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
Yamato

The UNHCR: Stateless People

47 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

From UNHCR's website:

Nationality is a legal bond between a state and an individual, and statelessness refers to the condition of an individual who is not considered as a national by any state. Although stateless people may sometimes also be refugees, the two categories are distinct and both groups are of concern to UNHCR.

Statelessness occurs for a variety of reasons including discrimination against minority groups in nationality legislation, failure to include all residents in the body of citizens when a state becomes independent (state succession) and conflicts of laws between states.

Statelessness is a massive problem that affects at least 10 million people worldwide. Statelessness also has a terrible impact on the lives of individuals. Possession of nationality is essential for full participation in society and a prerequisite for the enjoyment of the full range of human rights.

While human rights are generally to be enjoyed by everyone, selected rights such as the right to vote may be limited to nationals. Of even greater concern is that many more rights of stateless people are violated in practice - they are often unable to obtain identity documents; they may be detained because they are stateless; and they could be denied access to education and health services or blocked from obtaining employment.

http://www.unhcr.org...9c3646c155.html

Palestinian%20kids%20playing%20socer.jpg

This is why Palestine matters. Statehood makes the difference between self-determination, and slavery at the hands of another's government. The details of Israel-Palestine don't make it an exception to the rule. There is no excuse in the world from 3000 years ago or 70 years ago to justify abusing the human rights of innocent people today, anywhere in the world. And if it does happen anywhere, it needs to be stopped.

Edited by Yamato
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 million is not a massive problem. Yes, it is a misfortunate situation. There are 7 billion people on this little blue dot. That is something like one tenth of one percent. In addition, have you ever thought about the consequences? If you make those 10 million state-full, you could very easily cause 20 million others to become stateless. With 7 billion, it is physically impossible to make everyone happy. Does that register? Let me guess; is 10 million the estimated number of Palestinians on the planet?

Actually, I do agree with you that it is a massive problem. I believe that it is far more than just a mere 10 million. The poor in this nation are better off than about 80% of the rest of the world. That’s about 5.6 billion that live in a state of poverty that most probably don’t vote unless herded to a voting station and then votes for whoever they are told. They live very meagerly if not in squalor. Their level of education is probably below even a basic standard. There is no upward mobility for them. The plight of the Palestinian is minuscule compared to them.

Not all cultures are meant to survive. It is a law of evolution. You’d do better to just worry about the poor in your own neighborhood and let nature take its course.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

From UNHCR's website:

Nationality is a legal bond between a state and an individual, and statelessness refers to the condition of an individual who is not considered as a national by any state. Although stateless people may sometimes also be refugees, the two categories are distinct and both groups are of concern to UNHCR.

Statelessness occurs for a variety of reasons including discrimination against minority groups in nationality legislation, failure to include all residents in the body of citizens when a state becomes independent (state succession) and conflicts of laws between states.

Statelessness is a massive problem that affects at least 10 million people worldwide. Statelessness also has a terrible impact on the lives of individuals. Possession of nationality is essential for full participation in society and a prerequisite for the enjoyment of the full range of human rights.

While human rights are generally to be enjoyed by everyone, selected rights such as the right to vote may be limited to nationals. Of even greater concern is that many more rights of stateless people are violated in practice - they are often unable to obtain identity documents; they may be detained because they are stateless; and they could be denied access to education and health services or blocked from obtaining employment.

http://www.unhcr.org...9c3646c155.html

This is why Palestine matters. Statehood makes the difference between self-determination, and slavery at the hands of another's government. The details of Israel-Palestine don't make it an exception to the rule. There is no excuse in the world from 3000 years ago or 70 years ago to justify abusing the human rights of innocent people today, anywhere in the world. And if it does happen anywhere, it needs to be stopped.

Most Palestinians DID have nationality. Mostly - prior to 1988 - they where Jordanians. Then, in around 1990 - for the first time EVER in history - they became Palestinian Nationals, citizens of the new state of Palestine. (this only apples to Palestinians in the former mandate areas, and specifically the so-called "West Bank territories". Palestinians in Hamas-Occupied-Gaza are a different case.. and a much sadder one)

Their nation is under occupation at the moment, but they could end THAT tomorrow; all they have to do is recognise Israel as a sovereign Jewish State, and agree to meaningful peace terms. Sadly, that is unlikely to happen for as long as the Musim Brotherhood controls the leadership of the PLO, or that HAMAS occupies Gaza.

