Independence of Palestine

[KrooK]

Its not historical fact but Monastery its best place for discuss about it. If UN accept Palestinian membership, it will be historical fact than can't be ignored. What do you think - do they deserve on independence. I think so. Who like who but they really deserve.

[Samurai Waki]

The UN can only recognize Palestine as a country; Whether or not Palestinians get their wish, they still inhabit a contiguous area defined by a political and cultural border. They already are a country in all but name-- the problem is that Palestinian authority doesn't control half of the area that it claims as being Palestinian (Gaza, East Jerusalem , etc.) becoming recognized won't make a difference in the problems they already have. Palestinians have to lay down their arms and get serious about peace and political unity; otherwise it's just a meaningless house of cards.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Mmhhh...this is mostly Backroomish. But then, it would be a waste to miss this fine opportunity for some spirited debate right here. :wink:


I propose the Palestinians receive a homeland on Polish territor

[Hamata]

I propose the Palestinians receive a homeland on Polish territory fixed :clown:

[Louis VI the Fat]

fixed :clown:How'd you get hold of my notes? :stare:

[KrooK]

Maybe - but Palestine is their territory.
They were living there for thousands of years.
Its simply unfair that they are paying for nazis war crimes from WW2.

And this is not backroomish debate. Louis - don't you think that rising of new country is not historical event?

[Cute Wolf]

just face it, there's no actual "Palestine" or "Palestinians" before 1947 (or 45)

and even. the land we know as Israel today, if not for the Jews, the second closest claimants is actually the kingdom of Transjordan, we all know it was Palestinian freedom fighters (terrorists) that force king of Jordan to cede Palestine

[Hamata]

that's cool they were a sate in the past and now history is repeating it's self

[gaelic cowboy]

just face it, there's no actual "Palestine" or "Palestinians" before 1947 (or 45)

and even. the land we know as Israel today, if not for the Jews, the second closest claimants is actually the kingdom of Transjordan, we all know it was Palestinian freedom fighters (terrorists) that force king of Jordan to cede Palestine

That will be news to the people who were using the idea and word Palestine since about 400-500 BC, plus I'm pretty sure the English will be annoyed they were running a place that didnt exist apparently http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine

These kinds of rows are silly it would be like looking for leprechauns so you could claim Ireland, your self determination should never be about grassy fields or drops of blood(even though it helps)

[Samurai Waki]

I'm pretty sure that Palestine was the name the Greeks gave to the area while it was still Israel... The Palestinians wouldn't come around for another 1000 years; by the same token the Israelites would cease to exist five hundred years before the Palestinians came about. The area was also subject to the Byzantines, Ayyubids, Abbasids, Crusader States, Mamluks, Ottomans, and eventually British-- though never any independently recognized Palestinian Territory until 1967. So both the Palestinians and Israelis have fairly equal claim to the same area, which is to say, very little.

[Beirut]

They deserve a chance to live and be free. It is a crime against humanity to keep a people locked up and isolated from the world simply because of who they are. It is racist, indefensible, and immoral in every conceivable way. And there is plenty of blame to go around for this crime.

Slavery was ended. Apartheid was ended. It is time to end this.

[Kralizec]

I'm pretty sure that Palestine was the name the Greeks gave to the area while it was still Israel... The Palestinians wouldn't come around for another 1000 years; by the same token the Israelites would cease to exist five hundred years before the Palestinians came about. The area was also subject to the Byzantines, Ayyubids, Abbasids, Crusader States, Mamluks, Ottomans, and eventually British-- though never any independently recognized Palestinian Territory until 1967. So both the Palestinians and Israelis have fairly equal claim to the same area, which is to say, very little.

Not sure about how the Greeks called it, but "Palestine" is the Roman name for the Philistenes. After the Romans expelled the jews after yet another failed revolt, they renamed the province Syria Palaestina.


the problem is that Palestinian authority doesn't control half of the area that it claims as being Palestinian (Gaza, East Jerusalem , etc.) becoming recognized won't make a difference in the problems they already have. Palestinians have to lay down their arms and get serious about peace and political unity; otherwise it's just a meaningless house of cards.

That's a good point; actually the only reason why I'd oppose the move.

[Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout]

The Palestines are muslims.Muslims don't like the fact that they have a small jewish country surrounding them,think of David and Goalith.Muslims dont like jews.That is the reason why they want to remove Isreal(Note:My opinion)

[Cute Wolf]

The Palestines are muslims.Muslims don't like the fact that they have a small jewish country surrounding them,think of David and Goalith.Muslims dont like jews.That is the reason why they want to remove Isreal(Note:My opinion)

to the point that they make a fictionous people called "Palestine", that's true

it's not that I put a blind eye to the Israeli opression, however, but the Arabs did exgreggate everything about "palestinians" while previously, they're simply jordanian arabs

[Kralizec]

to the point that they make a fictionous people called "Palestine", that's true

it's not that I put a blind eye to the Israeli opression, however, but the Arabs did exgreggate everything about "palestinians" while previously, they're simply jordanian arabs

Can you elaborate? I've never understood this argument. The "Palestinians" are the people who inhabited the area what's now called Israel, Gaza and the West Bank prior to the establishment of Israel. So maybe they were culturally very similar to the Arabs in what's now the Jordan kingdom. Why would that lead to the conclusion that they're not a "nation", or that the Israeli's in 1948 had a more legitimate claim to the land?

[Montmorency]

I think the idea is that the Palestinian Arabs were not a distinct ethnic group until about half a century ago.

[Kralizec]

That's like saying that Native American tribe X is culturally not distinct from neighbouring tribe Y, and that therefore it's okay to expell tribe X and repopulate their land with European colonists. Granted, that pretty much happened anyway, but nowadays we generally think that it was immoral. For the record, the existence of both the USA and Israel is a fait accompli and I don't seek to reverse history. What bothers me is that people justify what was done, and argue that Palestinians in 1947 were not a distinct culture, therefore not a nation and that therefore the land was "vacant" and up for grabs.

Kosovars aren't ethnically or culturally distinct from Serbians, yet the countries which oppose Palestinian statehood right now supported their secession from Serbia.

EDIT: Kosovars is supposed to be Montenegrins :wall:

[LeftEyeNine]

For Islamists, Palestine is a cause, may one be Turkish, Afghan or Iraqi. They generally bear marks of hypocrisy about when it comes to Palestine and to other similar issues.

Also it's a fact almost impossible to deny -fueled by vulgar Israeli practices, to be honest- that antisemitism lurks within those minds.

If you really compare the two, existence of an Israeli state is less justified considering the inhabitance around the area prior to the foundation of the state.

Under such circumstances, it's just ridiculous to claim that Palestine is not qualified to be free but, on the other hand, the answers you would get from the Iranian/Turkish supporters of the free Palestine cause about a free "Kurdistan" may surprise you.

[Strike For The South]

The Palestines are muslims.Muslims don't like the fact that they have a small jewish country surrounding them,think of David and Goalith.Muslims dont like jews.That is the reason why they want to remove Isreal(Note:My opinion)

Get a new opinion

[Montmorency]

That's like saying that Native American tribe X is culturally not distinct from neighbouring tribe Y, and that therefore it's okay to expell tribe X and repopulate their land with European colonists.

I never said that. I was simply clarifying the nature of Palestinian identity a litttle. I wasn't justifying anything nor prescribing a scenario according to the besterest moral code.

[Cute Wolf]

For Islamists, Palestine is a cause, may one be Turkish, Afghan or Iraqi. They generally bear marks of hypocrisy about when it comes to Palestine and to other similar issues.

Also it's a fact almost impossible to deny -fueled by vulgar Israeli practices, to be honest- that antisemitism lurks within those minds.

If you really compare the two, existence of an Israeli state is less justified considering the inhabitance around the area prior to the foundation of the state.

Under such circumstances, it's just ridiculous to claim that Palestine is not qualified to be free but, on the other hand, the answers you would get from the Iranian/Turkish supporters of the free Palestine cause about a free "Kurdistan" may surprise you.

And since LEN allready said about Kurdistan, I'll also said about Aceh here, and if you know Philliphines, MILF (no, not that one, that ONE Moro Islamic Liberation Front)

Separatism because ethic/religious difference is nonsense, and if a nation state supress rebellion, that was nothing fancy.

and oh, said otherwise, but history is dominated by the strong eat the weak, not otherwise. I'm not really support israel, but I don't sympathize with Palestinians either, that was their own affairs and so what?

[LeftEyeNine]

Separatism because ethic/religious difference is nonsense, and if a nation state supress rebellion, that was nothing fancy.

The logical flaw in this statement put aside, what kind of a relationship does seperatism have to do with Israel-Palestine conflict ?

