Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
SunGod

Why were Jews 'chosen people of god' ?

83 posts in this topic

There's 269 illegal settlements in the West Bank at last count from a Sept 2012 report. Some of the information in my previous not up to date unfortunately but irregardless factual.

palestinan_map.jpg?w=588

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the above is a consequence of the palestinian/arab response to the partition of the area.

If, like me, you accept the moral/ ethical, political and historical right of the jews to return to their historical home land after ww 2, and to share a part of it with the arab peoles there; then what flowed from that was the result of arab reactions.

ALL of the losses of territory, from the begining suffered by the palestinians, and ALL of the palestinian refugees, resulted from their attempts to eradicate the jewish settlers from day one, and their failure to accept the partition of the land. Even now the ONLY likely solution leading to peace remains a two state one, but arabs and palestinians see only the elimination of israel as acceptable.

That is not going to happen so conflict wil continue. The jews are basically the good guys here, despite some modernist revision of history and a natural sympathy for the underdog and the present conditionof palestinians But the palestinian refugees are the rsult of their own peoles decisons and wars. In a way they are the result of miltary gambles made and lost by many arab groups including palestinians

For most of its history israel was the underdog. The wars from the beginning resulted from an arab belief that they could easily win a war with Israel Logically and statistically, they should have been right, but in every case, at great cost to both sides they were proven wrong. Israel has returned large tracts of territory in the past, only to have nations like syria use it to try and launch military assaults and terrorist raids missile attacks etc. If i were them I wouldnt have returned any land they gained as a result of the failure of arab mlitary attacks. But they were forced to as a part of political deals made largely by america.

Most modern restrictions imposed on palestinians result from the need for israel to secure its safety They wouldnt be required if a peace could be negotiated.

Israel is not going to go away. It is a strong nation state and one of the few western democratic forms of govt in the middle east. Both through its own efforts, and the support of western states, it will endure. Until arabs come to accpet that, then the palestinians may never be able to return home. Originally most refugees were not dispossed forcefully by israel they chose to leave rather than stay in jewish territories (inpart becaus ethey knew those areas would be attacked by arab peoples. The rest are largely the result of all the wars wars. Whereas, in most other parts of the world, wars end and people can return home, israel has been at war with arab states since the 1940s.

The official policy of many neighbouring states remains the eradication of israel.

Israel has no such official policy, or even expressed desire, regarding its neighbours. Who then, is the cause of ongoing conflict and hence of the refugee problem in the area?

The jews are particularly used to people saying that they are the cause of all problems, and if they could just be reradicated all would be peace and light. The current events in the area demonsrate the falsity of such a premise even to those who dont know their history. Take israel out of the eqaution and the area would stilll be a t war betwen nations and ethnic/religious divisions and still be filled with refugess Or possibly it might be uited under one dictaroal caliphate / fundamentalist theocracy

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the above is a consequence of the palestinian/arab response to the partition of the area.

If, like me, you accept the moral/ ethical, political and historical right of the jews to return to their historical home land after ww 2, and to share a part of it with the arab peoles there; then what flowed from that was the result of arab reactions.

ALL of the losses of territory, from the begining suffered by the palestinians, and ALL of the palestinian refugees, resulted from their attempts to eradicate the jewish settlers from day one, and their failure to accept the partition of the land. Even now the ONLY likely solution leading to peace remains a two state one, but arabs and palestinians see only the elimination of israel as acceptable.

That is not going to happen so conflict wil continue. The jews are basically the good guys here, despite some modernist revision of history and a natural sympathy for the underdog and the present conditionof palestinians But the palestinian refugees are the rsult of their own peoles decisons and wars. In a way they are the result of miltary gambles made and lost by many arab groups including palestinians

For most of its history israel was the underdog. The wars from the beginning resulted from an arab belief that they could easily win a war with Israel Logically and statistically, they should have been right, but in every case, at great cost to both sides they were proven wrong. Israel has returned large tracts of territory in the past, only to have nations like syria use it to try and launch military assaults and terrorist raids missile attacks etc. If i were them I wouldnt have returned any land they gained as a result of the failure of arab mlitary attacks. But they were forced to as a part of political deals made largely by america.

Most modern restrictions imposed on palestinians result from the need for israel to secure its safety They wouldnt be required if a peace could be negotiated.

