Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Assad: Israelis Helping Terrorists


  • Please log in to reply
178 replies to this topic

#166    Black Red Devil

Black Red Devil

    Mean as Hell

  • Member
  • 2,328 posts
  • Joined:04 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

  • I would if I could
    But I can't, so I won't

Posted 08 June 2013 - 01:52 AM

View PostYamato, on 04 June 2013 - 06:45 PM, said:

Israel is going all over land that isn't the state of Israel.  The answer is to extract them from their occupation zones and replace their occupation regime with a sane government that recognizes the civil liberties of all people.  Because you forget every discussion and reply with the same repetition as if this hasn't all been discussed already, I will once again have to repeat how that should happen, with diplomatic force and democracy.

B Jenkins wants 1967 borders but I don't see how a state can function separated by a hostile neighbor.  What precedence of success in that kind of arrangement can we refer to? If it's void of international peacekeepers, that idea would be an immediate mess and fail quickly resulting in Israel steamrolling the new state with military force, veritably overnight.  1947 borders are appropriate to the bureaucratic process we need to recognize the two states Israel and Palestine in the first place, or else the land swaps must be substantial, giving the northern half to one state and the southern half to the other.   Micro-issues like right of return are superfluous and serve only to roadblock two-state progress; when Palestine has statehood Israel doesn't have a voice in who does or doesn't return.

With the 1947 borders you would basically have Tel Aviv cutoff from Jerusalem. Difficult to see that happening IMO.

We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell

- Oscar Wilde

#167    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,377 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 08 June 2013 - 02:42 AM

View PostBlack Red Devil, on 08 June 2013 - 01:52 AM, said:

With the 1947 borders you would basically have Tel Aviv cutoff from Jerusalem. Difficult to see that happening IMO.
Biggest problem with the '47 borders is the war that began in '48.. If the Arabs felt strongly enough in '48 to go to war rather than have a Jewish state there in their midst then how is going back to that same border going to help today?  They have made absolutely no secret that ANY SIZE Israeli state in their midst is unacceptable....PERIOD.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...

#168    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,607 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering that inner landscape connecting those throughout life

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 08 June 2013 - 03:05 AM

Not every Arab opposes a two-state solution.




#169    Black Red Devil

Black Red Devil

    Mean as Hell

  • Member
  • 2,328 posts
  • Joined:04 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

  • I would if I could
    But I can't, so I won't

Posted 08 June 2013 - 03:53 AM

View Postand then, on 08 June 2013 - 02:42 AM, said:

Biggest problem with the '47 borders is the war that began in '48.. If the Arabs felt strongly enough in '48 to go to war rather than have a Jewish state there in their midst then how is going back to that same border going to help today?  They have made absolutely no secret that ANY SIZE Israeli state in their midst is unacceptable....PERIOD.

The Arab Higher Committee was the cause of the rejection of an Israeli State but 1) it had it's own critics amongst the Arab population and 2) was dissolved in 1948.  Things have moved on since then.  Currently the main reason many Arab States do not recognise Israel is because of the treatment of Palestinians and because the unfairness of the UN Partition Plan.

The first map was the Jewish ethnic composition at the time in 1947 (in blue) after a large influx of Jews (83,000 in 1920 to 600,000 in 1947) which was cause of most anti-jewish sentiment at the time.  Similar to the anti-muslim sentiment you find in Europe these days.  Large influxes of different ethnic/cultural groups create these Xenophobic feeling.



Posted Image

This was the UN partition decision.  The Israeli's received 56% of the territory (in white) despite having only 33% of the total areas population.  Was that fair?

Posted Image


Then again, looking at the progression from the first two maps, continuing on with the 1967 borders below

Posted Image

and now

Posted Image

you'd have to question Israel's real intent.

Edited by Black Red Devil, 08 June 2013 - 04:05 AM.

We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell

- Oscar Wilde

#170    ciriuslea

ciriuslea

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • CHAMP20NS

Posted 08 June 2013 - 04:46 AM

I see people are still trying to justify the theft of Palestine...tut tut


#171    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,412 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 08 June 2013 - 07:43 AM

View PostBlack Red Devil, on 08 June 2013 - 01:52 AM, said:

With the 1947 borders you would basically have Tel Aviv cutoff from Jerusalem. Difficult to see that happening IMO.
It's unlikely you'll get anything at all if you only ask for the minimum that you're willing to accept because you think it's more likely.