Edited by RoofGardener
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 million is not a massive problem. Yes, it is a misfortunate situation. There are 7 billion people on this little blue dot. That is something like one tenth of one percent. In addition, have you ever thought about the consequences? If you make those 10 million state-full, you could very easily cause 20 million others to become stateless. With 7 billion, it is physically impossible to make everyone happy. Does that register? Let me guess; is 10 million the estimated number of Palestinians on the planet?

Actually, I do agree with you that it is a massive problem. I believe that it is far more than just a mere 10 million. The poor in this nation are better off than about 80% of the rest of the world. That's about 5.6 billion that live in a state of poverty that most probably don't vote unless herded to a voting station and then votes for whoever they are told. They live very meagerly if not in squalor. Their level of education is probably below even a basic standard. There is no upward mobility for them. The plight of the Palestinian is minuscule compared to them.

Not all cultures are meant to survive. It is a law of evolution. You'd do better to just worry about the poor in your own neighborhood and let nature take its course.

That's what Nazi Germany said. Are you Col Klink? I don't want to banter with someone justifying ethnic cleansing and genocide. If you can't understand or even recognize the problem, you won't be helpful to solve it.

How many Palestinians are there? 100% of them are stateless. Asylum-seekers are quasi-stateless people too but I don't know if and doubt they would be added into the numbers.

Most Palestinians DID have nationality. Mostly - prior to 1988 - they where Jordanians. Then, in around 1990 - for the first time EVER in history - they became Palestinian Nationals, citizens of the new state of Palestine. (this only apples to Palestinians in the former mandate areas, and specifically the so-called "West Bank territories". Palestinians in Hamas-Occupied-Gaza are a different case.. and a much sadder one)

Their nation is under occupation at the moment, but they could end THAT tomorrow; all they have to do is recognise Israel as a sovereign Jewish State, and agree to meaningful peace terms. Sadly, that is unlikely to happen for as long as the Musim Brotherhood controls the leadership of the PLO, or that HAMAS occupies Gaza.

The first time ever? Palestine was created by the same authority and at the same time as Israel. If we are going to rely on the UN to create Israel, we have to do the same for Palestine or else we're not adhering to council resolutions. Israel has ignored the UN via US veto ever since.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.....

The first time ever? Palestine was created by the same authority and at the same time as Israel. If we are going to rely on the UN to create Israel, we have to do the same for Palestine or else we're not adhering to council resolutions. Israel has ignored the UN via US veto ever since.

Ummmm.... noooo... I don't think that's correct, Yamato ? My understanding is that the UN never implemented the mandate, because the Arabs said "No".

Israel declared its independence unilaterally, albeit following the UN Mandate plan. Then the Arab League attacked and - ultimately - occupied most of the "Palestinian" mandate areas (Gaza Strip, West Bank, and East Jerusalem). The residents of those areas become.. well... Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian.

the Arab League never permitted the official creation of a "Nation of Palestine", because to do so would be to legitimise the existence of Israel. The Arab position was that ALL of the former Mandate Territory belonged to Arabs, and that the Jews should just....well.... disappear.

We're talking about the late 1940's and early 1950's here. So far, I think what happened was essentially an Arab geo-political land-grab. However, by now the Muslim Brotherhood where getting increasingly involved, and they started to form what was to become the Palestine Liberation Organisation, injecting a dose of Islamic colonial theology into the mixture. This helped in preventing the creation of a Palestinian State for almost 40 years, long after the more secular geo-political motives of the old Arab League had mellowed in the face of repeated Arab military failures against Israel, and a rising tide of pragmatism.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry RoofGardener, please provide sources for this information so you can at least be treated credibly enough that your questions be entertained and your analysis be taken seriously. I've asked you for sources on things you've claimed already and I got crickets. Where does your understanding come from? Sources please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what Nazi Germany said.

Is that like your claim that Hitler invented preventative war?

Are you Col Klink? I don't want to banter with someone

If you didn’t banter then why are you? You just keep showing everyone your ignorance.

justifying ethnic cleansing and genocide.

No one has to justify things like natural law, it just is.

Well which is it? If it’s genocide then show me the mass graves and ovens. If it’s ethnic cleansing then you had better learn history. The Palestinian is at it evolutionary end.

If you can't understand or even recognize the problem, you won't be helpful to solve it.

Oh, I see the problem alright and you are part of it. Your hatred for Israel blinds you to the problem. Every single time you invoke the larger issue and then ignore all other manifestations of it just to express your hatred of Isreal.

How many Palestinians are there? 100% of them are stateless. Asylum-seekers are quasi-stateless people too but I don't know if and doubt they would be added into the numbers.