Israel is not going to go away. It is a strong nation state and one of the few western democratic forms of govt in the middle east. Both through its own efforts, and the support of western states, it will endure. Until arabs come to accpet that, then the palestinians may never be able to return home. Originally most refugees were not dispossed forcefully by israel they chose to leave rather than stay in jewish territories (inpart becaus ethey knew those areas would be attacked by arab peoples. The rest are largely the result of all the wars wars. Whereas, in most other parts of the world, wars end and people can return home, israel has been at war with arab states since the 1940s.

The official policy of many neighbouring states remains the eradication of israel.

Israel has no such official policy, or even expressed desire, regarding its neighbours. Who then, is the cause of ongoing conflict and hence of the refugee problem in the area?

The jews are particularly used to people saying that they are the cause of all problems, and if they could just be reradicated all would be peace and light. The current events in the area demonsrate the falsity of such a premise even to those who dont know their history. Take israel out of the eqaution and the area would stilll be a t war betwen nations and ethnic/religious divisions and still be filled with refugess Or possibly it might be uited under one dictaroal caliphate / fundamentalist theocracy

Let me address one question to you Mr Walker, lets trade Palestine for Australia...

Australia is suddenly receiving a huge influx of immigrants (many illegal), over a 32 year period the population of these immigrants rises from just 7.6% to 33% of the total population of Australia.

These immigrants through charity and international funds buy approximately 7% of Australian land. And on this land, they fire all the Australian laborers and hire only their fellow immigrants ... creating many disgruntled and unhappy land laborers rendering them homeless. Whole families that worked those lands for generations.

But then the UN partitions Australia, by demanding of Australia, "we are going to split Australia into two states, partition it into two, but hey catch this we are going to give an additional 48% of land in Australia to the 7% immigrant landowners who are only 33% of the population of Australia. You, Australians, are going to be keep the remaining 45%. Additionally, the 54% of land given to the 7% immigrant landowners who now make 33% of the population of Australia will have the highest agricultural producing land in all of Australia."

And it is all because these immigrants once lived in the land 1,600 years ago even they themselves werent the original inhabitants as there were inhabitants in Australia (remember Palestine is now Australia) already 1,000s of years before even these immigrants made their mass migrations from Mesopotamia. In fact, you (Australians = Arab Palestinians) are the descendents of the original inhabitants.

Now these immigrants only enjoyed but one golden age during their whole time there under a King David and his son King Solomon. This golden age comparative to other empires was extremely shortlived (i.e. Roman, Egyptian, Greek, Persian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Byzantine, Ottoman, etc) as it lasted 73 years in all before it disintegrated into two smaller states that stood between 200-300 years but never regained the power, greatness, and grandeur of that one single golden age.

How would Australians react to this?

Edited by Ambush Bug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me address one question to you Mr Walker, lets trade Palestine for Australia...

Australia is suddenly receiving a huge influx of immigrants (many illegal), over a 32 year period the population of these immigrants rises from just 7.6% to 33% of the total population of Australia.

These immigrants through charity and international funds buy approximately 7% of Australian land. And on this land, they fire all the Australian laborers and hire only their fellow immigrants ... creating many disgruntled and unhappy land laborers rendering them homeless. Whole families that worked those lands for generations.

But then the UN partitions Australia, by demanding of Australia, "we are going to split Australia into two states, partition it into two, but hey catch this we are going to give an additional 48% of land in Australia to the 7% immigrant landowners who are only 33% of the population of Australia. You, Australians, are going to be keep the remaining 45%. Additionally, the 54% of land given to the 7% immigrant landowners who now make 33% of the population of Australia will have the highest agricultural producing land in all of Australia."

And it is all because these immigrants once lived in the land 1,600 years ago even they themselves werent the original inhabitants as there were inhabitants in Australia (remember Palestine is now Australia) already 1,000s of years before even these immigrants made their mass migrations from Mesopotamia. In fact, you (Australians = Arab Palestinians) are the descendents of the original inhabitants.

Now these immigrants only enjoyed but one golden age during their whole time there under a King David and his son King Solomon. This golden age comparative to other empires was extremely shortlived (i.e. Roman, Egyptian, Greek, Persian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Byzantine, Ottoman, etc) as it lasted 73 years in all before it disintegrated into two smaller states that stood between 200-300 years but never regained the power, greatness, and grandeur of that one single golden age.

How would Australians react to this?