[Cute Wolf]

The logical flaw in this statement put aside, what kind of a relationship does seperatism have to do with Israel-Palestine conflict ?

because basically, Israel did conquer Palestinian territory, and they had the rights to kept their land of conquest, if you insist conquest is inhumane, bring back america to Native Americans and Australia to the Aborigines please.

It's more than 50 years allready, what's the matter of difference when it was 300 years and 50 years?

[Montmorency]

There needs to be some sort of statute of limitations, or else we would have to wrestle with haplogroups to figure out which nation has to move where. Maybe Indonesia should be decolonized out of respect for the dead hobbits?

[Cute Wolf]

There needs to be some sort of statute of limitations, or else we would have to wrestle with haplogroups to figure out which nation has to move where. Maybe Indonesia should be decolonized out of respect for the dead hobbits?

decolonize earth for the sake of animals :idea:

[LeftEyeNine]

because basically, Israel did conquer Palestinian territory, and they had the rights to kept their land of conquest, if you insist conquest is inhumane, bring back america to Native Americans and Australia to the Aborigines please.

It's more than 50 years allready, what's the matter of difference when it was 300 years and 50 years?

Do you actually know how Israel was formed ?

Your logical fallacy and lack of knowledge in this context put aside, would you appprove some Cuddly Pink Unicorn of Vengeance's post in Totalwerwer.org forums claiming that Indonesia's struggle for freedom is nonsense under the assumption that Turkey has annexed Indonesia in some parallel universe ?

[Fragony]

What's so bad about it, they got attacked and won. Do you just experience these things differently

[Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout]

What you people are foreggting about this is that is relgion. The Muslims dont want iseral in their lands.They hate jews.This is a relegious war,not some land issue.The Muslims dont want them in the middle east.

[Kralizec]

I never said that. I was simply clarifying the nature of Palestinian identity a litttle. I wasn't justifying anything nor prescribing a scenario according to the besterest moral code.

Sorry, I wasn't ascribing that line of reasoning to you personally.


What's so bad about it, they got attacked and won. Do you just experience these things differently

That's a disingenuous statement. The Arab countries attacked Israel because it had unilaterally declared its own statehood and claimed territories without the consent of the UN, the British or the Palestinian inhabitants.

[Madae]

I have a pretty... uh... let's say "interesting" perspective on what's going on in the middle east right now.

Forget the whole concept of country and just focus on religion; these people have been fighting this very same war for 2000 years, and it won't stop because they all have this age-old sense of entitlement to this, rather worthless in the greater scheme of things, strip of land - it's important to all of them, and so important that it can't be seen in the hands of anyone that doesn't agree with them specifically and wholeheartedly (I'm positive any disagreements between these countries is all about the land they're on, and nothing to do with what they might say).

In my opinion, and it may seem "mean" or "drastic", but I feel they should just fight it out, as long as it doesn't involve everyone else that doesn't care, and as long as it doesn't threaten the entire world. There is no room for compromise with them, so I say let the "best religion" (ie. the best man) win, and to the victor goes the spoils.

I understand my particular stance on this probably won't be very popular, but I don't see any other way to solve the problems they have. There will be war, and the unfortunate reality of it is that everyone else will get involved based on certain beliefs/alliances that they feel compelled to honor. It's a shame, really, because I could really care less what these people want to do, but I'll most certainly be paying for it in some way or another. Hell, maybe in worse ways than I can imagine. I hate to think of this as an apocalyptic scenario, but it most certainly can be when someone says something like... oh, I dunno... like this;


On October 26, 2005, IRIB News, an English-language subsidiary of the state-controlled Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), filed a story on Ahmadinejad's speech to the "World Without Zionism" conference in Asia, entitled: Ahmadinejad: Israel must be wiped off the map.[1] The story was picked up by Western news agencies and quickly made headlines around the world. On October 30, The New York Times published a full transcript of the speech in which Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying:

Our dear Imam (referring to Ayatollah Khomeini) said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.[2]

Ahmadinejad said that the issue with Palestine would be over "the day that all refugees return to their homes [and] a democratic government elected by the people comes to power",[3] and denounced attempts to normalise relations with Israel, condemning all Muslim leaders who accept the existence of Israel as "acknowledging a surrender and defeat of the Islamic world."

The speech indicated that he considered Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip to be a trick, designed to gain acknowledgment from Islamic states. In a rally held two days later, Ahmadinejad declared that his words reflected the views of the Iranian people, adding that Western world was free to comment, but its reactions were invalid.[4]

I understand that this particular quote by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was possibly taken out of context, but lets just assume for a moment that he actually believes what he says about Israel - who is backed by the war machine™, otherwise known as the US.