How ‘bout just the poor in most countries? For all practical purposes, they are refugees in their own country. That is nearly 5.6 billion people that are disenfranchised to one degree or another. I have the feeling that if it was Israel on the other end and the Jews were forced back into dhimmitude, we wouldn’t hear a peep from you about the genocide the Palestinians are committing on the Jew.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry RoofGardener, please provide sources for this information so you can at least be treated credibly enough that your questions be entertained and your analysis be taken seriously. I've asked you for sources on things you've claimed already and I got crickets. Where does your understanding come from? Sources please.

Yeah.... fair point, up to a point. Many of my posts synthesise information I've picked up over the years from multiple sources. Mostly internet articles, some newspapers, a few books, and debating on this and other forums. I also frequently tend to put my opinions in my posts, without citing sources for every single opinion. So sue me - I have a real life outside of these fora, and don't always feel like writing a formal thesis each time I post.

In regard the post in particular.. well.. lets see...

Regarding the creation of the State of Palestine (and the fact that it wasn't done by the UN), there is a helpful timeline article by Al jazeera

I associate the Muslim Brotherhood with influencing events partly due to the close relationship between them and Yasser Arrafat, and also their direct hand in creating the HAMAS movement. I'd refer you to the wikipedia articles on Arrafat and HAMAS for a starting point on that relationship.

As for suppression of the creation of a Nation of Palestine; that was ingrained into the Arab Leagues doctrine from the beginning, and was also espoused within the charter of the PLO. Their stated objective was to destroy Israel as a state. Obviously, creating a separate state of Palestine - whillst Israel still existed - would be to imply a recognition of Israel, and a definition of Palestine that excluded Israeli territory.

I hope that helped ?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah.... fair point, up to a point. Many of my posts synthesise information I've picked up over the years from multiple sources. Mostly internet articles, some newspapers, a few books, and debating on this and other forums. I also frequently tend to put my opinions in my posts, without citing sources for every single opinion. So sue me - I have a real life outside of these fora, and don't always feel like writing a formal thesis each time I post.

To Yam, nothing existed before the internet so if it’s not readily available here then it’s all a Zionist lie. He doesn’t understand that people did research the old fashioned way. What you present is good information – nothing new. But to him, it’s all proof of Zionist control of the MSM. Or some other excuse. But I’ll let you decide for yourself on the character of Yam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Those kids are playing football at ruins of their city but they seem happy and playfull like any other child anywhere.

Whats funny... There are people who tell that kids on that picture dont have nation, dont have history, dont have right to have their country and they dont have right to talk about their origins... Because they ( the kids ) are 'wrong', from both scientific and religious view point. But do u see, those kids are alive!? Then, they have history. Oh, how this reminds me of something from my past...

One thing is for sure - there can be oppression - for 5 years, 50 years or even 500 years but in the end, there will be peace and two countries, Israel and Palestina. Man can only strive to steal land from Palestina but the man isnt ethernal, better generations will come, eventually. This dam world needs a change, 5 rich man could solve Israel and Palestina conflict.

Edited by Sir Smoke aLot
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those kids are playing football at ruins of their city but they seem happy and playfull like any other child anywhere.

Whose fault is that? It’s not Israel’s. Try the parents.

Whats funny... There are people who tell that kids on that picture dont have nation, dont have history, dont have right to have their country and they dont have right to talk about their origins... Because they ( the kids ) are 'wrong', from both scientific and religious view point. But do u see, those kids are alive!? Then, they have history. Oh, how this reminds me of something from my past...

No one is saying they are wrong to have a right to a country. No one is denying their history. But their parents hold an ideology that is incompatible to a two-state solution. And as long as they do, Israel will defend herself from it.

The thing is is that squatters don’t usually have proper ownership of the land. They have no deeds. That is their history. Their history and mindset is also heavily based in the concept of Shirk. They are not allowed to partner authority of Allah with any other deity. And that is what they would have to do in order to share the land with Israel. And for that, there can be no two-state solution. There is nothing that even 100 rich men could solve.

This will change. The Palestinian culture will eventually fold back into the general Arab populace and these people will no longer be used by the Islamic world as cannon fodder to attack Israel. Once that source of agitation is removed, real peace might prevail between Israel and her neighbors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whose fault is that? It's not Israel's. Try the parents.

No one is saying they are wrong to have a right to a country. No one is denying their history. But their parents hold an ideology that is incompatible to a two-state solution. And as long as they do, Israel will defend herself from it.