You have just described australia AS IT IS. Heck we let complete foreigners buy parts of australia bigger than many european nations.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-news/australia-is-the-great-foreign-owned-land-as-more-nsw-farms-being-sold-overseas/story-e6freuzi-1226281573668

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/06/16/foreign-ownership-of-aussie-land-the-peril-of-selling-the-farm/

While a bit more than 60 % of australians remain from anglo celtic descent, there are increasing percentages of people from all races and continents including many muslims. Allowing for 2% indigenous peoples, over 33% of australians HAVE come from, or are descended from people of non anglo celtic descent. Over 24% of present day austrlaians were not born here, but migrated here or came as refugees to live here. We have the second highest refugee intake, per capita, in the world. (According to our foreign minister.)

Because we have a multicultural policy which asks migrants to first of all be austrlaians, and follow our laws and democratic systems; but alos celebrate and add to austrlaias diversity, every part of their own culture and share it with us, we live (mostly) in harmony. Legally there is no dicrimnation allowed on race religion etc in australia. You cant be hired or fired on the basis of race or religion or discriminated against ecause of your beliefs or practises. You cant be asked to give up your dress or any part of your way of life unless it conflicts with overall australian laws. (So, for example, female genital mutilation and child marriages are not allowed)

You'd be better off asking an indigenous australian how they feel. As for me, I know many races and cultures can live together in one democratic society and be united rather than divided.

Ps there is no public record or register of foreign ownership in Australia because no one cares enough to establish one, but over 10% of agricultural land is owned by overseas companies and investors.

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have just described australia AS IT IS. Heck we let complete foreigners buy parts of australia bigger than many european nations While a bit more than 60 % of australians remain from anglo celticc descent there are increasing percentages of peole from all races and continents including many muslims. Allowing for 2% indigenous peoples over 33% of australians HAVE come from other countries to live here. We have the second highest refugee intake, per capita, in the world. (According to our foreign minister.)

Because we have a multicultural policy which asks migrants to first of all be austrlaians, and follow our laws and democratic systems; but alos celebrate and add to austrlaias diversity, every part of their own culture and share it with us, we live (mostly) in harmony. Legally there is no dicrimnation allowed on race religion etc in australia. You cant be hired or fired on the basis of race or religion or discriminated against ecause of your beliefs or practises. You cant be asked to give up your dress or any part of your way of life unless it conflicts with overall australian laws. (So, for example, female genital mutilation and child marriages are not allowed)

You'd be better off asking an indigenous australian how they feel. As for me, I know many races and cultures can live together in one democratic society and be united rather than divided.

Ps there is no public record or register of foreign ownership in Australia because no one cares enough to establish one, but over 10% of agricultural land is owned by overseas companies and investors.

How unfortunate for the Arab Israelis as they dont enjoy that same democracy in Israel.

The Palestinian Arab Minority in Israel Inequality Report --> http://www.scribd.com/doc/49638195/The-Palestinian-Arab-Minority-in-Israel-Inequality-Report

This PDF is loaded with facts and take about 20-30 minutes to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you Jewish? If not, why not?

Say the Jewish are correct. Only they ascend to heaven. If you're not Jewish, you won't get in. On the other hand, if the Jewish are wrong about Jesus, and you are a devout follower of God (being Jewish), would God turn you away? You would be part of the "chosen people" and you spent a life devoted to him. Why would he turn you away? To me the win-win scenario if you believe in the god of Abraham would be to convert to Judaism.

Good question...in fact, very good. No I am not Jewish and feel that they are in error in their belief. I also believe that they, a remnant anyway, will finally recognize Jesus Christ as their Messiah in the end times. I believe the predictions of the Bible regarding God's chosen people AND His church. Many Christians have the false, imo, belief that the Christian church "replaced" Israel and that the promises made to the Jews were lost due to disobedience. This is not so. I believe that God chose Israel because of the obedience and faith of Abraham. He then used them as a living example of how He deals with humanity. Their blessings are yet to come. I disagree with much that the government of Israel does. I don't understand much of what God does.... but I accept my place in the scheme of things and trust that it will be explained in time. Those who cannot do so - I do not judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How unfortunate for the Arab Israelis as they dont enjoy that same democracy in Israel.

The Palestinian Arab Minority in Israel Inequality Report --> http://www.scribd.co...equality-Report

This PDF is loaded with facts and take about 20-30 minutes to read.

There about 1.5 million arab citizens of Israel (mostly muslim) who make up about 20% of the population. These are descendants of arabs who remained within israeli borders during the early wars and did not become dispossed refugees. They have the same democratic rights as all israeli citizens. (In my understanding) Palestinian refugees who are not citizens do not have those rights to participate in democratic decision making, nor would they /do they, in any other country where palestinian refugees reside.

