
dc.com/226/story/249
62.html
"Israeli Arabs have few rights within Israel,"
I guess that is why Jerusalem Arabs seek Israeli citizenship.
http://www.haaretz.c
om/hasen/spages/9214
28.html
http://www.mcclatchy
dc.com/226/story/249
62.html
Posted by: McSomeone, Scotland on 9:34pm Tue 13 May 08
They seek Israeli citizenship because that is the only way they can hang on to their homes. Israel is slowly building settlements in East Jerusalem and expelling Palestinians.
I'm baffled as to why anyone, especially a Scot can support one of the most vicious and brutal regimes since the fall of the aparthied regime of South Africa. Would you care to enlighten me?
They seek Israeli citizenship because that is the only way they can hang on to their homes. Israel is slowly building settlements in East Jerusalem and expelling Palestinians.
I'm baffled as to why anyone, especially a Scot can support one of the most vicious and brutal regimes since the fall of the aparthied regime of South Africa. Would you care to enlighten me?
Posted by: Paul R. on 5:47am Sat 17 May 08
Actually I think there was something fundamentally wrong with the policy of the United Nations in 1948. But it is a wrong that cannot be righted by turning back the clock. Israel has to be defended against Arab antiZionism which is fed by Muhammadan antiJudaism. Israel itself however needs to be put under pressure by the West to stop the settlement policy on the West bank.
Actually I think there was something fundamentally wrong with the policy of the United Nations in 1948. But it is a wrong that cannot be righted by turning back the clock. Israel has to be defended against Arab antiZionism which is fed by Muhammadan antiJudaism. Israel itself however needs to be put under pressure by the West to stop the settlement policy on the West bank.
Comment | Read Comments (22)
Print this story
Email to a friend