The thing is is that squatters don't usually have proper ownership of the land. They have no deeds. That is their history. Their history and mindset is also heavily based in the concept of Shirk. They are not allowed to partner authority of Allah with any other deity. And that is what they would have to do in order to share the land with Israel. And for that, there can be no two-state solution. There is nothing that even 100 rich men could solve.

This will change. The Palestinian culture will eventually fold back into the general Arab populace and these people will no longer be used by the Islamic world as cannon fodder to attack Israel. Once that source of agitation is removed, real peace might prevail between Israel and her neighbors.

I never said its Israel fault but u are so fast to accuse their parents who live in occupied land. We can call them squatters, ok, but if so then there was a reason that they are squatters now, isnt it? Were they squatters always?

Anyways, it is long story and not something that i would like to discuss. Two state solution is only logical and honest, for all the people there and its not possible today not only because Allah 'said so' to palestinians but because, obviously, Israel have its own interests that are far from only ' defending its citizens from mad arabs '.

With years of war palestinians have divided, one part is for peace with Israel and others dont wonna even discuss such solution. After decades of war its not surprise that one part dont wonna have peace. Its like u terrorize me in school days, for years, and now u wonna be my best friend? Sry man, u better run. I havent forgot a thing that u have done to me before. But here we have greater picture, it wasnt just kick me, make fun of me... Whole families gone missing, whole villages burned...

Long story man. Was it the part where i said ' Two state solution ' that grab your attention? I dont mind seeing world map with Israel and Palestine and every problem in this world can be solved with money because the money is cause to almost all problems so i still believe that 5 rich man would solve problems there, or anywhere in the world.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s a what-if scenario to ask yourself. If Israel did not declare statehood in 48 or even if the Balfour Declaration was not proposed in the teens, what would Palestine look like today? By 1922, it was declared unorganized territory because there was not enough Palestinians that owned land or even had a legitimate deed. I see two possibilities. One, without the Ottoman influence, the up keep of Palestine would continue to degrade. Photos of the al-Aqsa Mosque from the 1880s show a state of dilapidation. This would probably continue to be the state of the land even today and the children would be playing football in ruins. The other possibility would be that because it is unorganized territory, Palestine’s neighbors would begin to make claims and divvy up the land. Egypt would grab Gaza and the Negev. Jordan would take the West Bank. Syria and Lebanon would grab the northern parts (not wanting to be left out). The Palestinians would face the same treatment that they already have in Lebanon and Jordan. Would we see the same outrage about the Palestinians having their own state or would we just ignore and leave the “Arabs” alone?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said its Israel fault but u are so fast to accuse their parents who live in occupied land. We can call them squatters, ok, but if so then there was a reason that they are squatters now, isnt it? Were they squatters always?

The implication was there. Is there any way I can accuse the parents any faster? Yes, they were always squatters. That’s what semi nomadic tribes do. A minority was able to purchase land from the rightful land owners with a legal deed in hand and Israel has incorporated them into the nation.

Anyways, it is long story and not something that i would like to discuss. Two state solution is only logical and honest, for all the people there and its not possible today not only because Allah 'said so' to palestinians but because, obviously, Israel have its own interests that are far from only ' defending its citizens from mad arabs '.

It is not logical or honest because it doesn’t take into account the sensibilities of the two parties. It only takes into account the sensibilities of the non-Islamic world. And then it is even stretching it. The 47 borders establish essentially three separate parts to each nation. One defining attribute of any nation is the ability to self-defense. A nation cannot defend itself so partitioned. The 67 borders are just as bad, no nation can survive with a divided homeland. There is no logical or honest division for a two state-solution.

With years of war palestinians have divided, one part is for peace with Israel and others dont wonna even discuss such solution. After decades of war its not surprise that one part dont wonna have peace. Its like u terrorize me in school days, for years, and now u wonna be my best friend? Sry man, u better run. I havent forgot a thing that u have done to me before. But here we have greater picture, it wasnt just kick me, make fun of me... Whole families gone missing, whole villages burned...

If I was the one terrorizing you for years, then I would be playing the part of the Muslim. Years of Dhimmitude takes its toll. After places like Auschwitz, Muslims better run. Jews weren’t going to take anymore crap. Yet Israel has always kept the possibility of peace on the table, but the Muslim keeps swiping it off the table.

Long story man. Was it the part where i said ' Two state solution ' that grab your attention? I dont mind seeing world map with Israel and Palestine and every problem in this world can be solved with money because the money is cause to almost all problems so i still believe that 5 rich man would solve problems there, or anywhere in the world.