What is more

Most of the Arabs living in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since the Six-Day War of 1967, were offered Israeli citizenship, but refused, not wanting to recognize Israeli sovereignty. They became permanent residents.[9] They are entitled to municipal services and have municipal voting rights.[10

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

In other words, many arabs could have accepted participation in Israeli democracy via citizen ship but refused to do so. It is not that israel refused to allow them the full rights of democratic particpation, even though having 20% of therr citizens arab, makes many israelis very nervous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There about 1.5 million arab citizens of Israel (mostly muslim) who make up about 20% of the population. These are descendants of arabs who remained within israeli borders during the early wars and did not become dispossed refugees. They have the same democratic rights as all israeli citizens. (In my understanding) Palestinian refugees who are not citizens do not have those rights to participate in democratic decision making, nor would they /do they, in any other country where palestinian refugees reside.

What is more

Most of the Arabs living in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since the Six-Day War of 1967, were offered Israeli citizenship, but refused, not wanting to recognize Israeli sovereignty. They became permanent residents.[9] They are entitled to municipal services and have municipal voting rights.[10

http://en.wikipedia....izens_of_Israel

In other words, many arabs could have accepted participation in Israeli democracy via citizen ship but refused to do so. It is not that israel refused to allow them the full rights of democratic particpation, even though having 20% of therr citizens arab, makes many israelis very nervous.

Israel is notoriously known amongst the international community for its discriminatory laws. Read that PDF I posted.

Furthermore, the problem I would never rely on wikipedia for any political or historical information as it is notoriously full of misinformation. I sometimes post a link from wikipedia sometimes out of sheer convenience especially if I feel it is not too glaringly bad information wise.

And another thing you have obviously overlooked is that the West Bank and East Jerusalem are an occupation. East Jerusalem and the West Bank do not belong to Israel, Israel can not declare either within its borders nor annex it. It is militarily occupied territories. However, here lies the controversy, Israel has erected 269 illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. There are more than half a million Israeli Jews illegally residing in those settlements. Golan Heights too. Israel claims it annexed the Golan Heights. But international community says NO! the Golan Heights is occupied territory.

So we have to ask ourselves why would the Arab Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem want to become civilians of Israel thus recognizing Israeli sovereignty when these Arab Palestinians live under Israeli occupation?????

That would be foolish and suicidal to what the future may hold for the possibility of a Palestinian state existing. The occupied Arab Palestinians did the right and wise thing. Bear the occupancy with stiff upper lip and head held high and hope despite it being the longest running occupancy ever now 45 years and running that has survived 2 centuries will end for the sake of human dignity and human rights.

Edited by Ambush Bug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what is wrong with Israel ending their occupations of the Golan Heights and the West Bank?

Actually, ALL of that land belonged to Israel before it was taken from them, so they are just taking band what is rightfully theirs! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, ALL of that land belonged to Israel before it was taken from them, so they are just taking band what is rightfully theirs! :)

Wrong . . . What is known as the West Bank was under Ottoman rule as part of the provinces of Syria. At the 1920 San Remo conference, the victorious Allied powers (France, UK, USA, etc.) allocated the area to the British Mandate of Palestine. It belongs to the Arabs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go back a little further in history Etu. :)

Okee dokee . . . it was originally called Samaria, and was first occupied by the exiles from Babylon, so it belongs originally to the Mesopotamian empire (Sumerian, Assyrian, Chaldean, and particularly Babylonian). The Mesopotamian empire would become the Persian empire, and hence Arabic . . . therefore, it should now belong to the Arabs.

The Jewish people originate from the Middle East, the closest DNA matchings are from the people of Kurdistan, Arabs.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God first

thanks everybody

Why are Not Jew God chosen people

the reason Jews are not the only chosen group of persons of God?

But I forget the verse

God talk to other persons than the Jews

Jew came about because of Isalel a person

the ideal is older

Adam family has everybody in it

even Cain family which Noah wife was part of Cain family tree

with love and a holy kiss Roy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weren't the Jews the chosen people of God because of Abraham's willingness to sacrifice Isaac?

The account of Abrahan supposed to sacrifice Isaac IMO appears to be an addendem. AN addition to condemn child sacrifice which even the Jews (as influenced by their neighbors) were also beginning to participate in child sacrifice. It has been supposed that the account of Isaac and Abraham is an attempt to STOP that practice among the Jews.

SINcerely,

:devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel is notoriously known amongst the international community for its discriminatory laws. Read that PDF I posted.