I'm not even sure what you mean by basically.  The road between these two cities will be closed?   What about the roads between Gaza and the West Bank?  How open will those be?   If your meaning is to say that Jerusalem is a big deal, yeah it's a very big deal.  But technically under 1947 borders both states are cut off from Jerusalem in a fashion because it's a cosmopolitan city belonging to neither.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#172    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,412 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 08 June 2013 - 08:13 AM

View Postand then, on 08 June 2013 - 02:42 AM, said:

Biggest problem with the '47 borders is the war that began in '48.. If the Arabs felt strongly enough in '48 to go to war rather than have a Jewish state there in their midst then how is going back to that same border going to help today? They have made absolutely no secret that ANY SIZE Israeli state in their midst is unacceptable....PERIOD.
Because nobody is beholden to what the Arabs thought in 1948 if we're going to be accepting this Partition Plan in the first place.   The entire region rejected it.   It was an act of war.  

If the UN says it's okay for Northern Atheists to come down to Alabama to create an Atheist Homeland in Alabama even though the entire SE United States votes against it, what are you and the rest of the Southern Christians going to do about it?  Surrender your civil rights?

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#173    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,377 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 08 June 2013 - 08:31 AM

View PostYamato, on 08 June 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

Because nobody is beholden to what the Arabs thought in 1948 if we're going to be accepting this Partition Plan in the first place.   The entire region rejected it.   It was an act of war.  

If the UN says it's okay for Northern Atheists to come down to Alabama to create an Atheist Homeland in Alabama even though the entire SE United States votes against it, what are you and the rest of the Southern Christians going to do about it?  Surrender your civil rights?
Of course not...and I have acknowledged that the Palestinians got the "short end" politically with the Mandate.  However this is the reality and unless they accept it and try to move forward from the stand point of the existence of a state of Jewish character in their midst, there will never be a real chance for peace.  Surely you can see this?  To use your analogy, southern Christians would have to see the writing on the wall (so to speak) and compromise in some way that left them free to worship as they chose but also allowed the Atheists room to do the same.  This is my only point.... that total intransigence keeps this thing alive decade after bloody decade and since Israel will never just disappear, compromise and part of the pie is much better than continued war forever.  And compromise will come in time.  Unfortunately it only gets worse in the wake of this compromise.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...

#174    Black Red Devil

Black Red Devil

    Mean as Hell

  • Member
  • 2,328 posts
  • Joined:04 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

  • I would if I could
    But I can't, so I won't

Posted 08 June 2013 - 10:06 PM

View PostYamato, on 08 June 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

It's unlikely you'll get anything at all if you only ask for the minimum that you're willing to accept because you think it's more likely.

I'm not even sure what you mean by basically.  The road between these two cities will be closed?   What about the roads between Gaza and the West Bank?  How open will those be?   If your meaning is to say that Jerusalem is a big deal, yeah it's a very big deal.  But technically under 1947 borders both states are cut off from Jerusalem in a fashion because it's a cosmopolitan city belonging to neither.

It's just my opinion mate.  Nobody has the perfect answer otherwise there would have been a solution decades ago.  Former Prime Minister Barak suggested years ago a large 47km elevated floating bridge be built between the west Bank and Gaza.  I found the article here. It was rejected at the time due to costs.

The point is anybody of relevance, who comes forward with a peace plan (including some of the Arab States) only suggest a plan, a two state solution, that includes the 1967 borders.
Until religion is a factor in this world I don't think anyone in their wildest dreams believes Israel will renounce Jerusalem or make it a free state of some kind.  Christian dominated nations in the world also appear to be OK with their holy sites being under Jewish control.  Unfortunately Islamic extremists have brought this onto themselves and onto moderate Muslims, when they've shown their willingness to desecrate other religious holy symbols/sites/monuments in the name of  Islam.  I'm not a religious person but I would never interfere with another persons beliefs as long as it doesn't affect me or get forced onto me.

IMO the biggest victory the Palestinians can ever hope to achieve is a chunk of East Jerusalem as their capital.

We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell

- Oscar Wilde

#175    GoSC

GoSC

    HOSEA 1:10; 2:23

  • Member
  • 2,615 posts
  • Joined:26 Jan 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silver Mountain

Posted 09 June 2013 - 01:22 AM

View Postand then, on 08 June 2013 - 02:42 AM, said:

Biggest problem with the '47 borders is the war that began in '48.. If the Arabs felt strongly enough in '48 to go to war rather than have a Jewish state there in their midst then how is going back to that same border going to help today?  They have made absolutely no secret that ANY SIZE Israeli state in their midst is unacceptable....PERIOD.

You are so thoroughly indoctrinated with the popular mythological history of the State of Israel.

When the Partition Plan was drawn up, the Arabs constituted two-thirds of the population. There were 1,350,000 Arabs and 650,000 Jews.

