“Israel is an illegal creation of the United Kingdom!”

[iPakMan]

Israel will be defeated eventually, it's only a matter of time. Palestinians will get their state, insha'Allah.

Yeah keep chasing that magic dragon Mr Prime minister.
And i believe it was 7 jayron, Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Iraq, plus a few Militias.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Yeah keep chasing that magic dragon Mr Prime minister.
And i believe it was 7 jayron, Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Iraq, plus a few Militias.

 

[American Eagle]

The original UN Resolution 181 provided for equal states of Palestine and Israel, with an International City of Jerusalem to be administered in a neutral fashion. Thanks to ill advised pre, during, and post WWII Muslim League ideology most Muslim nations in 1947 voted against the establishment of Palestine when the voted against the establishment of Israel, as both were covered by the same, singular Resolution.

In 1967 the old leadership of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria foolishly attacked Isael, and were disasterously defeated. These nations then lost more land to Israel as a consequence of that war.

Today the UN, together with Egypt and Jordan, as well as Saudi Arabia, are urging the establishment of the nation of Palestine, still...and some of the same old Nazi-era anti-Semitism, some now passed down generationally, still suffocates the chance for a new nation of Palestine to be born once and for all.

This is one of the most convoluted issues of our time. Some on this site seem to think one side or the other "will win." That is untrue and an unhelpful and fruitless tact to follow.

I am personally opposed to Israeli expansionist settlements which were once stalled, but are on again it seems. But I still, as do most Americans, stand up for the right to Israel to exist, and I also stand up for the right for a new nation of Palestine to exist, peacefully, not with a bunch of revenge oriented hotheads...but focused in a new way of life for the Palestinians, who are both Muslims and Christians, to be sure we don't loose that focus.

There are many brilliant young minds in what can be formalized into the nation of Palestine, whose health, welfare, and education, without being taught intolerance and religious hatred, deserve a good future. I am always on the side of the youth of any nation for them to have a better future, with a secular eduation and freedom to choose whatever religion they might choose to freely affiliate with.

 

[iPakMan]

lol i meant to say And i believe it was 7 jayron: Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Iraq, plus a few Militias.
haha that was kinda funny though

 

[iPakMan]

The original UN Resolution 181 provided for equal states of Palestine and Israel, with an International City of Jerusalem to be administered in a neutral fashion. Thanks to ill advised pre, during, and post WWII Muslim League ideology most Muslim nations in 1947 voted against the establishment of Palestine when the voted against the establishment of Israel, as both were covered by the same, singular Resolution.

In 1967 the old leadership of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria foolishly attacked Isael, and were disasterously defeated. These nations then lost more land to Israel as a consequence of that war.

Today the UN, together with Egypt and Jordan, as well as Saudi Arabia, are urging the establishment of the nation of Palestine, still...and some of the same old Nazi-era anti-Semitism, some now passed down generationally, still suffocates the chance for a new nation of Palestine to be born once and for all.

This is one of the most convoluted issues of our time. Some on this site seem to think one side or the other "will win." That is untrue and an unhelpful and fruitless tact to follow.

I am personally opposed to Israeli expansionist settlements which were once stalled, but are on again it seems. But I still, as do most Americans, stand up for the right to Israel to exist, and I also stand up for the right for a new nation of Palestine to exist, peacefully, not with a bunch of revenge oriented hotheads...but focused in a new way of life for the Palestinians, who are both Muslims and Christians, to be sure we don't loose that focus.

There are many brilliant young minds in what can be formalized into the nation of Palestine, whose health, welfare, and education, without being taught intolerance and religious hatred, deserve a good future. I am always on the side of the youth of any nation for them to have a better future, with a secular eduation and freedom to choose whatever religion they might choose to freely affiliate with.

And yet leaders within the PA name streets after Martyrs who killed thousands of Men Women and Children through the decades, teach children to hate Israel and not once have they said if the Arab League were willing, it too would attempt to destroy Israel just recently. And mind you this is the "moderate" regime as opposed to Hamas: The bigger Israeli lovers.