Furthermore, the problem I would never rely on wikipedia for any political or historical information as it is notoriously full of misinformation. I sometimes post a link from wikipedia sometimes out of sheer convenience especially if I feel it is not too glaringly bad information wise.

And another thing you have obviously overlooked is that the West Bank and East Jerusalem are an occupation. East Jerusalem and the West Bank do not belong to Israel, Israel can not declare either within its borders nor annex it. It is militarily occupied territories. However, here lies the controversy, Israel has erected 269 illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. There are more than half a million Israeli Jews illegally residing in those settlements. Golan Heights too. Israel claims it annexed the Golan Heights. But international community says NO! the Golan Heights is occupied territory.

So we have to ask ourselves why would the Arab Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem want to become civilians of Israel thus recognizing Israeli sovereignty when these Arab Palestinians live under Israeli occupation?????

That would be foolish and suicidal to what the future may hold for the possibility of a Palestinian state existing. The occupied Arab Palestinians did the right and wise thing. Bear the occupancy with stiff upper lip and head held high and hope despite it being the longest running occupancy ever now 45 years and running that has survived 2 centuries will end for the sake of human dignity and human rights.

I agree that israel should hand back control of the occupied territories; BUT they have to have an ironclad guarantee of territorial security before they do this. Every time in the past when israel handed back territory it won after arab nations attacked it, this was used to to gain strategic advaantage to attack israel, either militarily or via terrorist attacks. Israel woud be stupid to hand back territories if that endangered its existence, and while arab states and organisations remain commited to the destruction of Israel.

The bottom line is whether you actually believe israel has a right to an existence as an indepnedent nation state in ANY of the territory it now holds, or whether you believe it does not . The occupied teritories are occupied as a consequence of arab military failure to destroy Israel. Historically, many nations gain territory in this way. That doesnt make it right, but neither does it make it wrong for Israel to continue to occupy the territory until its national integrity is guaranteed.

Israel has never sought to gain any territory by miitary means or occupation through force. It 's occupied territories were gained, and are held, as a result of succesful defences of its borders and strategic advances into enemy held territory during wars initiated by arab nations..

My point about israeli citizen ship was in response to your argument that arabs do not have the right of democratic involvement in israel's policies or governance.

Actually they do, if they are citizens. Why should any non citizen in any country have a right to participate in the governance of that country? You made it sound as if Israel excluded arabs from citizen ship. That is clearly not the case. Palestinian refugees in other arab states have no say in their governance, and are never/or very rarely, offered citizenship of those states. Yet you expect Israel to do this..

Why?

Because israel is a more progressive, democratic, western and inclusive society, than all those arab states?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that israel should hand back control of the occupied territories; BUT they have to have an ironclad guarantee of territorial security before they do this. Every time in the past when israel handed back territory it won after arab nations attacked it, this was used to to gain strategic advaantage to attack israel, either militarily or via terrorist attacks. Israel woud be stupid to hand back territories if that endangered its existence, and while arab states and organisations remain commited to the destruction of Israel.

The bottom line is whether you actually believe israel has a right to an existence as an indepnedent nation state in ANY of the territory it now holds, or whether you believe it does not . The occupied teritories are occupied as a consequence of arab military failure to destroy Israel. Historically, many nations gain territory in this way. That doesnt make it right, but neither does it make it wrong for Israel to continue to occupy the territory until its national integrity is guaranteed.

Israel has never sought to gain any territory by miitary means or occupation through force. It 's occupied territories were gained, and are held, as a result of succesful defences of its borders and strategic advances into enemy held territory during wars initiated by arab nations..

My point about israeli citizen ship was in response to your argument that arabs do not have the right of democratic involvement in israel's policies or governance.

Actually they do, if they are citizens. Why should any non citizen in any country have a right to participate in the governance of that country? You made it sound as if Israel excluded arabs from citizen ship. That is clearly not the case. Palestinian refugees in other arab states have no say in their governance, and are never/or very rarely, offered citizenship of those states. Yet you expect Israel to do this..

Why?

Because israel is a more progressive, democratic, western and inclusive society, than all those arab states?

The Arab nations did not start the 1948 war they intervened as the newly proclaimed nation of Israel was aggressively taking land that had been partitioned to the Arab Palestinians.

The 1956 Suez War, Israel (along with Britain and France) invaded Egypt in response to Egypt nationalizing the Suez Canal.