I guess the misinformation grabbed my attention. It’s true that every man has his price but you are talking about changing Islamic dogma. No 5 rich men have the money to change that. That’s like saying that 5 rich men could remove the requirement to be baptized in the Christian faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that like your claim that Hitler invented preventative war?

If you didn't banter then why are you? You just keep showing everyone your ignorance.

No one has to justify things like natural law, it just is.

Well which is it? If it's genocide then show me the mass graves and ovens. If it's ethnic cleansing then you had better learn history. The Palestinian is at it evolutionary end.

Oh, I see the problem alright and you are part of it. Your hatred for Israel blinds you to the problem. Every single time you invoke the larger issue and then ignore all other manifestations of it just to express your hatred of Isreal.

How 'bout just the poor in most countries? For all practical purposes, they are refugees in their own country. That is nearly 5.6 billion people that are disenfranchised to one degree or another. I have the feeling that if it was Israel on the other end and the Jews were forced back into dhimmitude, we wouldn't hear a peep from you about the genocide the Palestinians are committing on the Jew.

Dwight Eisenhower claimed that Hitler invented preventative war. And you're in blind denial of it.

It's genocide; it's no a choice; I showed you a map and a definition. I don't need mass graves and ovens to get genocide. Don't confuse words in dictionaries with specific events from WW2.

I don't hate nations and by the same token I don't love nations. I don't love the flag. I don't love to wave it. I'm not symbol-minded and I'm the farthest thing from a nationalist that you can get. But why is this always about me?

10 million is not a massive problem. Actually, I do agree with you that it is a massive problem.

Well that about has you covered.

How 'bout just the poor in most countries?

The poor in most countries are not being occupied; and you are only responsible for the poor in your own. Not Israel.

For all practical purposes, they are refugees in their own country.

No they're not refugees; you spin the definitions of words so dizzy you can't possibly know what they mean.

I have the feeling that if it was Israel on the other end and the Jews were forced back into dhimmitude, we wouldn't hear a peep from you about the genocide the Palestinians are committing on the Jew.

You have a feeling anytime somebody says something that infers criticism of Israel. I don't even say the word Israel in the post and you come right out with the same old pathetic anti-semitic crap, on schedule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

To Yam, nothing existed before the internet so if it's not readily available here then it's all a Zionist lie. He doesn't understand that people did research the old fashioned way. What you present is good information – nothing new. But to him, it's all proof of Zionist control of the MSM. Or some other excuse. But I'll let you decide for yourself on the character of Yam.

Just post your sources for the crap you say bro. You too, since you showed up. You're making a lot of claims here. Source, please. For instance, show me your source that taught you that ethnic cleansing is acceptable for humans to practice.

All you're doing here is expressing your own opinion and trying to pull it off as fact. I'll take a guess at your first source: AIPAC? Your 2nd source: Project for a New American Century? If I posted AIPAC propaganda here do you think you'd be able to disagree with it? Should we check? Maybe you can split some hairs for the first time ever lest we don't wind up believing that you're a tool for AIPAC?

Edited by Yamato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So information from the UN is "misinformation" but a load of baseless claims and denials of dictionary and encyclopedia definitions from an anonymous Zionist poster will take care of that UN stuff right away. Sorry chums, that's not good enough on my thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So information from the UN is "misinformation" but a load of baseless claims and denials of dictionary and encyclopedia definitions from an anonymous Zionist poster will take care of that UN stuff right away. Sorry chums, that's not good enough on my thread.

I don't see how that relates to the previous posts in this thread ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The implication was there. Is there any way I can accuse the parents any faster? Yes, they were always squatters. That's what semi nomadic tribes do. A minority was able to purchase land from the rightful land owners with a legal deed in hand and Israel has incorporated them into the nation.

It is not logical or honest because it doesn't take into account the sensibilities of the two parties. It only takes into account the sensibilities of the non-Islamic world. And then it is even stretching it. The 47 borders establish essentially three separate parts to each nation. One defining attribute of any nation is the ability to self-defense. A nation cannot defend itself so partitioned. The 67 borders are just as bad, no nation can survive with a divided homeland. There is no logical or honest division for a two state-solution.

If I was the one terrorizing you for years, then I would be playing the part of the Muslim. Years of Dhimmitude takes its toll. After places like Auschwitz, Muslims better run. Jews weren't going to take anymore crap. Yet Israel has always kept the possibility of peace on the table, but the Muslim keeps swiping it off the table.

