Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 80

Thread: Israeli-Arab Wars and Palestinian Population Displacement

  1. #21
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam L View Post
    Egypt would not have put up with them. This is part of what stopped the peace talks in the 90's. Gaza does not want to be part of or deal with Egypt.
    Not really--no one really considered Egyptian control over Gaza (or Jordanian control over the West Bank) as part of a possible deal. Instead, the entire thrust of the peace process from the Oslo Agreement in 1993 onwards was Palestinian self-determination in the West Bank and Gaza.

    They came very, very close to this in 2000-01, but all three parties (US/Israel/Palestinians) made major errors that scuppered the negotiations and seriously damaged the prospects for peace any time in the immediate future.

    ....no body cares about the Palestinians in reality. Frankly, most Middle Eastern countries want there to be more conflict, it puts stock in their hatred of the Israelies.
    I don't agree--I don't think many ME regimes are served well by the continuation of the conflict. The public salience of the Palestinian question has declined over the years, but it is still an emotive issue as virtually all the polling data (another one here) suggests.

    Palestinians, those in charge, don't want it to get better because they will no longer have a job and the they will start fighting amongst themselves.
    I don't agree here either--whatever his domestic constraints weaknesses as a leader, I think Abu Mazen very much wants to achieve peace. Indeed, the usual Israeli criticism of is not that he wants conflict, but that he can't deliver implementation of an agreement.

  2. #22
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    I don't agree--I don't think many ME regimes are served well by the continuation of the conflict. The public salience of the Palestinian question has declined over the years, but it is still an emotive issue as virtually all the polling data (another one here) suggests.
    Yes, people emote on the issue, but its more like a lot of rich northern liberals. They love every "Black" issue and support them, while personally they don't really give a damn or like them and just want the "status" and their own little cause to champion. Also, a lot of Middle Easterners don't like the Palestinians. They do when it comes to politics, but they don't want anything to do with them. As far as the "ME regimes" are concerned, no it doesned serve them well, but they certainly like having the Palestinian issue on their side when it comes to blaming the West for being in the Middle East. Remember these guys will cut off thier nose despite their face, literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    I don't agree here either--whatever his domestic constraints weaknesses as a leader, I think Abu Mazen very much wants to achieve peace. Indeed, the usual Israeli criticism of is not that he wants conflict, but that he can't deliver implementation of an agreement.
    First, I wasn't quite saying that about all leaders, but I was about most.
    ALso, what about the recent Palestinian vs. Palestinian skirmishes in Gaza and the West Bank. Look at history, almost every group that emerges from years of foreign control almsot immediately runs into civil violence issues. Lets say the Israelis do pull out and leave them alone. This new Palestinian state will still be poor and uneducated. It won't be much better off than its current state nor what it would have developed into if nothing had been taken in '67 or even '48. They are on a piece of land with no significant value, and they lack the education and eperiences the Israelies had (a lot of Europes intelligencia) when they became a country. Look at Eastern Germany and the chaos it is still in, and they were western (sort of) before being occupied.

    Adam

  3. #23
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Southport NC
    Posts
    48

    Default Some reading material for anyone interested.

    Understanding the basics are usually important.
    The basics are that only when Israelis settle in Israel do Arabs care anything about it.
    Jerusalem is not even mentioned in the Koran. It states “nearest mosque” (there were no mosques in Israel at the time) Which is actually in Medina.

    The simple fact is, those who are called “palestinians” today have no right to that land at all.

    Israel was deserted at the first part of the 19th century.
    http://www.eretzyisroel.org/%7Edhershkowitz/ Photos of pre-Israeli state 19th century

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=79d_1184884637 A little movie.

    http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001137.html Totten

    Myth of Palestine:
    http://www.allthingsbeautiful.com/al...th_of_pal.html
    Which states”
    1. Palestine was a British invention after WWI and never existed as an independent state. Most of this "Palestine" is called Jordan today.
    2. The small number of people (700,000) occupied the entire Palestine Mandate which included Israel, the West Bank, Golon Heights, Gaza and Jordan today. Most of the Arab populations lived East of the Jordan River.
    3. The common usage of the word "Palestinian" refers to people who live in Palestine: Arabs (a "mixed race of Arabic speaking peoples"), Bedouins, Christians, Druze, and Jews.
    4. Under Muslim rule the region had been reduced to a barren wasteland. Jews were the only people that produced anything causing resentment from the masses of illiterate and poverty-ridden Arabs. Jews never held any political power until 1948.
    5. The British didn't want a Jewish majority in the region. This led in later years to a policy of systematically reduced immigration quotas, and indirectly to the death of millions of Jewish refugees in Europe twenty some years later. The British would illegally partition the region into Jordan, (forbidding Jews from living there) then stripped off the Golon Heights giving that to France and Syria. Calling the remainder "Palestine" then flooding it with outside Arabs.
    6. Constant agitation by outside Arabs and others leading to riots and murders of Jews. The British did nothing to stop this. Immigration and travel restrictions were almost universally applied only to Jews, no restriction was placed on Arab immigration to help flood the region with Arabs the British favored. Jews were the only economic success even with all of this going on.
    7. Whenever there were Arab riots, Jewish immigration was restricted. This was the beginning of the British Policy of Appeasement, and the success of terrorism. The success of terrorism goes on today and appeasement still fails today. When will they ever learn?
    8. All lands acquired by Jews were purchased, not taken according to Arafat's Nazi Uncle in 1937 and the British. Haj Amin al-Husseini was a Nazi war criminal wanted in Yugoslavia and mixed Nazi ideology into Islam. Arafat in fact wasn't even a Palestinian, but was born, raised, and educated in Egypt. According to Forbes, his estate is estimated to be worth over $300 million while he locked his own people into concentration camps.
    9. Between 1950 and 1967 when Jordan and Egypt annexed the West Bank and Gaza, they flooded the area with more Arabs. Even today most Arabs in the West Bank, etc. hold Jordanian passports and Jordanian citizenship. After 1967 Jordan/Egypt relinquished claims to the area then started to scream for a second Palestinian state in addition to the first Palestinian State of Jordan. Before that, they claimed Palestine meant land of the Jews.
    10. Even with immigration from Russia in the 1990's, the majority of Israelis are descended from Arab, Asian, and African Jews including two-thirds of the 870,000 Arab Jews expelled from surrounding Arab Nazi states. Druze, Bedouins, Christians, and some Arabs sided with the Jews in 1948 and serve in the Israeli Army today. The Israeli military has three Arab generals.
    11. Why did the British do this? It's about oil, stupid! Britian didn't give a damn about Arabs or Jews. Just like America today ignores Saudi terrorism it's still about oil.”

    And part 2:
    http://www.allthingsbeautiful.com/al...th_of_pal.html

    Additional:

    http://www.sullivan-county.com/id3/palestine.htm

    http://www.richardwebster.net/israelpalestine.html

    http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2006/0...t-of-land.html

    Hopefully, this helps with understanding the land rights issue.

  4. #24
    Council Member tequila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    1,665

    Default

    It certainly helps to understand that such old-school Jabotinskyist tropes are still in fashion among certain types. No doubt some people in Georgia probably still believe the Cherokees left due to the charms of Oklahoma, or perhaps because they foresaw the future glories of Sooner football.

  5. #25
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tequila View Post
    It certainly helps to understand that such old-school Jabotinskyist tropes are still in fashion among certain types. No doubt some people in Georgia probably still believe the Cherokees left due to the charms of Oklahoma, or perhaps because they foresaw the future glories of Sooner football.
    Agreed, mate.

    The simple fact is, those who are called “palestinians” today have no right to that land at all.

    Israel was deserted at the first part of the 19th century.
    All those years in grad school wasted. Why didn't my professors let me in on such revelations?

    Tom

  6. #26
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Cut and paste jobs from biased web sources never help anything....and that's "understanding the basics." Informed debate and discussion is one thing...and a good thing.

    Let's hope we don't see this again.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  7. #27
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    717

    Thumbs down I got a bit of a shock when this arrived in my E-Mail...

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Blair View Post
    Cut and paste jobs from biased web sources never help anything....and that's "understanding the basics." Informed debate and discussion is one thing...and a good thing.

    Let's hope we don't see this again.
    I second that.

    It was a tad unsettling to come across this.
    Last edited by Norfolk; 12-28-2007 at 10:40 PM.

  8. #28
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    Council member Rex Brynen, writing for Chatham House this month:

    Past as Prelude: Negotiating the Palestinian Refugee Issue
    Summary points

    - The question of Palestinian refugees has long been one of the most difficult issues in dispute in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. With the onset of renewed peace talks following the Annapolis summit of November 2007, it is once again an issue that the Israeli and Palestinian negotiators must address.

    - The two sides are in a worse position to resolve the issue than they were during the last rounds of permanent status negotiations in 2000–01. The political weakness of the Israeli and Palestinian governments is compounded by heightened mistrust between the two societies, as well as by a hardening of Israeli public attitudes against even the symbolic return of any refugees to Israeli territory.

    - There is now a substantial accumulated body of work on the Palestinian refugee issue to guide and inform negotiators and policy-makers. This includes past official negotiations among the key parties, wider discussions among regional states and the international donor community, unofficial and Track II initiatives and a considerable body of technical analysis.
    CH offers up another view: Israeli Perspectives on the Palestinian Refugee Issue
    Summary Points

    - At the beginning of the Oslo Process the greatest challenge was the question of Palestinian statehood; negotiation of the refugee issue was postponed until the later stages. Over a decade later, Palestinian statehood is generally accepted as a given, and the refugee issue has taken centre stage.

    - The Israeli perspective, from a leadership standpoint, is seemingly characterized by a sense of being overwhelmed, owing to the complexity of elements making up the refugee issue, the multiplicity of actors involved, and a heightened sense of uncertainty as to the consequences of any negotiated settlement.

    - More strategic work is needed at the political and policy-making level to determine the resolution level required for the agreement itself. Much of the detail involved will have to be developed outside the main negotiation framework.

    - More research and strategy development work is needed concerning the Israeli public domain, to assess existing attitudes and possible avenues for widening the public discourse. To this end, the Israeli media should also be encouraged to present the different debates and elements of the issue.

    - There is a need for an international task force of leading experts working alongside the negotiation process and translating both sides' strategic options into operational frameworks. Such support could ease the load on the actual negotiating parties, thereby facilitating the decision-making process.

  9. #29
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Split between Brooklyn, Manhattan, Fairport New York
    Posts
    10

    Default Idigenous people are invisible to the Colonists

    To Herzl and the millions of Zionists who have followed him, the Palestinians were invisible, simply because their existence did not matter. The very idea that indigenous people mattered at all did not come into currency in the capitols of the Western World, until it became apparent in the Cold War that their "hearts and minds" mattered...except in the case of Palestinians.

    The 2-state solution is at best a bridge to a stable state. Stability will not be achieved until there is but one state: either a United State of Israel and Palestine, which would be two homelands comingled in one country and sharing the governance of the same; or a Jewish state with all Arabs removed or killed, who were once affiliated with the land called Palestine.

    I do not believe that the Zionists will be allowed by the rest of the world to complete their intention to eradicate "Palestine" and to submerge the remnants of Palestinians into the larger genre called 'Arabs'. Of course, the Zionists are counting on the brute force of American military and economic power to cower the rest of the world into accepting whatever fate they eventually decide for the Palestinians. But, as long as the Palestinians have sponsors and supporters beyond the refugee camps and Occupied Territories, it will be difficult if not impossible for brute force to ultimately succeed.

  10. #30
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default simulated Palestinian refugee negotiations

    In June, I helped organize and run three days of simulated Palestinian-Israeli negotiations on the refugee issue for Chatham House (Royal Institute of International Affairs) in the UK. This involved some 35 former and current officials (Israeli, Palestinian, Jordanian, Lebanese, US and others) and technical experts.

    The simulation report is here, and the full project description can be found here.