The 1967 Six Day War, Israel attacked Syria, Jordan, and Egypt by pre-emptively destroying nearly all of Egypt's airforce and rendering their airfields inoperable, and destroyed two-thirds of Syria's air force, and destroyed all of Jordan's air force. Gaining air superiority against all three Arab nations.

There were clear border provocations committed by Israel in the proceeding years before the war against Syria. In the words of Moshe Dayan "I know how at least 80% of the clashes there started. It went this way: we would send a tractor to plow some demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didnt shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and thats how it was." told reporter Rami Tal in 1976. Israel intentionally precipitated hostile exchanges with Syria in order to justify larger and larger military adventures into the Golan Heights. Golan Heights is wanted for mostly one resource and one resource alone -- water that is the Jordan river and its headwaters. And secondarily, for the fertile farmlands.

Jordan, in 1966, 3 Israeli homes were blown up and a military truck was blown up a few days later. Israel retaliated by blowing up the Jordanian villages of Rafat and Tel Arabain, killing 11 civilians.

Later in the same year, Arabs sabotage in Jerusalem injuring 4 civilians and a mine was exploded under a military vehicle near Hebron killing 3 Israeli soldiers and wounding an additional 4.

Israel violated its UN Charter and Armistice Agreements with Jordan when a large force of Israeli tanks under air cover descended upon the village of Samu. 5,000 villagers were routed from their homes with the destruction of 125 homes as well as the village clinic and school were blown up. Additionally 28 houses and mosque were damaged. When Jordan responded to this, a Jordanian plane was shot down, 15 Jordanian soldiers were killed and 37 wounded, in addition to the villagers killed and wounded.

And Egypt, warned an attack or war against Syria would involve Egypt too. The CIA even acknowledges the Egyptian build up in the Sinai was strictly defensive in nature. Israel responded by sending a tank brigade to the Gaza Strip to taunt Egypt. Egypt responded by closing the Strait of Tiran to Israeli ships and ships carrying military materials to Israel.

Israel was never threatened with attack by Egypt that conflicted with US intelligence, President Johnson was never convinced, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara was never convinced, and CIA Director Richard Helms was never convinced. In fact, President Johnson and his aides became "annoyed about the Israeli alarm over what they considered as an improbable Egyptian attack and suspected Israel of undue nervousness or deviousness." Secretary of State Dean Rusk surmised that Israel was seeking to justify a first strike and warned Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban, "I do not wish to assume your information is meant to give us advance notice of a planned Israeli preemptive strike. This would be a horrendous error."

Israel played an active role in the Lebanon Civil War of 1975-1976, pursuing the annihilation of the PLO through support of Christian and SLA militias. In 1978, Begin initiated Operation Litani in March, a large-scale air, land, and sea invasion that seized all of southern Lebanon up to the river Litani. The operation killed 1,000 civilian Palestinians and Lebanese and caused 100,000-200,000 to flee their homes. President Carter condemned the attack and condemned Israel for its use of cluster bombs against US-Israeli arms agreements. The US sponsored a resolution that caused Israel to reluctantly withdraw from southern Lebanon to be replaced by UN peace keeping corp. However Israel did withdraw but refused to allow the UN to replace Israel's surrogate militia (the SLA) from the southern Lebanon border.

Once Reagan replaced Carter, Israel resumed its war on the Syrian-backed PLO in Lebanon with continued bombing. Then there was year long cease fire between Israel and the PLO before Israel resumed bombing of the PLO in 1982 hoping to provoke responses from the PLO with two bomber attacks that killing 39 and wounding tens of more, and 2 Syrian MiGs were shot down attempting to intercept the Israeli bombers. Israel finally succeeded when the PLO responded with eight artillery volleys were fired into Northern Israel away from towns and settlements as a means of displaying the capacity to inflict punishment but reluctance for war. Both the PLO and Syria desired to avoid war with Israel, Arafat issued a declaration that the PLO would abide by the cease-fire and Syria advised restraint to avoid Israel receiving a genuine pretext for a major ground assault. Never the less, Sharon authorized a major troop build up along the Lebanese border and in the Golan Heights (which according to Israel it was annexed and according to the UN it is still occupied territory).

The 1982 Lebanon War officially began after Begin unprovokedly authorized an airstrike against PLO positions in southern Lebanon and Beirut on June 4 1982, causing at least 45 Palestinian and Lebanese deaths, wounding 150-250 others, in response for the Palestinian attack in London that wounded the Israeli ambassador to Britain June 3, 1982. PLO denied responsibility and denounced the attack because it was the work of Abu Nidal, an arch-enemy of the PLO. On June 6 1982, Israel had the pretext it sought and launched Operation Big Pines by invading Lebanon starting the Lebanon War.