I guess the misinformation grabbed my attention. It's true that every man has his price but you are talking about changing Islamic dogma. No 5 rich men have the money to change that. That's like saying that 5 rich men could remove the requirement to be baptized in the Christian faith.

You are talking about Israel as if they are peacekeepers and only reason that there is war, by your opinion, is ' Islamic dogma ' on arab side. I cant argue with that and i dont wont to at all.

Just need to mention, after i see u say about WW2, what do muslims have to do with Auschwitz? Should muslims suffer for nazi attrocities in WW2? Does suffering in war make it legal to occupy other people's lands and call them squatters now? And it was not only nazi who are to blame, the whole world did nothing with only few great people who did help jewish people to escape certain death. If only more people were involved, there would not be so much deaths and we would not discuss this at all. Thing is, them riches can solve everything. I can talk about anything with open mind, without emotions, but when there is war u cant say that one side is for peace and other is not, its not as simple as that, never it is, and most important its not 'Islam' problem. Or we should go back to thread ' Islam is (not) peaceful religion ' ? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are talking about Israel as if they are peacekeepers and only reason that there is war, by your opinion, is ' Islamic dogma ' on arab side. I cant argue with that and i dont wont to at all.

Just need to mention, after i see u say about WW2, what do muslims have to do with Auschwitz? Should muslims suffer for nazi attrocities in WW2? Does suffering in war make it legal to occupy other people's lands and call them squatters now? And it was not only nazi who are to blame, the whole world did nothing with only few great people who did help jewish people to escape certain death. If only more people were involved, there would not be so much deaths and we would not discuss this at all. Thing is, them riches can solve everything. I can talk about anything with open mind, without emotions, but when there is war u cant say that one side is for peace and other is not, its not as simple as that, never it is, and most important its not 'Islam' problem. Or we should go back to thread ' Islam is (not) peaceful religion ' ? :)

I think his points about most of the Palestinians not having deeds for the land they lived on is true. But your point about the holocaust is very well taken. It wasn't only the Mufti being allied with Hitler that was the cause of the suffering of the Jews. NO government attempted to help them, not one. But the bigger issue - and the one I flog like a dead horse because no one ever really answers it, is - what are we going to do now? Even if one accepts that the UN should not have decided to partition Palestine and give the Jews a place of their own, it has happened - it IS a reality. To take the stance that the Palestinians have and to never be willing to ever accept the Jews in Palestine is simply irrational. The Israelis have the 10th largest army on the planet, they are a nuclear state and have a relatively thriving economy. In short, they are going nowhere. As long as this conflict continues their settler parties are going to keep finding ways to take and use more land. Just as Palestinians feel all the land is theirs, so do some of the Jews feel that all of ancient Judea and Samaria are deeded to them by God. If the Palestinians could ever break the stranglehold of their selfish leaders and make an imperfect peace then the settlers would finally be reigned in by the rest of the state who want peace. If the conflict continues and inevitably the world turns on Israel then eventually reality will set in and Israel will face that they have only two choices. Give in to global pressure and essentially become dhimmi in their own land OR tell the world to shove it and take all of what they feel is theirs. About 6 million of their relatives died because the world simply did not care. Which course do you think they'd take? Which would you take in the same circumstances?
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think his points about most of the Palestinians not having deeds for the land they lived on is true. But your point about the holocaust is very well taken. It wasn't only the Mufti being allied with Hitler that was the cause of the suffering of the Jews. NO government attempted to help them, not one. But the bigger issue - and the one I flog like a dead horse because no one ever really answers it, is - what are we going to do now? Even if one accepts that the UN should not have decided to partition Palestine and give the Jews a place of their own, it has happened - it IS a reality. To take the stance that the Palestinians have and to never be willing to ever accept the Jews in Palestine is simply irrational. The Israelis have the 10th largest army on the planet, they are a nuclear state and have a relatively thriving economy. In short, they are going nowhere. As long as this conflict continues their settler parties are going to keep finding ways to take and use more land. Just as Palestinians feel all the land is theirs, so do some of the Jews feel that all of ancient Judea and Samaria are deeded to them by God. If the Palestinians could ever break the stranglehold of their selfish leaders and make an imperfect peace then the settlers would finally be reigned in by the rest of the state who want peace. If the conflict continues and inevitably the world turns on Israel then eventually reality will set in and Israel will face that they have only two choices. Give in to global pressure and essentially become dhimmi in their own land OR tell the world to shove it and take all of what they feel is theirs. About 6 million of their relatives died because the world simply did not care. Which course do you think they'd take? Which would you take in the same circumstances?