 

[Tang0]

And yet leaders within the PA name streets after Martyrs who killed thousands of Men Women and Children through the decades, teach children to hate Israel and not once have they said if the Arab League were willing, it too would attempt to destroy Israel just recently. And mind you this is the "moderate" regime as opposed to Hamas: The bigger Israeli lovers.

And streets and institutions within Israel are named after the generals and politicians who's disproportionate responses to terrorism have killed thousands of innocent civilians, destroyed the infrastructure of multiple countries, and doomed hundreds of thousands to poverty without hope of an economic future. Around and around it goes, for generations and generations of fruitless hate, with the world powers on the sidelines keeping either side from instituting a "Final Solution"...

I hope some sane young people on both sides of the fence get together and mutually agree that their parents are nuts, and the governments of both nations get the boot...

 

[iPakMan]

And streets and institutions within Israel are named after the generals and politicians who's disproportionate responses to terrorism have killed thousands of innocent civilians, destroyed the infrastructure of multiple countries, and doomed hundreds of thousands to poverty without hope of an economic future. Around and around it goes, for generations and generations of fruitless hate, with the world powers on the sidelines keeping either side from instituting a "Final Solution"...

I hope some sane young people on both sides of the fence get together and mutually agree that their parents are nuts, and the governments of both nations get the boot...

Generals and politicians who Defended their country. Arabs have doomed themselves to poverty and misery, for daring and daring to attack Israel just to fail again and again. We do not target civilians in fact we are too humane, if you look into the Gaza war you`ll find that Israel actually spent millions in Dropping Leaflets in Gaza Pre-warning them of an attack. Which in my eyes was a mistake, obviously the targets escaped and civilians stayed just to die and kill their children to become "Shahids".

 

[T-Rex]

........ We do not target civilians in fact we are too humane,......

What you say are lies because this is what you said in one of your posts "Hi tech weapons are used to decrease casualties among Palestinian civilians". Do you think you can lie your way out of here?

 

[Developereo]

Not even close. The entirety of the America's were conquered by western nations and their original inhabitants genocidaly massacred. Mass migrations and genocide followed the creation of many states in Africa after the colonial powers left. The mass movements that followed the creation of India and Pakistan don't need to be belabored by me. Suffice to say, moving in and killing all the locals has a long, long, history, stretching back to before imperial Rome.

This is not the issue under debate. We all acknowledge that colonization and mass expulsions have happened throughout history. The land of Palestine has been home to Hittites, Babylonians, Syrians, Egyptians, Hebrews, Arabs and others throughout history. In all the examples you gave, in every other country on the planet, when the modern state was created, it belonged to the people physically present on the land at the time of creation. Even in Africa, when the colonial powers bestowed independence, they gave it to the people living there -- if those people wanted to realign themselves along ethnic lines, that was their own choice afterwards.

Israel is the only exception to this rule. It was created as a vacuum state, expecting its eventual population to be shipped in after its creation.

The central issue here is whether the creation of a "Jewish" state in Palestine at the turn of the 20th century was justified. It was not. By no stretch of the imagination can anybody justify creating a state for 3% of the population, expecting the remaining 97% to pack up and leave to make room for the eventual arrival of the "preferred" inhabitants.

Umm not really, it would be more like declaring in the 40's that a certain region comprising mostly of one religion or another be separated from the surrounding land and given autonomy. Then, following that, wars and general uncertainty caused mass migrations and displacement.....Wait a second....That sounds exactly like the creation of another state we might have both heard of!?

Wrong analogy. Pakistan was created to encompass areas which were majority Muslim at the time -- not three decads later, not in some future timeframe. The proper analogy is to declare India a Sikh state and expect all non-Sikhs to pack up and leave India.