    We held it here (complete with bar open well past midnight):



    There are times I do love my job

  11. #31
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    CH, 11 Feb 09: The Palestinian Refugee Issue: A Palestinian Perspective
    Summary Points

    - The quest of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes is not only a legal and moral right but has become a major part of Palestinian identity and symbolizes Palestinian historical narratives. It has been an effective instrument of mobilization that became the political priority of various resistance groups which later formed the Palestine Liberation Organization.

    - The PLO embarked on a line of negotiation which sought to reconcile rightist and realist approaches. They sought acknowledgment by Israel of its responsibility for the refugee issue and acceptance in principle of their right of return while showing flexibility and readiness to discuss various formulations of return.

    - At the core of the inter-Palestinian debate is the dynamic between the two objectives of achieving statehood and the resolution of the refugee issue. State-building came to be seen not only as a means of reconstructing Palestinian identity but also as a catalyst to resolution of the refugee issue.

    - A peace agreement should widen the options for the refugees and address all aspects of the refugee issue including the rights of repatriation to Israel, return to a Palestinian state, compensation, and equality and full citizenship rights in countries where refugees choose to remain.

    - A comprehensive peace agreement must include the regional aspects of the refugee issue and all regional actors.

    - There is an urgent need to review the current format of negotiations and bring about more balanced and effective international political engagement in the bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

  12. #32
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    CH, Apr 09: Palestinian Refugees: The Regional Perspective
    Summary Points

    • Chatham House’s work on the Palestinian Refugee issue, known as the Minster Lovell Process, looks beyond the narrow Israeli-PLO bilateral negotiations and provides a critical regional perspective. It is inclusive of the host countries and the refugees, bridging regional communication gaps and involving international stakeholders.

    • Refugees and host countries will have no legal obligation to go along with the results of a process in which they have no part and which are likely to leave them worse off than before. The political costs of difficult compromises may also be too heavy to bear for any of the stakeholders.

    • Negotiators have reached agreements that they cannot sell to their own people. They have been one step away from a solution but this is a major step involving issues such as right of return of refugees, acknowledgment of responsibility and reconciling narratives. The internal debate on each side is as complex as the differences between them. In addition both sides in the conflict have to contend with the views of an international diaspora.

    • Should an agreement be reached, the landscape will look radically different. The parties, both local and international, have barely anticipated many of the problems of implementing an agreement. In addition, the regional perspective changes the equation – one cannot talk of permanent resettlement activities given that the distances involved are comparable to that of an average Western commute.

  13. #33
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default UNRWA at 60

    UNRWA And Palestine Refugees: Drawing Lessons From 60 Years Of Service

    Date: September 25, 2009 from 1:30 pm to 5:00 pm EDT
    Location: Columbia University
    Morningside Campus
    Casa Italiana
    Contact: For further information regarding this event, please contact Leia Reisner by sending email to lrr2131@columbia.edu .

    The United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for Palestine Refugees and the Middle East Institute of Columbia University present a Symposium entitled, "UNRWA and Palestine Refugees: Drawing Lessons from 60 Years of Service," to mark the 60th anniversary of UNRWA's creation.
    Full program here.
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


  14. #34
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    19

    Default

    New to site so don't get uppitty about this

    as one who served Palestine 1945/48 clear a few things first up to 1945 Arabs and Jewish people lived cheek to cheek in towns, villages all over the country (1945/46) AMERICAN JEWS started pushing Britain for survivers of camps to go to Palestine. Britain being mandatory power by act of league of nations refused this. America pushed monies into Palestinian Jews to enable this to take place All Jewish people whe survived camps to go to promised land Isreali forces did not push Arab people from lands the arab people choose to go fallowing their leaders advice. Think you will find that most Jewish Settlements were built to protect the main targets. Never has Isreali's forces attacked a Arab village unless in self defence. I know a lot of books has been written concerning this conflict, ( BUT ) i think you will find these books were written by people who were not born at said time. Also you will find that a Jewish Brigade that was armed in 1940 by Britain and fought with British army in western desert and Italy, who were posted back to Eygpt in 1946 deserted taking all, weapons vehicles to Palestine to form frame work of Isreali forces

    FOR TRUE STORY find the book ( FORGOTTEN CONSCRIPTS ) by Eric Lowe
    Last edited by serviceman; 11-28-2009 at 02:02 PM. Reason: a few ....

  15. #35
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    Serviceman,

    A warning and a welcome:

    Warning: don't start by telling everyone to not get uppity. You are not the only one with an opinion on the Middle East in general or the Arab-Israeli issue specifically. Moreover you are not the only one with time on the ground so I recommend that you follow your own advice and avoid confusing opinion with fact.

    Welcome. Recommend you introduce yourself

    Tom

    Moderator

  16. #36
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by serviceman View Post
    Think a lot of trouble in Isreali is caused by out side interference
    Serviceman,

    I live in Israel. My current family spans those held in British prisons, as Jewish Terrorists, to those British Arabists who opposed the creation of the modern state of Israel - so please don't assume you have some superior knowledge of the issues. It ain't true and it doesn't help.

    While I agree with some of your observations, you're being a bit too black and white. For example, Beit-Shean valley was pretty cleared "pre-emptively" as opposed to true "self-defence." - and you can run out breath arguing about Deir-Yassin, and a few other forgotten villages.

    They have three versions of history here in Israel. "Ours, yours and theirs."
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  17. #37
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    19

    Default Isreal

    Sir may i ask your age in this matter i was there when Isreali was born in May 1948 I admire what the Jewish people did with (as you may say a desert) The Jewish people were getting their homeland as early as 1946, they were not prepared to wait terrorist get nothing or were they trying to grab all British bases intact and why did a peace keeping force have to suffer so many casualities. May i also ask you to visit the cemeteries at Khayat Beach and Remlech. As i say i admired what the Jewish people did before and after 1945/48, but the three years between sticks with me. all these people from America,Britain who do all the shouting about the Arab people getting pushed out of here and there are not helping things
    Last edited by serviceman; 11-28-2009 at 03:11 PM. Reason: add

  18. #38
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    19

    Default

    As you say about some General stateing there job in Malaya. that was not the British armies job in Isreal, mistakes were made on both sides. The troops there were curtailed in actions, retaliate if ???

  19. #39
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by serviceman View Post
    Sir may i ask your age in this matter
    I'm a pretty good looking 46.
    The Jewish people were getting their homeland as early as 1946,
    I think Moses would quibble with that and negotiations with the British Government began as early as 1923.
    May i also ask you to visit the cemeteries at Khayat Beach and Remlech.
    I've visited the one in Haifa, and I know the one in Ramleh.
    all these people from America,Britain who do all the shouting about the Arab people getting pushed out of here and there are not helping things.
    If you are telling me that ignorance of the roots of the Arab-Israeli conflict is an extremely sever problem, then I can agree, but some people did get pushed out, ( Lod and Haifa for example ) and a far greater number left of their own accord. A great many stayed. I can see Arab villages from where I write this.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  20. #40
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    I'd just like clarify something: I didn't start this thread. My post at the beginning was actually made on this thread, if memory serves me right, that discussed various small wars and I wondered by the ongoing Palestinian struggle against Israel was not included. Being a relative newcomer to the site at the time, I made a rather poorly worded, quickly typed response, not realizing that I would be assumed to be advocating genocide when merely exaggerating...

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    Seems to be me that the Palestinians have very effectively managed to leverage every non-lethal asset available to deter Israel from simply wiping the Palestinians from the planet, which Israeli could have (and probably should have) done long ago, while gaining significant concessions from the Israelis.
    This was clarified...

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    Regarding the phrase in question, for clarification, it would have been better to state that Israel could have (and, with their nat'l security interests in mind, probably should have) stomped the Palestinian resistance/terrorists/insurgents into submission long ago. Kind of like how I was gloating last week that the Patriots slaughtered every team that they've faced this season, but those teams are all very much alive.
    Just wanted to throw that out there because the absence of context makes this look kind of odd. Upon reading this 2+ year old thread, I was scratching my head for a while wondering why/when I wrote this until I finally jogged my memory.

    Only on the internet do I need to assure people that I am not in favor of genocide.

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
  •