Results 1 to 20 of 41

Thread: 1967 - Israel's Wasted Victory

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default 1967 - Israel's Wasted Victory

    The Economist, 24 May 07: Forty Years On
    ...Forty years of conflict have convinced most Palestinians and Israelis that they are best off separating into two states. Yet they seem incapable of getting there.

    Though most Israelis have come to accept that the Palestinians should have independence, most still think they are not automatically entitled to it, but first need to earn it by providing Israeli security. For their part, though most Palestinians are willing to let Israel exist if it leaves them alone, most think armed struggle of some sort is justified as long as it continues to occupy their land and kill suspected militants and innocent bystanders alike. Neither side has ever had a leadership willing to override those views.

    In the meantime the Israeli settlements that dot the West Bank like holes in a Swiss cheese keep growing. The measures that protect them from Palestinian extremists, such as special settler-only roads and hundreds of checkpoints and roadblocks, stifle the West Bank's economy and drive even more Palestinians to extremism....

  2. #2
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    35

    Default

    Peace can only come from hardliners, after a sea of blood, sanctioned by a perceived strong America.

    It's how the Oslo peace accords came about. With a triumphant America flush from the Gulf War able to force a tired Israel and weakened PLO from the First Intifada to make a peace of sorts.

    Look at the Israeli-Egyptian peace after the Yom Kippur War between Sadat and Begin.

    With a fatally weakened Olmert presidency, anarchy in the Territories and a perceived weak America, nothings going to happen for a while yet.

  3. #3
    Council Member Culpeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Roswell, USA
    Posts
    540

    Default

    In my opinion, the war left Arab war refugees that the other Arab countries kept trapped as a thorn in the side of Israel. After the war, Israel did everything it could to protect and provide safe harbor for Jewish refugees in Arab countries. The aggressors of that war should still be made to pay. All territories claimed by Israel after that war should be swept clean of the generations of Arab refugees and sent to Arab countries where the Arabs will be forced to do what they should have done to begin with, which is take responsibility for biting off more than they can chew. Had Israel done this to begin with we wouldn't be seeing the problems we are witnessing today. Historically, that territory was Jewish land before it became Palestine. Theoretically, there is no Palestine and there are no Palestinians. However, there is the original modern day Israel and what the Arab lost as a result of the war that Israel has every right to maintaining as she wish. The Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, and the West Bank shouldn't exist at all with Arab interests. The Arab nations tried to destroy Israel to the ground and lost. "To the victors goes the spoils of war." Period. The fallacy of the Six Day War, or as the Arabs call it, "The Setback", is that it gave Arab extremists a handle to hold on to that has led to all this strife in the entire region. Had Israel been aggressive after the conflict as they were during the conflict the victory would have been whole and the situation in the Middle East would be quite different today. So, in that respect, it was a wasted victory. But Israel isn't the only nation to blame. The United Nations, led by the United States did everything they could to set up a human catastrophe that we are still paying for to this day. When it comes to the Middle East there should never be any sort of settlement after a coalition of aggressive Arab nations are totally defeated. We already know what happens when the opposite is applied.
    Last edited by Culpeper; 05-26-2007 at 04:31 AM.

  4. #4
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    In my opinion, the war left Arab war refugees that the other Arab countries kept trapped as a thorn in the side of Israel. After the war, Israel did everything it could to protect and provide safe harbor for Jewish refugees in Arab countries. The aggressors of that war should still be made to pay.
    There are any number of scholarly works that refure this simplistic view. No frontline Arab country "trapped" Palestinians. To the contrary, they wanted them either back in Palestine or dispersed. Many took the latter route; may did not. Two civil wars broke out as a result of refugee concentrations. One was in Jordan in 1970; the next was in Lebanon in 1975.

    Historically, that territory was Jewish land before it became Palestine. Theoretically, there is no Palestine and there are no Palestinians. However, there is the original modern day Israel and what the Arab lost as a result of the war that Israel has every right to maintaining as she wish. The Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, and the West Bank shouldn't exist at all with Arab interests.
    If by you mean King Saul and David, there were people there when the Israelites conquered the area. The "no Palestinians" is a long term Zionist propaganda tool that was in play decades before Israel became a country. At ome stage, the Zionist movement claimed there were no people living in the region.

    Neither side wears a white hat in this struggle. To state the the US has left Israel twsting in the wind is absurd.

    Regards,

    Tom

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    129

    Default

    Arab culture has centuries old traditions of raiding, kidnapping, piracy and assassination. Not to mention vicious internal wars. The outcome of the 1967 war may give a target and a rallying cry to Arabs everywhere but in my opinion it didn't create the various foreign and domestic crises that continually assail the middle east. Mind, the occupation of Palestine and Iraq isn't helping anything.

    In my opinion, the Economist article starts from the flawed assumption that there was some opportunity for peace to be wasted. Had Israel withdrawn from the Gaza Strip, West Bank, Sinai and Golan Heights their state would simply have been a better target. Had they thrown out the Palestinians they still would have been assailed by PLO exiles who simply would have had more power in neighboring Lebannon and Jordan. Their current course of action has ended in today's craptastic situation.

    Frankly, I think the concept of "peace" in that region of the world is a little strained. It implies that once Israel and the Palestinians hammer out their differences there will be no fighting and everyone can go back to the natural state of happy and loving coexistence. Actually, in the middle east it appears that peace itself is the unnatural state - simply an unstable pause between wars.

  6. #6
    Council Member Culpeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Roswell, USA
    Posts
    540

    Default

    Simplistic is correct. Keep it simple. Trying to please everyone after the Six Day War was a mistake made by the United Nations and the United States had a heavy hand in the matter. So, it is not absurd. It is a fact. Your tendency to over empathize with the Arabs in this area is a fault and far from scholarly. It is what it is. If you think I'm wrong than how do you suppose all those Arabs ended up staying in the Gaza Strip, West Bank, and so forth to starve. You want Israel to be their welfare state no different than the very countries that tried to destroy Israel to begin with. A coalition of Arab countries, supported and armed by the Soviet Union, tried to destroy Israel. The areas in question were lost by this coalition. The people in these areas needed a name. Palestinian. And that is all it is is a name fore these people are a generation of nothing more than Arab refugees from that war. And you think these Arab countries had no responsibility for these people? Israel should have sent them straight to Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. Israel would still be having a problem but not one concerning occupied territories full of unemployed people that hate them and bent on destroying Israel. I wonder what you thought about Israel immediately after the Six Day War.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •