This stupid wall in the Middle East

[Intrepid00]

Originally Posted by Zar

i'm surprised at myself for holding back any comments....

you guys know how i feel anyway

"Dradle, Dradle, Dradle, I made you out clay"

[G.K Zhukov]

1) In Palestine, its the Palestinians who have the rightfull claim to the land. And the small ammount of jews (like 1% of the population) who have lived side by side with the Palestinans during the last 2000 year.
The immigration of jewish settlers witch started around 1900, mobilized by zionism, was not a intending to live side by side with the palestinians, but to take their land. The settlers are just as much soldiers as those who wear a gun and uniform.
So basicly the jews stole much of the palestinians land, terrorised them and forced alot of them to move from their homes. Now the palestinians live in two big prisions called the gaza stripp and the west bank. Or in refugee camps in Lebanon, Jordan or scattered across the world.
2) If the swedes had invaded my country, Norway, colonizing it and conquering it, harrasing me, killing my family at random, denying my civil rights, forcing me to take work for nothing in their industry, it sure wouldnt have taken me 50-60 years before I got completly pissed. In about a year, I would have started to look for the first swede to kill, either he was a 23 year old in uniform, or any swedish settler on norwegian soil. A settler is not a civilian.
Just take a look at Israel. Its a rascist state. Any Israeli soldier can kill a palestinian and get away with it (or a journalist..). They import more settlers from all over the world. Witch they then give arms. So they can kill/harrass palestinians. They dont belong there, you can hear it by their newyork accent... While the palestinans have no right to return to their country (Law of return), and no right to buy land.
Israel is not self-sufficent. Most of its arms it get for free by USA. It also gets alot of aid to finance their bugdets and repression of palestians. And on top of that, they get loans, witch they dont have to pay.
(american taxpayers should really ask themself why they want to give their money to Ariel "the butcher" Sharon so he can murder).

The white farmers of Zimbabwe have alot more in common with the Israeli settlers, then the palestinians.

[JonnyBGood]

Dear god. Where do you get your information heh? Mad Arab bomber's weekly?

1) The Jewish population of Palestine (israel and palestine) has never been below 10% in recorded history.
2) Zionism was not the motivating factor behind most Jewish settlers decision to move to Palestine in the early part of the nineteenth century.
3) Either pick 1881 or 1917 as the time that immigration began at a new level. 1900 is a date you plucked out your ass.
4) There is literally zero historical precedent for treating the Israeli settlers any differently. People have always moved onto other people's land for a huge number of reasons. I'm not saying this makes it right in future but to condemn the current generation who have done nothing wrong for the transgressions of the forefathers is a moral fallacy of the highest order.
5) The rest of your post is some sort of mindless emotional rant you must have picked up off their backpages of the worst anti-Israel hack in existence.

[G.K Zhukov]

1) eh, according to the history books at uni level. Even the most extremist zionist I have ecountered never claimed 10%.
2) Zionism was, and still is, the most influental ideology. Im not talking about the small numbers who came on their own inative, but the big push to sent settlers to the area.
3) "A new level".. wow, your deep. Weather it was 1881 or 1917 doesnt matter for that say. According the the british statistic on the population in the area (Palestine was a british protectorate, or colony) the settlers of 1881 was quite few.
4) Im treating Israeli settlers like any other settler. A settler is a person you send to someone else's land (or empty land), so that you later can claim that area for yours. (exampel: Those who we today call protestants/unionists in Northern-Ireland, russians in what we today call southern russia and siberia).
You use settlers to either conquer land, or to fortify it/legitmite rights after your army has conquered it.
5) Get a operation so you look like a palestinian and move down there, live there for a decade, and tell me Im wrong.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

1) eh, according to the history books at uni level. Even the most extremist zionist I have ecountered never claimed 10%.

Read better books. And 10% has always been the accepted figure (certain historians pushed this up and down for ideological reasons but this doesn't change reality).

2) Zionism was, and still is, the most influental ideology. Im not talking about the small numbers who came on their own inative, but the big push to sent settlers to the area.

So am I.

3) "A new level".. wow, your deep. Weather it was 1881 or 1917 doesnt matter for that say. According the the british statistic on the population in the area (Palestine was a british protectorate, or colony) the settlers of 1881 was quite few.

Indeed they were but it was a distinct rise on previous rates. As was 1917, 1919, 1945, 1948 and 1991-2.

4) Im treating Israeli settlers like any other settler. A settler is a person you send to someone else's land (or empty land), so that you later can claim that area for yours. (exampel: Those who we today call protestants/unionists in Northern-Ireland, russians in what we today call southern russia and siberia).

There are large numbers of Israelis who were born in Israel. What do you propose for them? That they simply give up their land?

You use settlers to either conquer land, or to fortify it/legitmite rights after your army has conquered it.

Aye and much like every other settling of one people somewhere else throughout history this has happened.

5) Get a operation so you look like a palestinian and move down there, live there for a decade, and tell me Im wrong.

Get an operation so you look like an Israeli and live in a Palestinian refugee camp. Anecdotal evidence based on a paucity of facts is not a reason for making unilateral judgements which will affect millions.


Statistics here, here and for good measure here here. The range given there is from 6% on upwards, certainly not 1%. Of course the validity of the census process pre-1922 must be questioned for various reasons blah blah blah etc etc read a few books something something I'm going to bed.

[queball]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Anecdotal evidence based on a paucity of facts is not a reason for making unilateral judgements which will affect millions.

Spoilsport.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

There are large numbers of Israelis who were born in Israel. What do you propose for them? That they simply give up their land?

This would be a great argument if the Israeli's weren't actively trying to increase their borders.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Aye and much like every other settling of one people somewhere else throughout history this has happened.

Is this mean to be a supportive argument for this practise now?

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

This would be a great argument if the Israeli's weren't actively trying to increase their borders.

I don't believe I've stated my support for that anywhere. In fact I'm fairly sure I've voiced my opposition to it on numerous occasions.

[Vermillion]

Devil's Advocate time.

As a Climax to the wave of anti Semitism that swept the world in the 1920s (as it does every hundred years or so) a new leader in Germany built up a state based largely on scapegoating the Jews and the Communists (who he saw largely interchangeably) for all the evils of the modern world. he started by burning down their sinagogues and places of work, then in 1935 passed laws depriving them of human rights. Land and property was confiscated both by the stae and by profiteering thugs who used the new laws as an excuse to get rich. Forced emmigrationw as the policy of the day.

The problem is, nobody was willing to let these emmigrants immigrate. Even after the Nuremburg laws, ships of refugees were still being turned around and sent back to Germany. Hitler himself is quoted as saying he took this as world approbation for his next actions.

When forced immogration failed because of that, ghettoisation was attempted, segregating and starving the jews to death. When that failed, and the war in the east started to get complicated, the next step, a final solution, was agreed upon at wansee in early 1942. This extermination decision was not original, Einsaztzgruppen had been mass shooting jews for a while now, and gas vans had ben attempted as well to make things easir on the German troops. None proved sufficient, so 6 death camps were established in Poland.

During this time world reaction was non-existant. Resistance groups smuggled out official documents and pictures, but the governments of the west refused to act, and newspapers refused to print or reference them. Still refugees were being turned back.

By 1945 between 5 and 7 million jews had been killed, and until the very last days very little was spoken about it in media or government circles. When the USSR liberated Majdanek and sent eyewitness testemony and pictures to the west, they were buried.

After the war, the extent of what had happened came to light. One of the few places to accept refugees during the war was the British mandate of Palestine, and the jewish population had swelled, not because of any 'homeland of the jews' reason, but because nobody else had opened their doors.


In my mind, the state of Israel started with credit. The world well and truly ****ed up, and Israel was a part of the pennance. One cannot blame Israel for paranoia or exceptional vigour in their own defence.


Now also, stepping out of Devil's advocate mode, I believe that credit has expired, with this most recent intefada, the blame rests equally on both sides of this morass. None the less, just because this generation of net-users sees the war as ancient history does not make it so. Were I the son or nephew of a survivor, I too wuld be willing to go to great menths to ensure the world never had the opportunity to do such acts, or stand by and watch such acts again.


Just something to think about. This in no way justifies the building of the wall, nor some of the other more aggrgious acts of Israel in the last 10 years, but I think more people should keep it in the back of their mindsbefore judging everything with blanket statements.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Read better books. And 10% has always been the accepted figure (certain historians pushed this up and down for ideological reasons but this doesn't change reality).
So am I.
Indeed they were but it was a distinct rise on previous rates. As was 1917, 1919, 1945, 1948 and 1991-2.
There are large numbers of Israelis who were born in Israel. What do you propose for them? That they simply give up their land?
Aye and much like every other settling of one people somewhere else throughout history this has happened.
Get an operation so you look like an Israeli and live in a Palestinian refugee camp. Anecdotal evidence based on a paucity of facts is not a reason for making unilateral judgements which will affect millions.


Statistics here, here and for good measure here here. The range given there is from 6% on upwards, certainly not 1%. Of course the validity of the census process pre-1922 must be questioned for various reasons blah blah blah etc etc read a few books something something I'm going to bed.

1) Why should the Palestinians pay for something that they didnt do? What right did the UN have to give half their country to someone else?
The Jews should have gotten Bavaria instead. Not even the germans themselfs like bavarians
Was it, or was it not, Nazi-Germany who was responisble for holocoust?
2) After reading your links, I suggest you a) get glasses b) read my posts again. c) get some links witch explains the numbers before imigration. The first link, www.mideastweb.org, gives 3.something % if you calc it. Out of those labeled christians, the overwealming majority is palestinians. (just like today, most christians are palestinians, altrough their number are declining due to beeing forced out like every other palestinians)
4) Please lean statistics.
5) Israeli's arent forced to live in palestinian refugee camps. If you thought so, I suggest you go to a mental institution.
6) For those who are born there, either a) start behaving and stay b) Move to the U.S.A or whereever your parents come from.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Vermillion

In my mind, the state of Israel started with credit. The world well and truly ****ed up, and Israel was a part of the pennance.

I'm not sure you can say "the world" ****ed up. Most of the world had nothing to do with it. Europe certainly ****ed up but I'm not really why our/their penance should be shared by everyone else on the planet. It's the equivalent of me being a victim of a pogrom (by the English, say against those of Irish descent) in the UK, the US standing idly by doing nothing, and then me going to Peru to beat up the Indians or something.

[Vermillion]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

I'm not sure you can say "the world" ****ed up. Most of the world had nothing to do with it. Europe certainly ****ed up but I'm not really why our/their penance should be shared by everyone else on the planet. It's the equivalent of me being a victim of a pogrom (by the English, say against those of Irish descent) in the UK, the US standing idly by doing nothing, and then me going to Peru to beat up the Indians or something.

If you fled to the US, and they willfully turned their backs on you and refused to let you and other refugees like you into the country, sending you instead back to the Pogroms, then they would have a measure of responability, yes.

[Intrepid00]

I really don't give a crap about who owns what or who blengs where. What I care about is that fact the wall is a waste of money and resources.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Intrepid00

I really don't give a crap about who owns what or who blengs where. What I care about is that fact the wall is a waste of money and resources.

I feel that way about most government spending.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Vermillion

If you fled to the US, and they willfully turned their backs on you and refused to let you and other refugees like you into the country, sending you instead back to the Pogroms, then they would have a measure of responability, yes.

Yes. But what has this got to do with the Peruvians, which was my original point?

[Intrepid00]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Yes. But what has this got to do with the Peruvians, which was my original point?

Yes, but what does this have to do with a wall one could easy just around, under or over? Which was my orginal point.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Intrepid00

Yes, but what does this have to do with a wall one could easy just around, under or over? Which was my orginal point.

Yes, but what does this have to do with the inefficacy of government spending--which was my original point?

[Intrepid00]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

Yes, but what does this have to do with the inefficacy of government spending--which was my original point?

I am not going to disagree there.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

1) Why should the Palestinians pay for something that they didnt do? What right did the UN have to give half their country to someone else?
The Jews should have gotten Bavaria instead. Not even the germans themselfs like bavarians
Was it, or was it not, Nazi-Germany who was responisble for holocoust?

So taking it off the palestinians would be bad but ****ing over the next few generations of bavarians would be fine? Especially seeing as all Germans forever are equally responsible for all Nazi atrocities committed! They shouldn't have received any land at all from anyone in my opinion.

2) After reading your links, I suggest you a) get glasses b) read my posts again. c) get some links witch explains the numbers before imigration. The first link, www.mideastweb.org, gives 3.something % if you calc it. Out of those labeled christians, the overwealming majority is palestinians. (just like today, most christians are palestinians, altrough their number are declining due to beeing forced out like every other palestinians)

Do you actually read it at all? For one thing I think we've both concluded that your random 1% figure was, in fact, total crap.

a) Population censuses from 1922 onwards are reliable but those before are not, this leads to some difficulties in estimating populations under Ottoman rule
b) There was no administrative district of Palestine. Turkish census figures were for various districts, including the Jerusalem, Acco and Nablus districts for example. The Acre district included areas in Lebanon, outside the modern borders of Palestine in which there were no Jews.
c) The Ottoman census did not include approximately 10,000 foreign subjects who were Jews who lived in Palestine.
d) Both Arabs and Jews avoided the Turkish census. Foreigners who were without residence permits did not want to make their presence known. Arabs and Jews wished to avoid taxes and conscription

Keeping all of this in mind the Turkish census for 1878 listed 462,465 Turkish subjects in the Jerusalem, Nablus and Acre districts: 403,795 Muslims (including Druze), 43,659 Christians and 15,011 Jews. In addition, there were at least 10,000 Jews with foreign citizenship (recent immigrants to the country), and several thousand Muslim Arab nomads (Bedouin) who were not counted as Ottoman subjects. So excluding Jewish foreign citizens, pretending that the Ottoman census was reliable and including the areas outside of modern Palestine where no Jews lived and on which there is no claim at all we do in fact get the figure of 3.1%. Great!

I'll be off to study my statistics now. After that I'm going to selectively read the newspaper and conclude that George Bush is a martian.

5) Israeli's arent forced to live in palestinian refugee camps. If you thought so, I suggest you go to a mental institution.

Please find me any sentence of mine which expresses any vague form of support for forcing anyone to live in a refugee camp please.

6) For those who are born there, either a) start behaving and stay b) Move to the U.S.A or whereever your parents come from.

Or where their great-great-great etc etc etc grandparents come from which is Palestine am i rite? You're just arbitrarily drawing boundaries in time you feel comfortable due to some ****ing gay trip you're on.