Edited by Ambush Bug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, ALL of that land belonged to Israel before it was taken from them, so they are just taking band what is rightfully theirs! :)

And when did all that land belong to Israel-- I will tell you when between 1000 or 996 BCE for approximately 73 years under King David and King Solomon. Do you not realize there were other peoples living in the land, peoples that never left the land, people that predate the Jews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Arab nations did not start the 1948 war they intervened as the newly proclaimed nation of Israel was aggressively taking land that had been partitioned to the Arab Palestinians.

The 1956 Suez War, Israel (along with Britain and France) invaded Egypt in response to Egypt nationalizing the Suez Canal.

The 1967 Six Day War, Israel attacked Syria, Jordan, and Egypt by pre-emptively destroying nearly all of Egypt's airforce and rendering their airfields inoperable, and destroyed two-thirds of Syria's air force, and destroyed all of Jordan's air force. Gaining air superiority against all three Arab nations.

There were clear border provocations committed by Israel in the proceeding years before the war against Syria. In the words of Moshe Dayan "I know how at least 80% of the clashes there started. It went this way: we would send a tractor to plow some demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didnt shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and thats how it was." told reporter Rami Tal in 1976. Israel intentionally precipitated hostile exchanges with Syria in order to justify larger and larger military adventures into the Golan Heights. Golan Heights is wanted for mostly one resource and one resource alone -- water that is the Jordan river and its headwaters. And secondarily, for the fertile farmlands.

Jordan, in 1966, 3 Israeli homes were blown up and a military truck was blown up a few days later. Israel retaliated by blowing up the Jordanian villages of Rafat and Tel Arabain, killing 11 civilians.

Later in the same year, Arabs sabotage in Jerusalem injuring 4 civilians and a mine was exploded under a military vehicle near Hebron killing 3 Israeli soldiers and wounding an additional 4.

Israel violated its UN Charter and Armistice Agreements with Jordan when a large force of Israeli tanks under air cover descended upon the village of Samu. 5,000 villagers were routed from their homes with the destruction of 125 homes as well as the village clinic and school were blown up. Additionally 28 houses and mosque were damaged. When Jordan responded to this, a Jordanian plane was shot down, 15 Jordanian soldiers were killed and 37 wounded, in addition to the villagers killed and wounded.

And Egypt, warned an attack or war against Syria would involve Egypt too. The CIA even acknowledges the Egyptian build up in the Sinai was strictly defensive in nature. Israel responded by sending a tank brigade to the Gaza Strip to taunt Egypt. Egypt responded by closing the Strait of Tiran to Israeli ships and ships carrying military materials to Israel.

Israel was never threatened with attack by Egypt that conflicted with US intelligence, President Johnson was never convinced, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara was never convinced, and CIA Director Richard Helms was never convinced. In fact, President Johnson and his aides became "annoyed about the Israeli alarm over what they considered as an improbable Egyptian attack and suspected Israel of undue nervousness or deviousness." Secretary of State Dean Rusk surmised that Israel was seeking to justify a first strike and warned Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban, "I do not wish to assume your information is meant to give us advance notice of a planned Israeli preemptive strike. This would be a horrendous error."

Israel played an active role in the Lebanon Civil War of 1975-1976, pursuing the annihilation of the PLO through support of Christian and SLA militias. In 1978, Begin initiated Operation Litani in March, a large-scale air, land, and sea invasion that seized all of southern Lebanon up to the river Litani. The operation killed 1,000 civilian Palestinians and Lebanese and caused 100,000-200,000 to flee their homes. President Carter condemned the attack and condemned Israel for its use of cluster bombs against US-Israeli arms agreements. The US sponsored a resolution that caused Israel to reluctantly withdraw from southern Lebanon to be replaced by UN peace keeping corp. However Israel did withdraw but refused to allow the UN to replace Israel's surrogate militia (the SLA) from the southern Lebanon border.