I don't really approve of Israel, or many of its current tactics, but if I were in their shoes I would have done most of the same things. It was originally 40% of its current size, with only a small majority of Jewish citizens. The mandate called for an independent democratic state, the result may have been a "Jewish" state, but it was just as likely to be secular.

No, sir. The Zionist manifesto, and the Balfour Declaration, both call for a "Jewish" state. A state where every Jew on the planet is automatically a citizen and non-Jews are expected to be a minority at best.

The problem is that all the surrounding states (Which had just so happened to side with the genocidal NAZIS in the recent war) decided the new state was a cancer, and decided to launch another genocidal conflict, since ya know, the world had not seen enough of that lately.

Ah, the Nazi canard again....
Let's review the history: Starting late 19th century, when the Zionist manifesto was devised, Jews start migrating to Palestine with the pre-determined aim of establishing a Jewish state. The Arabs, unaware of the ulterior motive, welcome the Jews and give them refuge from European persecution. Even through WW1, the Arabs haven't caught on the Zionists' plan. It is only after the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and massive Jewish migration coupled with Jewsih terrorist attacks on Arabs, that the Arabs finally realize they've been duped by the Zionsts. It is only at that point that the Arabs find cause with the common enemy.

The Palestinians decided (Wisely) to avoid the war zone, hoping the war would be over fairly quickly.

Yet another Israeli lie. Even Israeli historian now acknowledge that the Arabs did not leave volunatarily, but were forcibly evicted from Israel.

1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Israel opened up part of its archives in the 1980s for investigation by historians [...] Pappé calls the exodus an ethnic cleansing and points at Zionist preparations in the preceding years and provides more details on the planning process by a group he calls the 'Consultancy'.[15] Morris also says that ethnic cleansing took place during the Palestinian exodus, though Morris considers that to have been justified. In an interview with Ari Shavit, Morris says that "there are circumstances in history that justify ethnic cleansing. … when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide—the annihilation of your people—I prefer ethnic cleansing."

The Israelis decided (cruelly, but wisely) to not let floods of armed and angry refugees back in.

No, they are not allowed to return because this was the plan all along. They are not allowed, purely and simply, because they are not Jewish. Their return will destroy the Jewish nature of Israel, which has been the primary raison d'etre of Israel from day one.

So, let me put it this way to you. Let us assume you are the citizen in a newly created tiny dot of a state in the center of a vast desert. Recently, your ethnic group barely survived a concerted attempt to destroy it.

But this begs the question in the first place: was there any justification for Isreal's creation in Palestine? It was the Europeans who persecuted Jews' for centuries (and the Arabs who gave them refuge). It was the Germans who executed the Holocaust. It was the Americans who felt guilty about the whole thing. Any of these countries should carve out a piece of their land and give it to the Jews.

Why should the Palestinians pay the price for the Europeans' crimes and the Americans' guilt? It's easy to be compassionate when someone else is paying the price.

But do you really expect to win any sympathy with the "They have no right to continue breathing" argument though?

Nobody wants the Jews to stop breathing. They just want them to breathe somewhere else. As stated above, let the compassionate Europeans and Americans (and Indians) find some empty land for the poor, victimzed Jews.

If Israel is an illegal state because the neighboring countries don't like it's existence, than Pakistan is an illegal state because India does not approve of it's existence. You can make similar arguments about the various Hindu and Muslim refugees that immigrated from both countries.

This is a nonsensical statement. Just stringing together words does not make a sentence meaningful.

The big difference between Israel-Arab and Pakistan-India divisions, is that in the case of India and Pakistan, the refugees had a pretty good idea they were not going back to their former homes, and made new homes in the new countries. The Palestinians on the other hand, were rejected by both Israel and their Arab neighbors... I feel sorry for them, but I think the blame is as easy to assign to the surrounding nations as it is to Israel itself.