I still strongly believe that both Israel and Palestina have rights for that land there but i will always defend my belief that land was stolen at some point from palestinians. I dont really need to search history books or any other source of information because truth is simple, ' palestinians were living there and at one point things started to change - new people come there and did many attrocities to old citizens of that area '.

All that u said after first sentence :) was well said. Israel wont go anywhere and we all must know that, and accept it. At least because there are many people in Israel and it would be wrong to strive for them to 'loose' their country. But, as u said, Israel have military power and no matter what the world decide, Israel ( backed up by USA ) will be safe. Whats important, after all those years of fighting, is to find solution for both Israel and Palestine. Israel should not occupy more land, would need to return some land to Palestine and support forming of that state. But palestinians, both groups, must accept that peace and hope for better future is, in any possible way, better then war.

As things are now, its horrible situation. Look at this picture ( i know it was posted many times before ) :

israels-expanding-control-over-palestinian-land.jpg

From this picture i see that Israel, as u say, dont give up to global pressure ( and it should not, if country survive 50 years who is anyone to say it cant exist no more ) and indeed is taking what they think is theirs ( which they should not ). From year 1946 to now... Alot of things happen. Its easy to see how did jewish people advance, backed up by USA. Arab world sold palestinians, literally. There is plenty of land for 2 countries but 1946 plan is going on even today.

I hope that, in near future, there will be and agreement, but we must try and be in palestinians 'shoes' at least for minute, think about your country on this map instead of Israel and Palestine.

Maybe whats holding back from palestinian side is simple fact - there are two factions in Palestine - if there will be only one gouvernment and one country then there would be no 2 'important' leaders and its easy to realize that leading positions, 'fight for chairs' in gouvernment is more important to palestinian leaders then making peace for all of their people. Israel can only profit from that.

PS

I support only peace, no matter how hard it would be - it is only good solution. And sry for long post.

Edited by Sir Smoke aLot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RavenHawk--in post #7 you state that "The Palestinian is at an evolutionary end?" Do you mean this as a scientific, cultural, military or otherwise statement? "An evolutionary end?" What does this mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are talking about Israel as if they are peacekeepers and only reason that there is war, by your opinion, is ' Islamic dogma ' on arab side. I cant argue with that and i dont wont to at all.

Not necessarily peacekeepers, but not taking crap and keeping the peace that way. But yes, it is because of Islamic dogma. Israel is an abomination in the Islamic world.

Just need to mention, after i see u say about WW2, what do muslims have to do with Auschwitz?

They have nothing to do with Auschwitz. That wasn’t the focus of the example. After Auschwitz, dhimmitude would no longer be tolerated or anything like it. The Jew was going to be responsible for their own defense and no one else would take that role but Jews.

Does suffering in war make it legal to occupy other people's lands and call them squatters now?

First of all war is suffering. But if you attack someone and then lose your territory to them, they have no obligation to return it. The reason so-called Palestinians are squatters is because they are and it wasn’t their land in the first place. More than likely, the rightful owners were no longer alive and their heirs might not have even been aware of the asset. At best they were absentee owners that could not maintain the land. For bad or good Israel has become a surrogate land owner and are doing what the original land owners were either unwilling or incapable of doing. And that is to evict squatters and all those that do not have a legitimate deed.

And it was not only nazi who are to blame, the whole world did nothing with only few great people who did help jewish people to escape certain death. If only more people were involved, there would not be so much deaths and we would not discuss this at all.

And that is probably a very good explanation why Israel should never let anyone again compromise their security or sovereignty.

Thing is, them riches can solve everything.

Money does not solve everything especially when you are confronted with ideology. In this case Islamic dogma.

I can talk about anything with open mind, without emotions, but when there is war u cant say that one side is for peace and other is not, its not as simple as that, never it is,

Actually, both sides are working for peace for only their people. There is nothing wrong with that but when those two goals are in opposition to each other, then you end up with the two sides clashing and the best solution is to let it come to its own conclusion. In a generation or two, there will be no more “Palestinian land” and Israel will be whole. It will create a whole new dynamic in the ME and will force the Islamic world to finally recognize Israel.

and most important its not 'Islam' problem. Or we should go back to thread ' Islam is (not) peaceful religion ' ? :)

It certainly is and before it is all over, we surely will return to that thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RavenHawk--in post #7 you state that "The Palestinian is at an evolutionary end?" Do you mean this as a scientific, cultural, military or otherwise statement?

