Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The UN mandate expired. And certainly those that lived there [the 48% Arab population] had as (or should have) had as much say as the 52% of the population that was Jewish.
Lets keep in mind the Palestinian portion of the UN partition plan was a minority of the land despite being an overwhelming majority of the population.
What do you mean the UN Mandate expired?
The Palestinians have no legal claims or entitlement to the land they call Israel in their entirety. The Arab bloc rejected UNGA 181 on behalf of their Palestinians and chose war instead of a state. The Palestinian movement really began in the 1970's in opposition of Zionism and not in 1949. But since you have the ball in this one on one, lets start a Q&A.
1) Why did the original PLO Charter of 1964 Article 24 express no sovereignty over the West Bank and Gaza?
2) Why did Jordan and Egypt occupy the 'Palestinian Arabs' between 1949 and 1967 and failed to champion a Palestinian State?
3) Why did the Arabs reject UNGA 181 and fight a regional war instead of statecraft?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWiseWino
I note that you didn't capitalize "supreme council" which speaks volumes regarding their "legal" authority to grant de jure or de facto or any blah de blah, legal authority over Palestine.
Oops, I made a typo in my post. Something every human has made once or twice in their life. I guess my posts must be omitted and deemed invalid.
I don't see where I was being dishonest. I never even mentioned Arab deeds or specific ownership of properties. There is no debate since the Mandate clauses stated equal opportunity for minorities. However I stand by my point. Equal citizenship and opportunity was administered and accepted in Israel but Arab leadership chose a different route. Its unfortunate that the Arab family have suffered the consequences of the actions by their leaders. If they accepted the partition plan, their would be a Palestinian state today.
Just be careful how you are posting. It was and always has been the Arab leaders (singular). So I advise you to type Arab leaders as the Arab people have had no choice since every single Legislative Council created by the people (I think there were two) were disbanded by the leaders (after the 1949 Armistice and after the 2007 Hamas coup). The leaders in both regions, since the last election in 2006, have not allowed the people to have a election since then. The English name Palestinian was kept by the Arabs ever since WW1 (up to 1949) and after 1967, since no name was ever envisions by their leaders. From what I've read in Arabic, if the Jews had lost the war in 1948 no Palestinian state would have been created and the region would have been divided up among Egypt, Jordan and Syria. And also for what's it worth Syria attempted to lay claim to the entire region in 1922 (politically). Thus even if the partition plan were accepted, there would have been a war anyway and there still would not be a Palestinian state today.
As to deeds, the only only ones the Israeli gov't legal system accepts as true ownership for Arabs are the ones that were created before the 1949 Armistice, from the Ottoman Era and from people where the land was not owned by a Jews, JNF or were Jewish towns before the 1949 Armistice .
Just be careful how you are posting. It was and always has been the Arab leaders (singular). So I advise you to type Arab leaders as the Arab people have had no choice since every single Legislative Council created by the people (I think there were two) were disbanded by the leaders (after the 1949 Armistice and after the 2007 Hamas coup). The leaders in both regions, since the last election in 2006, have not allowed the people to have a election since then. The English name Palestinian was kept by the Arabs ever since WW1 (up to 1949) and after 1967, since no name was ever envisions by their leaders. From what I've read in Arabic, if the Jews had lost the war in 1948 no Palestinian state would have been created and the region would have been divided up among Egypt, Jordan and Syria. And also for what's it worth Syria attempted to lay claim to the entire region in 1922 (politically). Thus even if the partition plan were accepted, there would have been a war anyway and there still would not be a Palestinian state today.
As to deeds, the only only ones the Israeli gov't legal system accepts as true ownership for Arabs are the ones that were created before the 1949 Armistice, from the Ottoman Era and from people where the land was not owned by a Jews, JNF or were Jewish towns before the 1949 Armistice .
I will be mindful. It's easy on a forum to type in general times. It has been taught that the term Palestinian was coined to describe the Jew during the mandate. I can see where the British would also label the Arab a Palestinian due to its anti Jewry policies. Authoritarian regimes and monarchies has always been the government of choice. I too also that pan Arabian was the culprit behind the rejections of partition. Which leads me to my adnausem point in which the Arab block had rejected statehood for decades while Israel accepted the notion of the PA state.