No, the big difference is that Muslims were already the majority in the lands that became Pakistan; they didn't have to be shipped in from elsewhere. Whatever migrations happened did so because of ethnic strife, not to rig the demographics post facto.

 

[bc040400065]

Whoa! This is really ignorant stuff. I really wonder what the point is in educating y'all if no Pakistani can say, "Israel is a legal and legitimate state" without fear of being murdered. In that case, the polite thing to do is for moderators to acknowledge the limitation by deleting such embarrassing threads, is that not so?

If I'm wrong about this - let's see some Pakistanis here do their own research. You can't discover truth unless you evaluate evidence both pro- and con-.

Your perception about pakistan is really biased and based on media propaganda. pakistan is not a arab country, nor iran, We can say what ever we feel. Example, Nothing happened at the reports of Pakistan's FM's meeting with Isreali FM during Musharaf time in turkey. That FM i.e. Khursheed Qasori is stil alive and lives a peaceful life and is active in politics even now. Nothing wrong happened with him.
and you better stop defending isreal because palestines are also human being and that is their land and isreal occupied their land and forced them out.

 

[Developereo]

Perhaps I can politely point out

I might argue that no-one was certain who would prevail in the conflict that followed the creation of Israel.

Rather than correcting the inaccuracies in these posts, I would recommend that people watch the BBC documentary I posted in post #17. Everything is explained and, even better, documented in that program.

 

[Veritas]

Anti-sematism is live and well in this forum, along with Anti-Hinduism, may god bless you all.

 

[W.11]

Same thing could be said about pakistan

a bharti in bengla disguise??, woow

 

[iPakMan]

This is not the issue under debate. We all acknowledge that colonization and mass expulsions have happened throughout history. The land of Palestine has been home to Hittites, Babylonians, Syrians, Egyptians, Hebrews, Arabs and others throughout history. In all the examples you gave, in every other country on the planet, when the modern state was created, it belonged to the people physically present on the land at the time of creation. Even in Africa, when the colonial powers bestowed independence, they gave it to the people living there -- if those people wanted to realign themselves along ethnic lines, that was their own choice afterwards.

Israel is the only exception to this rule. It was created as a vacuum state, expecting its eventual population to be shipped in after its creation.

The central issue here is whether the creation of a "Jewish" state in Palestine at the turn of the 20th century was justified. It was not. By no stretch of the imagination can anybody justify creating a state for 3% of the population, expecting the remaining 97% to pack up and leave to make room for the eventual arrival of the "preferred" inhabitants.



Wrong analogy. Pakistan was created to encompass areas which were majority Muslim at the time -- not three decads later, not in some future timeframe. The proper analogy is to declare India a Sikh state and expect all non-Sikhs to pack up and leave India.



No, sir. The Zionist manifesto, and the Balfour Declaration, both call for a "Jewish" state. A state where every Jew on the planet is automatically a citizen and non-Jews are expected to be a minority at best.



Ah, the Nazi canard again....
Let's review the history: Starting late 19th century, when the Zionist manifesto was devised, Jews start migrating to Palestine with the pre-determined aim of establishing a Jewish state. The Arabs, unaware of the ulterior motive, welcome the Jews and give them refuge from European persecution. Even through WW1, the Arabs haven't caught on the Zionists' plan. It is only after the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and massive Jewish migration coupled with Jewsih terrorist attacks on Arabs, that the Arabs finally realize they've been duped by the Zionsts. It is only at that point that the Arabs find cause with the common enemy.



Yet another Israeli lie. Even Israeli historian now acknowledge that the Arabs did not leave volunatarily, but were forcibly evicted from Israel.

1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Israel opened up part of its archives in the 1980s for investigation by historians [...] Pappé calls the exodus an ethnic cleansing and points at Zionist preparations in the preceding years and provides more details on the planning process by a group he calls the 'Consultancy'.[15] Morris also says that ethnic cleansing took place during the Palestinian exodus, though Morris considers that to have been justified. In an interview with Ari Shavit, Morris says that "there are circumstances in history that justify ethnic cleansing. … when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide—the annihilation of your people—I prefer ethnic cleansing."