[Beskar]

I will give a brief and simple History refresher, since some people may require one:

There has been long been discussions and talks of a 'Jewish Homeland' since the first Zionist conference (Basel, 1897) which begins the more 'official' journey. As you know, the Ottoman Empire controlled the whole area so there wasn't going to be any big changes any time soon, but later came the First World War and with the Ottoman Empire going to be fragmented, the first real break-through comes through the Balfour Declaration (1917).

Let's Time-skip a little, now we come to the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine (1947), the newly created United Nations sets to solve this issue by partitioning the land, creating two states in an union in the area. This was gladly accepted by the Jewish side and a few small exceptions on the Arabian side which on a whole was against this. After-all, who out-numbers who? Why should they accept such terms. With the plan falling through and the British withdrawing the area leaving it in the incapable hands of the UN, The Kingdom of Jordan decided to move in and annex the territories of Palestine that were planned, civil war began as the Jewish communities in Palestine were underattack by the Arabian communities and they fought, leading to a declaration of Independence for the State of Israel and goal was to survive the attacks by the Arabian communities and the neighbouring Arab countries. With Arabian hostility growing, King Abdullah decided to lead a charge as Supreme Commander of the Arabian offensive against the newly created state, however, political ambition and infighting between the Arabian powers and their distrust of Palestinian independent ambitions would ultimately be their downfall.

Anyway, after the War armistice agreements came into place, resulting in the Green Line, with West Bank belonging to Jordan and Gaza belong to Egypt. During the war many Arab populations fled their homes, some where even forced to move, causing the refugee crisis for the Arabian communities. However, this was off-set by the Jewish exodus forced from the neighbouring countries of Egypt, Jordan, etc which ended up in Israel (As a side note: The Israeli's assisted the exiled Jews more than the Arabian states assisted the exiled Arabs). There is also controversial reports, the Exodus numbers around 711,000 according to the UN report in 1951, however the British census of 1946 only listed 467,000 in the entire mandate.

So the border remained stable for a few years, there were still clashes here and there, but nothing much. The Arabian nations between to sign various agreements and alliances, and with Egypt massing on the border with Israel in Sinai, they close the Tiran Straits, destroying Israel shipping and sea access at Eilat. This was pre-conditioned by treaties where this occured, it would be an act of war, and as such, Israel forms a National Unity government and decides to strike pre-emptively, USA style, thus begins the Six-Day war. This pre-emptive strike hit Egypt's air-force destroying it upon the ground, giving the Israeli's air superiority. All-in-all, Israel's size increased by a factor of three (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Six_Day_War_Terrritories_2.png). Sinai was later returned to Egypt as per the Camp David Accords (1978) with Sadat.

With the Foreign power elements on the side-lines, things started to get focused more internally. As you may know, the PLO has been around for a while during this, responsible for much of the violence (First Intifada), and in an arrangement that put the Israeli government and the PLO... the Oslo Accords (1993). This is the arrangement where they try to settle the issue, the Palestinians having some self-determination and Israel has the promise of security.

From there, you start ending up into the current climate area.

[Kralizec]

Let's Time-skip a little, now we come to the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine (1947), the newly created United Nations sets to solve this issue by partitioning the land, creating two states in an union in the area. This was gladly accepted by the Jewish side and a few small exceptions on the Arabian side which on a whole was against this. After-all, who out-numbers who? Why should they accept such terms.

The plan alotted a disproportionately large amount of land to the Jewish population compared to their relative numbers, and also in terms of natural recources (particulary easy access to water) the plan was unbalanced.

[LeftEyeNine]

By the way, if you win a war, you deserve to get what that war was supposed to be fought for.

There is a very crooked perception in this Israel-Palestine conflict that if you favor one side on certain aspects, you must be refusing everything about the other.

And that gives hints of, in fact, the roots of the debaters' actual thoughts on the matter which turn out to be either antisemitic or anti-Islamic.

[Cute Wolf]

By the way, if you win a war, you deserve to get what that war was supposed to be fought for.

There is a very crooked perception in this Israel-Palestine conflict that if you favor one side on certain aspects, you must be refusing everything about the other.

And that gives hints of, in fact, the roots of the debaters' actual thoughts on the matter which turn out to be either antisemitic or anti-Islamic.

well, so just let em finish that matter themselves, anyway, levant regions is often at war and favourite fighting ground since long time in history, just pretend that's will be never ending war here, simple.

[Madae]

Kind of off topic, but I'm reminded of that movie Kingdom of Heaven and a quote that I thought was rather interesting. Balian and Saladin are talking after just having come to terms for surrender of the city, and Balian asks him while he's walking away; "What is so important about this city? What is it worth?", and Saladin replies "Nothing", only to turn around and say "Everything".

Anyway, I really liked that quote.

Getting back to my previes post, I just wanted to add a little addendum;

If we were going to let these countries fight it out (which I still think is the best course of action), I think the only intervention from anyone else should be to set up "evacuation camps", so that people that are living there and don't necessarily care about whats going on can head to one of these camps and leave the country through scheduled flights out to different countries (probably cheaper than bombing the hell out of it). This, of course, would be a massive displacement of refugees to various places which probably won't be taken kindly, but on the other hand, I don't think innocents should suffer when the combatants are given free reign to duke it out. Some steps should also be taken to help determine that these people are "genuine" in their desire to leave the conflict behind them, instead of just giving them a free ride to some place where they can pick a fight and do something stupid. How you would do that though is rather beyond me. I suppose I'm personally just willing to believe that anyone that came was actually being serious about it... I would like to think so, at least. I think if anyone renegged on that agreement within a certain period of time, the penalty should be rather harsh (long time in jail, maybe, or just simple deportation back to the war zone).

[LeftEyeNine]

Letting them fighting out will eventually lead to the genocide upon the Palestinians. There's no fair ground for that.

If you're fine with letting them fight it out under those terms, you have no right to mourn over the Holocaust. You are actually a favorist then.

[Madae]

Letting them fighting out will eventually lead to the genocide upon the Palestinians. There's no fair ground for that.

If you're fine with letting them fight it out under those terms, you have no right to mourn over the Holocaust. You are actually a favorist then.

Like I said - come up with a different compromise then for a people that have been fighting the same battle for 2000 years and will simply not give any ground. I'd wager the only reason they haven't done anything is that they're worried about who will jump in on it. *cough*US*cough*

And don't put words in my mouth. The holocaust is an altogether different beast - the jews did nothing to deserve the retribution of the nazi's. The Palastinians are not helpless and are just as eager to fight back as the next guy for their varying beliefs. The only people there that deserve my pity are the people that are caught in the crossfire of a war between religions that they don't give a damn about.

What's a favorist, anyway? It's not in the dictionary or a wiki entry. I'm assuming you mean I favor one country over the other, which is far from the truth - I don't care about any of them and would prefer everyone stay out of the petty rivalries of foreign powers, especially when its coming from the middle east. The only time I *do* care is when it threatens my family and the planet I live on.

It's easy to look at it and say "How you could let that happen?!", when one only has to look at history to know that it's happened thousands of times before you were even born. The only difference here is that we're "lucky" enough to be living in an age where stone age religious disagreements are still commonplace. News flash; every one of you lives in a country that was built on the blood of hundreds of thousands of people. Seriously, what's a few more to bury a stupid argument for good? The end justifies the means.

But hey, on the flip side, I'm all for peace if everyone would just sit down and take a chill pill. If they can come to an agreement that they are all satisfied with, more power to them. If they can't, then quit stalling and get it over with so the rest of the world can move on. It's like that entire region is the definition of a drama queen; "hey, look at us! we can still be important if we keep threatening the world with nuclear holocaust! watch me while I wave around my gigantic missle". As long as it's over there and not near me... eh.

[LeftEyeNine]

I ain't put my name forward for a mediator. Obviously there are smarter men than me for a resolution of this looks-to-be-neverending case. But this does not hinder my logic to comment on the problem and suggestions expressed to overcome.

The reason people following a statehood cause using means of terrorism - PKK, IRA, ETA, Hamas and whatnot - is mainly because of their inability to go on a full-scale war against the "oppressors". The method minimizes their losses and sustains the longevity of the armed struggle. Why pinch for years if you had the power to slam it once and for all ?

Jews did not have a paramilitary organization in Nazi Germany -'cause they were already enjoying the benefits of the welfare of the country they were residing prior to the period and there was no need for such an armament. But exchange the roles of Israel and Palestine today and you'd get very similar results. Nazis being overwhelming and swift does not mean Jews would never respond armed back then. I gave the example just to show you what happens when you leave opponents of unbalanced attributes clash with each other.

Also it's more of a globalized and relatively civilized world now. Hell knows what Israel would have done to Palestinians already should we were in inital years of 20th century.

I agree with the zealous background of the issue fueled by religious patterns behind this fight as much as I agree that this fight is far from being over, if it ever will.

But this still does not justify letting Israel roll over Palestinians. It's not the age of Genghis Khan.

[Madae]

I'd hardly call the Palastinians helpless - they have Iran at their back, and most muslim countries would probably assist them if push comes to shove. Russia would probably provide some assistance too, but I bet they would only do that to annoy the US.

The Jews in Germany and surrounding areas weren't unified, and it's likely many of them didn't know what was going to happen until it happened. If people are still arguing over whether or not the holocaust actually happened (long story short - it did), then I think it's a fair assumption to say that not everyone back then knew what was really going on. Plenty of Jews from all over the world fought in the war, but you definitely wouldn't consider them a governmental body capable of making unified decisions that affected the entirety of their believers. The Palastinians, however, are all nicely compact and located in their own little corner of the world that just happens to be next to and in direct conflict with a mutually hated enemy.

Truly, I don't doubt that they are civilized - I hardly think of them as "barbaric" - but they're letting a 2000 year old "history book" determine who should be where and run what and have this or that. They're simply misguided, incredibly naive and entirely presumptuous to think that they all have some "god-given right" to a worthless piece of land. Israel is definitely not excluded from this and is just as guilty.

And it's a shame we don't live in the past - the world and our decisions would be much more simple if we could just roll over anyone that disagreed with us and put a McDonalds on every corner.

[Montmorency]

How about they settle it in the old manner: the Palestinians' best against the Israelis' best?


https://i494.photobucket.com/albums/rr309/desertSypglass/0222pod09.jpg
https://i494.photobucket.com/albums/rr309/desertSypglass/aldo-raine-picture.jpg

[Madae]

I'm down with that. I imagine it turning out just like the intro video of Shogun 2, though.

[LeftEyeNine]

Quoting the only part I somewhat disagree with:


I'd hardly call the Palastinians helpless - they have Iran at their back, and most muslim countries would probably assist them if push comes to shove. Russia would probably provide some assistance too, but I bet they would only do that to annoy the US.

Notwithstanding the general political stances as you predict, a Palestinian population enough to be called "massacred" would be pruned before any aid could come in should Israel find the opportunity to do so. These guys are living door to door.

[Madae]

We live in an age where reprisals are mere minutes away, at most an hour, even at the distance Iran is from Israel. Not that I disagree that Israel definitely has the capability to try, but I doubt they would finish off the entire country before aid arrived short of turning it into a giant crater. Hell, I'm sure there are plenty of reserves stationed there that support the Palestinian cause. There would have to be something more than just the word of neighboring countries to keep Israel at bay. As you said, they're practically on their doorstep. I bet they look out their windows and raise a fist of contempt as they stare down the proverbial "drawn line", mine fields, border patrols and electric fences. You ever seen the DMZ between North and South Korea? Yeah...

[Cute Wolf]

How about they settle it in the old manner: the Palestinians' best against the Israelis' best?


https://i494.photobucket.com/albums/rr309/desertSypglass/0222pod09.jpg
https://i494.photobucket.com/albums/rr309/desertSypglass/aldo-raine-picture.jpg


yeah, let the Palestinians choose 4000 hand picked men, and Israel choose 4000 hand picked men, arm them with mere swords, shields, and chain mail armour - if we must, it should be standardized and distributed with third party so there's no advantage over each others, and then let em duke it out in battle, the winner takes all

oh, for extra lulz, let some have bows and slings, and some ride horse too, play it M2TW style

[Madae]

I would agree, if I wasn't absolutely sure they would immediately start fighting again as soon as one side won over the other (Shogun 2 intro). I think we're past the point of knowing that reason and logic doesn't work with these people. It's all or nothing. Everyone that cares needs to be involved, and everyone that cares needs to be either dead or past the finish line with flag in hand.

[Beskar]

I did the brief history as I wanted to write more and because of the time, it wasn't really suitable. Just woke up from a bad sleep, so I will continue on.

The main hindrance to this peace process is mostly the violence which keeps giving Israel excuses to fight back. Israel, ultimately, wants security, but it is these lack of security which brings about the main issues in the peace-talks.

Before the increase in violence, Israel and the Palestinians territories had a some what mutual understanding. The Israeli's need workers, the Palestinians are workers and right next door, so the Palestinians come onto the farms and what not in the morning and return to their homes at night. Both areas prosper from this arrangement. With the increase in violence, and the semi-partitioning, the security was compromised which resulted in Israel building a wall between the areas. This is to prevent people from either populations for entering each area over security concerns but it looks like something closer to the Berlin Wall. As a result, Israel now mass imports workers from the Philippines leaving the Palestinians in a far more poorer situation where they struggle to make their ends meet in their own areas.

However, the situation for Arabs/Palestinians within the Israeli territories are different. As you may know, Jewish people take the Sabbath very seriously and this is very evident in Israel, as Muslims do not share the same holy day, they provide an essential backbone to Israel to keep many of the services and infrastructure running. There is a lot of "Keeping to their Communities" especially in the smaller villages or towns but in the more metropolitan places, there are thriving communities which intermingle and they live side-by-side in peace.

So how can this issue be resolved?

There Five formal solutions, I would rank them in order of which would be the worst first in my opinion.

UN simply making Palestine independent in the style of Kosovo.
This is a very bad idea on many levels as it would simply shove two-states on the exact same territory, it would be pure chaos and if you thought the fighting was bad now... Yeah... Really really bad idea.

Two-State Solution
Whilst this is very similar to the first one, the main difference is both sides agreeing to it, and arranging it themselves. This is probably one of those things "If there were no issues, it could work" however, there are lots of issues.. and by lots, I mean lots. There is the resource and infrastructure inequity, there are the "Settlements", there are the issues about the status of Arab-Israeli's, there are many things which why this hasn't got any closer to working over the last past 20 years.

Creation of a New Secular One-State
The better solutions begin looking towards a one-state solution, one of those advocated which I used to advocate myself in the past is the creation of a brand two state and a merger of the two. However, this still has many issues such as the mass influx of refugee Palestinians, far higher Palestinian birthrate and other issues which will turn the whole area from a Jewish slim majority into making the Jewish people a minority and subjected them to an influx of hostile Palestinians. With the Arab population controlling the politics, thing will suddenly go downhill for the Jewish minority which will cause them to begin fleeing the area to the West where they would be far more accepted. Idea for this is based on Turkey/Belguim.

Absorption by the Israeli State
Effectively by this, there is compensation and settlement of the Palestinian people in those other areas outside of Israel, the Arab people in the area would be brought in under the umbrella of Israel. There would be some issues and psychological divides but this is ultimately the most viable solution so far mentioned. Quoting from some where else: "Arab-Israeli's enjoy greater legal rights and a higher standard of living than anywhere throughout the Arab world, proving that preserving the Jewish state would not necessarily mean that its Arab minority would suffer discrimination." There would be some losses on both sides, but things could realistically pick up from here and it would solve the issue. Elon Peace Plan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Peace_Plan) is one avocation of this.

Benelux Model
This is the most ambitious and best working model for a solution that has the closest to both sides "Winning". It would provide the advantages of both a Two-State and One-State model. The issue of this would be it's implementation would require some hardwork and strong co-operation.

[Beskar]

Just remembered there is a Sixth one, but I don't think much of it.

Returning of Gaza to Egypt and West Bank to Jordan, pre-Six Day War style.
Returns the territory back to those areas and those Arab nations would have to tackle the issues themselves since they were the ones who issued their authority over those areas before Israel took the land from them in the Six-Day War. Jordan is especially not wanting this, due to the large Palestinian majority already present in the country and such a move would make Jordan a de facto Palestinian-State. Plus Egypt wouldn't be too happen with all those militants now running around their country from Gaza/Hamas.

[Cute Wolf]

anyway, while absorption to Israel is the most viable option, I doubt Palestinians have the gut to swallow their own false sense of pride.

maybe forced relocation (just like what European colonists do with Native Americans and Australian Aborigines) of Palestinian people to somewhere else should be better. in the long run

[Beskar]

anyway, while absorption to Israel is the most viable option, I doubt Palestinians have the gut to swallow their own false sense of pride.

maybe forced relocation (just like what European colonists do with Native Americans and Australian Aborigines) of Palestinian people to somewhere else should be better. in the long run

Well, most of the argument is, most of this is done already. There are many Palestinian refugees which keep multiplying in large numbers too. This is a big concern for Israel if all these suddenly return. Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria should simply incorporate those refugees by giving them citizenship. This way at least in the short term, these refugees can make a real life for themselves and could in the future contribute to a viable Palestinian state, though since Jordan is pretty much a Palestinian State anyway and since there are no other "Jewish" states, it could be argued even though it isn't the most ideal solution, absorption has a lot of merit for the future.