As for land deeds, I am not an expert but I believe the new Israeli government allowed a few thousand Arabs to gain citizenship as part ofUN 181 before rejection.
As for land deeds, I am not an expert but I believe the new Israeli government allowed a few thousand Arabs to gain citizenship as part of UN 181 before rejection.
Per the Israeli Hebrew media, it has nothing to do with the UN. Israel is allowing families from the WB to move into Israel due to having family members in Israel since the Armistice without any issues. Also the Christian Arabs have been moving out of the WB in droves into Israel itself and also to the US (if they have family in the US and that family states they will not go onto the welfare system for a minimum of 5 years and thus bypassing the immigrant quota system). People seem to not know that the Christians are being persecuted by the Muslims, where they have been forced out of entire cities by the Muslims. Just look up Ramallah; It was a Christian city and now it's a Muslim city with an extremely low amount of Christians.
"In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,
And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,
And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girga****es, and the Jebusites."
I don't know when it was but it was way before 1949 or even 1917.
"In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,
And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,
And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girga****es, and the Jebusites."
I don't know when it was but it was way before 1949 or even 1917.
The Jews of Europe are not descendants of Abraham.
The Palestinians are, however, so are we going to get into that ?
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,470,414 times
Reputation: 12187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troyfan
"In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,
And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,
And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girga****es, and the Jebusites."
I don't know when it was but it was way before 1949 or even 1917.
This is the ultimate issue with the Israel/ Palestine issue in the USA: for most Republicans this is all it takes to end the conversation. In fact many evangelicals believe there must be a Jewish state for Jesus to return and bring the final judgment. It's funny how passages about gluttony and helping the poor are never taken literally but they pick out passages here and there and hold them up as a gold standard.
Simply put religious texts must not ever be used to decide political issues. Religious people always believe they don't have to compromise because even God agrees with them. The reason there is no peace in Israel / Palestine but Northern Ireland is improving is because the Holy Land is filled with religious nuts on both sides with NI is mostly secular. Should White Americans abandon all sites sacred to Native Americans?
I would encourage everyone to hear both sides and then moderate perspectives. Here is a good starting point by Rick Steves
Look to the history of the peace and promise made broken and compensation of WWI peace treaty. Nations were gone and others created. Promises of support from UK started then for a nation and after WWII it became really strong to create a Jews state .Iraq and other were craved out of Ottoman empire for backing Germany. Many of the radical Muslims backed Germany in WWII. You lose'you lose; like every war.
This is the ultimate issue with the Israel/ Palestine issue in the USA: for most Republicans this is all it takes to end the conversation. In fact many evangelicals believe there must be a Jewish state for Jesus to return and bring the final judgment. It's funny how passages about gluttony and helping the poor are never taken literally but they pick out passages here and there and hold them up as a gold standard.
Simply put religious texts must not ever be used to decide political issues. Religious people always believe they don't have to compromise because even God agrees with them. The reason there is no peace in Israel / Palestine but Northern Ireland is improving is because the Holy Land is filled with religious nuts on both sides with NI is mostly secular. Should White Americans abandon all sites sacred to Native Americans?
I would encourage everyone to hear both sides and then moderate perspectives. Here is a good starting point by Rick Steves
While the video was refreshing and provides a unique vantage point, I chuckled at some of the interviews where the Palestinians pretend that they like in a free open society. The scene were they pretend that Ramallah is a wonderful place to live, was not very wonderful for the two Jews who had their eyes gouged out for taking a wrong turn. Thanks to Israeli's security presence, the Palestinian Arab does enjoy a higher quality of life than in Gaza.
To comment about your other reasons. Their is a very heavy religious context within this conflict. Lets not forget that Jews have been subjugated to discrimination and genocide for millenniums. Israel is a community where Jews can be free to live without harsh rule. This is more important than the views of the Orthodox.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