Yes. As a culture, it is going nowhere. The people will live on but will be absorbed into the general Arab populations.

"An evolutionary end?" What does this mean?

The young Palestinian culture was just an upstart in the world of cultures. Around 1922, people there were official called Palestinian only because that is where they currently lived. During the Ottoman period, they were a conglomeration of various semi nomadic tribes that wandered the region with land owners and merchants from Arabia, Syria and Lebanon. If the term Palestinian was used, it was a descriptor of where the people lived as opposed to who the people were. The ties were with family (tribe) and not the land. It was very similar to Italy. Prior to 1848, the people that lived there were not Italians, they were known by the city-state they were from, so Genoese, Venetian, Florentine, Napoli, etc. Garibaldi unified a nation. If we can take an example from Hollywood, in the scene from Lawrence of Arabia, when Prince Faisal entered Damascus. Even he could not unite the tribes to run the services of just one city. How was he ever going to unite a Pan-Arab nation? Which if he had done so, then Israel would not have been. It was that disorganization that gave birth to modern Israel and sealed the fate of the Palestinian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily peacekeepers, but not taking crap and keeping the peace that way. But yes, it is because of Islamic dogma. Israel is an abomination in the Islamic world.

Well that sounded more like you were talking about some shiny peacekeepers force. 'Islamic dogma'? Do you know that, by Islam, if muslims are not threatened or attacked it is strictly forbidden for muslims to attack others, no matter who it is? But doesnt matter at all because when u check history of that conflict its easy to relize something... Problems in Israel and Palestine are greater and more complicated for anyone to simply blame religious belief.

They have nothing to do with Auschwitz. That wasn't the focus of the example. After Auschwitz, dhimmitude would no longer be tolerated or anything like it. The Jew was going to be responsible for their own defense and no one else would take that role but Jews.

Jewish people have right to have their country, and they have country and defense - Israel is strong and will always be but isnt it time to start working on making that area safe rather then making your strong position stronger day after day, on someone else's expense.

First of all war is suffering. But if you attack someone and then lose your territory to them, they have no obligation to return it. The reason so-called Palestinians are squatters is because they are and it wasn't their land in the first place. More than likely, the rightful owners were no longer alive and their heirs might not have even been aware of the asset. At best they were absentee owners that could not maintain the land. For bad or good Israel has become a surrogate land owner and are doing what the original land owners were either unwilling or incapable of doing. And that is to evict squatters and all those that do not have a legitimate deed.

I dont remember that there was Israel on the map in, for example, 1950. So who did attack Israel for them to justify taking others territory? What can you provide as a proof that there were any owners of that land anytime in history, other then occupying forces? If owners really existed, how were their heirs found? Sounds complicated. As for Israel being capable, sure it is its a modern state now with many strenghts but i think that there is great reason why those before Israel didnt make any progress... Constant 'colonization', if i can call it that. Years before occupying of that land started there were British, Spanish, Italian, Franch and i dont know which other army gone tru that area, they all have taken part in 'forming' it. That land was under constant foreign rule. Its logical to see that all of the resources were exported to their home countries, local population used on many ways... All that mythology about heirs and owners cant be used for excuses, reality is that Israel made great country but haven't done that in a peaceful way.

Money does not solve everything especially when you are confronted with ideology. In this case Islamic dogma.

Islamic dogma, nice term, actually beautiful one, perfect term for use when u need to explain more complicated stuff and you are not in the mood to write alot :) jk, money can solve anything and everything but if u, somehow, get in a problem and cant solve it with money - u can solve it with alot more money. ( lines from Black cat, White cat, so wise )

Actually, both sides are working for peace for only their people. There is nothing wrong with that but when those two goals are in opposition to each other, then you end up with the two sides clashing and the best solution is to let it come to its own conclusion. In a generation or two, there will be no more "Palestinian land" and Israel will be whole. It will create a whole new dynamic in the ME and will force the Islamic world to finally recognize Israel.

It might be a easy solution, if opposing palestinian factions negotiate some kind of centralization for them to even be able to negotiate peace with Israel, that would be best for people, maybe... Separation of palestinians was greatest defeat for Palestine so far, but again, it was not them only who are responsible for separation. Whatever happens in future, i am sure that there will always be this two countries - Israel and Palestine. Maybe both will look a little different but both have every right to 'survive'.

It certainly is and before it is all over, we surely will return to that thread.

Yeah, i assumed that. Is it possible to have positive outcome from talking in that thread, i wonder.

1 person likes this

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.