No, they are not allowed to return because this was the plan all along. They are not allowed, purely and simply, because they are not Jewish. Their return will destroy the Jewish nature of Israel, which has been the primary raison d'etre of Israel from day one.



But this begs the question in the first place: was there any justification for Isreal's creation in Palestine? It was the Europeans who persecuted Jews' for centuries (and the Arabs who gave them refuge). It was the Germans who executed the Holocaust. It was the Americans who felt guilty about the whole thing. Any of these countries should carve out a piece of their land and give it to the Jews.

Why should the Palestinians pay the price for the Europeans' crimes and the Americans' guilt? It's easy to be compassionate when someone else is paying the price.



Nobody wants the Jews to stop breathing. They just want them to breathe somewhere else. As stated above, let the compassionate Europeans and Americans (and Indians) find some empty land for the poor, victimzed Jews.



This is a nonsensical statement. Just stringing together words does not make a sentence meaningful.

No, the big difference is that Muslims were already the majority in the lands that became Pakistan; they didn't have to be shipped in from elsewhere. Whatever migrations happened did so because of ethnic strife, not to rig the demographics post facto.

Ohh yes, Jews under Islam had it great.

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

In 1839, in the eastern Persian city of Meshed, a mob burst into the Jewish Quarter, burned the synagogue, and destroyed the Torah scrolls. It was only by forcible conversion that a massacre was averted.[28] There was another massacre in Barfurush in 1867.[29][30] In 1839, the Allahdad incident, the Jews of Mashhad, Iran, now known as the Mashhadi Jews, were coerced into converting to Islam.[31]

In the middle of the 19th century, J. J. Benjamin wrote about the life of Persian Jews:

"…they are obliged to live in a separate part of town…; for they are considered as unclean creatures… Under the pretext of their being unclean, they are treated with the greatest severity and should they enter a street, inhabited by Mussulmans, they are pelted by the boys and mobs with stones and dirt… For the same reason, they are prohibited to go out when it rains; for it is said the rain would wash dirt off them, which would sully the feet of the Mussulmans… If a Jew is recognized as such in the streets, he is subjected to the greatest insults. The passers-by spit in his face, and sometimes beat him… unmercifully… If a Jew enters a shop for anything, he is forbidden to inspect the goods… Should his hand incautiously touch the goods, he must take them at any price the seller chooses to ask for them... Sometimes the Persians intrude into the dwellings of the Jews and take possession of whatever please them. Should the owner make the least opposition in defense of his property, he incurs the danger of atoning for it with his life... If... a Jew shows himself in the street during the three days of the Katel (Muharram)…, he is sure to be murdered."[32]

In 1840, the Jews of Damascus were falsely accused of having murdered a Christian monk and his Muslim servant and of having used their blood to bake Passover bread.[33] A Jewish barber was tortured until he "confessed"; two other Jews who were arrested died under torture, while a third converted to Islam to save his life. Throughout the 1860s, the Jews of Libya were subjected to what Gilbert calls punitive taxation. In 1864, around 500 Jews were killed in Marrakech and Fez in Morocco. In 1869, 18 Jews were killed in Tunis, and an Arab mob looted Jewish homes and stores, and burned synagogues, on Jerba Island. In 1875, 20 Jews were killed by a mob in Demnat, Morocco; elsewhere in Morocco, Jews were attacked and killed in the streets in broad daylight. In 1897, synagogues were ransacked and Jews were murdered in Tripolitania.

 

[iPakMan]

What you say are lies because this is what you said in one of your posts "Hi tech weapons are used to decrease casualties among Palestinian civilians". Do you think you can lie your way out of here?

That was 500. And what he/she said is true, it does reduce Civilian casualties. But when a father holds his daughter above his head, she is bound to die don`t you agree?