The partition solution provided the Jews who occupied less than 6% of the lands in the mandate, should receive 56% of the mandated territory. The Arabs, who occupied 94% of the land, should be alotted only 44%.

The Arabs naturally unanimously rejected what they regarded as a grostesquely skewed misallocation.

The Arabs challenged the power of the United Nations to dispose of Arab-inhabited lands without the CONSENT of the population and further contended that a two-thirds majority SHOULD decide the fate of the entire country. In addition, the Arabs rejected as unfair a scheme of distribution that involved EJECTING the Palestinians from lands long held by their families for the benefit of a numerically smaller population of Jews, most of whose members were NEWCOMERS.

In other words, what the Arabs rejected was the whole procedure of a callous manifestation of colonialist manuevering by the great powers. By manipulating the United Nations, the powers were seeking to divide the country under an impracticable formula HIGHLY PREJUDICIAL to the Palestinians. The Arabs, recognized as their right, rejected the plan and maintained that the United Nations had NO LEGAL right to recommend partition when the MAJORITY of the inhabitants of Palestine OPPOSED it.

Nonetheless, by rejecting the Partition Plan, the Palestinians did not reject their claims to an independent nation. What they rejected was a Jewish state established on Palestinian land and not to the Jews' rights as a people.

Little known fact known to the western population, is that the Zionists began to prepare for war immediately after the announcement of the Partition Plan. Jewish forces took to the field almost immediately, quickly securing areas designated Jewish and then expanding into parts of Palestine reserved for the Palestinians.

November 30 1947, a single day after the passage of Partition Plan, ALL Jews age 17 to 25 were ORDERED to register for military service. On December 5th, David Ben-Gurion ordered "immediate action". By mid-December 1947, the Zionists began organizing military action against the Arabs spelled out under a strategy called Plan Gimmel. The first major Jewish assault occured on December 18 1947, when a Palmach shock force conducted a nighttime raid on the Palestinian village of Khissas, in northern Galilee, killing 5 adults and 5 children and wounding 5 others.

On December 19, 1947, David Ben-Gurion ordered that the Jewish forces strike aggressively "In each attack, a decisive blow should be struck, resulting in the destruction of homes and the expulsion of the population."

Christopher Sykes (Crossroads To Israel), a contemporary British observer, notes that the Khissass attack represented a new phase in the struggle, that its character changing from "indiscriminate raiding and counter-raiding to more calculated attack and atrocity."

By early March 1948, the Jews began pursuing Plan Dalet, aimed at capturing areas in Galilee and between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv that had been assigned by the United Nations Partition Plan to the Palestinian state.

When the war was declared on May 15, 1948, the Jordanian war aims were not against the Jewish state or partition but were against Israel's efforts to annex parts of Palestine not granted to the Jews in the UN Partition Plan.

"All of the battles with Jordan's Arab Legion were fought in areas outside the territory of the Jewish State ... INCLUDING those fought in Jerusalem." - Abraham Sela, Israeli Historian

The Zionists of Palestine had consistantly had better and more weapons than the Palestinians and other Arabs in the neighboring states. Both Jews and Arabs were officially embargoed from buying weapons in the United States and most western countries, the Zionists clandestinely received major supplies of arms from Czechoslovakia beginning in early 1948. One contracted supply provided the Zionists with 24,500 rifles, 5,000 light machine guns, 200 medium machine guns, 54 million rounds of ammunition, and 25 Messerschmitt warplanes.

By May 15 1948, the Israelis were capable of fielding 800 armored vehicles, 787 mortars, and 4 field guns against the Arab TOTAL fielding 113 armored vehicles, 40 mortars, and 102 field guns.

On May 18 1948, the US Army Intelligence estimated the forces as 40,000 Jewish troops and 50,000 Jewish militia against 20,000 Arab troops and 13,000 Palestinian guerrillas.

At the height of the 1948 War's escalation it was 100,000 Jewish troops against 55,000-56,000 Arab TOTAL  troops. Additionally, approximately, 20,000-25,000 of the Jewish troops were battle-experienced European WWII veterans.

"I charge thee in the sight of God, who giveth life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed the good confession; that thou keep the commandment, without spot, without reproach, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: which in its own times he shall show, WHO IS THE BLESSED AND ONLY POTENTE, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS; who only hath immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power eternal. Amen" (I Tim 6:13-16).

#176    third_eye

third_eye

    _ M Ġ ń Ř Ī Ş_

  • Member
  • 7,043 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia

  • "Legio nomen mihi est, quia multi sumus"

    God has no religion ~ Mahatma Gandhi

Posted 09 June 2013 - 01:42 AM

not to mention the holy sites and relics were held as 'ransom' ... all the holy sites and relics of all of the faith //

it was practically gimme what we want or armageddon  ....