Once Reagan replaced Carter, Israel resumed its war on the Syrian-backed PLO in Lebanon with continued bombing. Then there was year long cease fire between Israel and the PLO before Israel resumed bombing of the PLO in 1982 hoping to provoke responses from the PLO with two bomber attacks that killing 39 and wounding tens of more, and 2 Syrian MiGs were shot down attempting to intercept the Israeli bombers. Israel finally succeeded when the PLO responded with eight artillery volleys were fired into Northern Israel away from towns and settlements as a means of displaying the capacity to inflict punishment but reluctance for war. Both the PLO and Syria desired to avoid war with Israel, Arafat issued a declaration that the PLO would abide by the cease-fire and Syria advised restraint to avoid Israel receiving a genuine pretext for a major ground assault. Never the less, Sharon authorized a major troop build up along the Lebanese border and in the Golan Heights (which according to Israel it was annexed and according to the UN it is still occupied territory).

The 1982 Lebanon War officially began after Begin unprovokedly authorized an airstrike against PLO positions in southern Lebanon and Beirut on June 4 1982, causing at least 45 Palestinian and Lebanese deaths, wounding 150-250 others, in response for the Palestinian attack in London that wounded the Israeli ambassador to Britain June 3, 1982. PLO denied responsibility and denounced the attack because it was the work of Abu Nidal, an arch-enemy of the PLO. On June 6 1982, Israel had the pretext it sought and launched Operation Big Pines by invading Lebanon starting the Lebanon War.

The only war technically begun by israel was the 6 day war, in which israel launched premptive strikes against greatly superior arab armies positioning to attack it. (As proven by documents captured during the war)

I am not going to continue to argue with someone who sees history so differently to how I see it. You are, of course, entitled to your opinions. I can't agree with them because they go both against historical realities, (most of which I actually lived through as an outside observer) and my sense of ethical right and wrong. The palestinian refugees and ALL their problems are a result of arab actions against Israel from its first settlement, and its rejection of that settlement, and of Israel. If you do not accept the right or legitimacy of the state of israel to exist, in its original borders, fair enough; I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okee dokee . . . it was originally called Samaria, and was first occupied by the exiles from Babylon, so it belongs originally to the Mesopotamian empire (Sumerian, Assyrian, Chaldean, and particularly Babylonian). The Mesopotamian empire would become the Persian empire, and hence Arabic . . . therefore, it should now belong to the Arabs.

The Jewish people originate from the Middle East, the closest DNA matchings are from the people of Kurdistan, Arabs.

On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates—the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and jesusites." (Genesis 15:18-21)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates—the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and jesusites." (Genesis 15:18-21)

Has God ever fulfilled this convenant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only war technically begun by israel was the 6 day war, in which israel launched premptive strikes against greatly superior arab armies positioning to attack it. (As proven by documents captured during the war)

I am not going to continue to argue with someone who sees history so differently to how I see it. You are, of course, entitled to your opinions. I can't agree with them because they go both against historical realities, (most of which I actually lived through as an outside observer) and my sense of ethical right and wrong. The palestinian refugees and ALL their problems are a result of arab actions against Israel from its first settlement, and its rejection of that settlement, and of Israel. If you do not accept the right or legitimacy of the state of israel to exist, in its original borders, fair enough; I do.

So states the popular history of many politically correct textbooks in our educational institutions. Actually the only war Israel didnt start is the October War aka Yom Kippur War 1973. Its true. The 1948 war was really in response to aggressive expansion of the new proclaimed State of Israel. Egypt didnt start the Suez War, the Arab nations didnt start the Six Day War, and the PLO didnt start the Lebanon War.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates—the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and jesusites." (Genesis 15:18-21)

the LORD? LMFAO

:santa: well this guy said all that land belonged to the future share holders of Tropicana orange juice . . . so there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The victors write the history.

Or one of the histories. Some still consider the Bible as a historical document but there has been no archaeological evidence of a mighty nation of Israel as described in the Old Testament. There is certainly no evidence of Solomon's merge (by marriage) with Egypt which would have created a gigantic Middle East superpower of great historical significance. All evidence suggests that during these times Jewish villages lived in Canaan surrounded by other cultures and had no real power over the region. In other words, the conquests of Joshua and Daniel and Solomon are just mythology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So states the popular history of many politically correct textbooks in our educational institutions. Actually the only war Israel didnt start is the October War aka Yom Kippur War 1973. Its true. The 1948 war was really in response to aggressive expansion of the new proclaimed State of Israel. Egypt didnt start the Suez War, the Arab nations didnt start the Six Day War, and the PLO didnt start the Lebanon War.

So state the history books. So also was it reported and written in the news papers of the times as it happened. So also did it come over the radios and televisions of the times. Possibly because thats what really happened, not the modern arab propaganda disseminated and accepted by many younger people today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.