~

Quote

' ... life and death carry on as they always have ~ and always will, only the dreamer is gone ~ behind the flow of imagination, beyond any effort to be still
dancing in the ebb and flow of attention, more present than the breath, I find the origins of my illusions, only the dreamer is gone ~ the dream never ends
'

GIFTS WITH NO GIVER - a love affair with truth ~ Poems by Nirmala

third_eye ' s cavern ~ bring own beer


#177    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,377 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 09 June 2013 - 02:23 AM

They are THERE.  They possess the land.  They are not going anywhere so why not try to make a deal?  The subtext here is about the nation of Israel being illegitimate and as such it needing to basically disappear to set things aright.  You do realize how impossible that is, right?

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...

#178    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,412 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 June 2013 - 03:54 AM

View Postand then, on 08 June 2013 - 08:31 AM, said:

Of course not...and I have acknowledged that the Palestinians got the "short end" politically with the Mandate.  However this is the reality and unless they accept it and try to move forward from the stand point of the existence of a state of Jewish character in their midst, there will never be a real chance for peace.  Surely you can see this?  To use your analogy, southern Christians would have to see the writing on the wall (so to speak) and compromise in some way that left them free to worship as they chose but also allowed the Atheists room to do the same.  This is my only point.... that total intransigence keeps this thing alive decade after bloody decade and since Israel will never just disappear, compromise and part of the pie is much better than continued war forever.  And compromise will come in time.  Unfortunately it only gets worse in the wake of this compromise.
I can agree with your ending here...wait....*pinches self*...okay yeah I'm still here.  Perhaps my analogy softened up your position a little bit and I appreciate you being open minded enough to consider it.

While the UN doesn't have authority over Alabama just because Washington DC dropped the ball and evacuated its authority (as if there is no other legitimate government below the national or state level), Palestinians got the short end politically but there was never any debate between us on the existence of the state of Israel despite the implication often made in your rhetoric that it is being contested, it's what's happened since then that matters to me.  If we say we have to erase every political wrong of the past century that exercise would never end.  So I let that go.  Whatever the political interests of either of the powers at play here are, I'm not really interested in any of it because Israeli and Palestinian bureaucrats haven't led by any example I could approve of following.   What I can't accept is the violation of peoples' civil liberties. Zionists can have political will and self-pride so long as Palestinian liberation groups can too, but they can't talk peace and do war and maintain credibility.   Generally, how they carve up the map and draw the lines is extracurricular once the principle of self-determination for all is met, but I would expect a violent reaction in some people on both sides of the issue no matter how the land is carved.  If Israelis were occupied, they would respond with the ultimate force, on that point I think we agree as well based on many of your previous statements.  But this isn't any reason to take their political side.  I know you introduce religious reasons from there to make up your mind as a Christian Zionist, but religious interpretations don't decide my values.  I don't get my principles from religious history or ethnic differences, I get them from seeing that the worst examples of human behavior through history are the violent control of populations, and the solution to that behavior is to set them all free to practice their beliefs and live their lives in peace.  That should be good enough for true Semites and European/American transplants alike.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#179    GoSC

GoSC

    HOSEA 1:10; 2:23

  • Member
  • 2,615 posts
  • Joined:26 Jan 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Silver Mountain

Posted 16 June 2013 - 08:11 PM

View Postand then, on 09 June 2013 - 02:23 AM, said:

They are THERE.  They possess the land.  They are not going anywhere so why not try to make a deal?  The subtext here is about the nation of Israel being illegitimate and as such it needing to basically disappear to set things aright.  You do realize how impossible that is, right?

Throw your copies of Myths And Facts into the trashcan that book is published by AIPAC btw. So yes, it is trash. Truly educate yourself, pick up a copy of The Passionate Attachment: America's Involvement With Israel, 1947 To The Present by George W Ball and Douglas B Ball. Try a local library. I quoted portions from it in my last posting in this thread. The powers that be want the "wool pulled over the American public's eyes" concerning Israel and its relationship with America.

It is an eye-opening analysis on American interests in the Middle East. One of the best books I have ever read on the subject. And this recommendation goes for all board members here.

"I charge thee in the sight of God, who giveth life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed the good confession; that thou keep the commandment, without spot, without reproach, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: which in its own times he shall show, WHO IS THE BLESSED AND ONLY POTENTE, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS; who only hath immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power eternal. Amen" (I Tim 6:13-16).




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users