[LeftEyeNine]

So much wrong in this "Israel is good to go, Palestinians are arses" kind of logic that I'll refrain to discuss it any further.

[Beskar]

So much wrong in this "Israel is good to go, Palestinians are arses" kind of logic that I'll refrain to discuss it any further.

I will be honest, LEN, I am not entire sure what you meant by that statement: ("Israel is good to go, Palestinians are arses"). Apologies if something I said made you feel especially uncomfortable.

[LeftEyeNine]

It was rather directed at some other patrons, Beskar. No worries. I'm not a religious Muslim who is a Palestinian cause fanatic however this thread smirks with thoughts of anti-Islam which is definitely something only Backroom can handle, not Monastery where historical debate on rational terms is supposed to take place.

[Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout]

It was rather directed at some other patrons, Beskar. No worries. I'm not a religious Muslim who is a Palestinian cause fanatic however this thread smirks with thoughts of anti-Islam which is definitely something only Backroom can handle, not Monastery where historical debate on rational terms is supposed to take place.

Then do not insult the jews,They deserve their land.

[LeftEyeNine]

Then do not insult the jews,They deserve their land.

And how did I do that ? :inquisitive:

[Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout]

And how did I do that ? :inquisitive:

Muslim hate :Jews.

Thats the reason why there's this damn war in the middle east.

[Beskar]

Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout, I know you are eager to comment on the subject, but may I request you keep it to the subject at hand and not simply start trying to pick a fight with another patron simply because they are a Muslim?

LeftEyeNine has not said he hates Jews, unless you are trying to do the true scotsman fallacy saying he is not Muslim as he doesn't hate Jews, your comments are not relevant to the topic and it is just distracting from the debating and arguments at hand.

There are a great many arguments including the fact there are many people who identify as Muslim / Non-Jewish who have a valid claim to their homes which are in that land. Even though there are large politics at work with different people having different agendas, it still doesn't excuse this fact.

While in many ways there should be compensation for a great many of them, and them having the opportunity to lead fulfilling lives elsewhere at least, it isn't as basic as "Jews = Good, Muslims = Bad" and it never will be. There are bad Jews and there are good Muslims and they don't all 'hate' eachother either!

LeftEyeNine if anything has expressed sympathy with the innocents who just happened to be in the wrong place in the wrong time and his arguments and version of events will most likely stem from them. He isn't wrong in this, he is correct, but that is all part of a far larger and greater picture which needs to be solved like a jigsaw puzzle to try to get the best out of the situation.

[Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout]

Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout, I know you are eager to comment on the subject, but may I request you keep it to the subject at hand and not simply start trying to pick a fight with another patron simply because they are a Muslim?

LeftEyeNine has not said he hates Jews, unless you are trying to do the true scotsman fallacy saying he is not Muslim as he doesn't hate Jews, your comments are not relevant to the topic and it is just distracting from the debating and arguments at hand.

There are a great many arguments including the fact there are many people who identify as Muslim / Non-Jewish who have a valid claim to their homes which are in that land. Even though there are large politics at work with different people having different agendas, it still doesn't excuse this fact.

While in many ways there should be compensation for a great many of them, and them having the opportunity to lead fulfilling lives elsewhere at least, it isn't as basic as "Jews = Good, Muslims = Bad" and it never will be. There are bad Jews and there are good Muslims and they don't all 'hate' eachother either!

LeftEyeNine if anything has expressed sympathy with the innocents who just happened to be in the wrong place in the wrong time and his arguments and version of events will most likely stem from them. He isn't wrong in this, he is correct, but that is all part of a far larger and greater picture which needs to be solved like a jigsaw puzzle to try to get the best out of the situation.

I am not trying to pick a fight with him because he is muslim.I was reminding him of how the whole concept is.In contary,I don't think there are bad jews. If we look at WW2,it was clear that Hitler tried to wipe them. I don't agree with good muslims,but there are good ones I know off.

There are a great many arguments including the fact there are many people who identify as Muslim / Non-Jewish who have a valid claim to their homes which are in that land. Even though there are large politics at work with different people having different agendas, it still doesn't excuse this fact.

Tell me,who lived in Israel first? Jews or Muslims? Cannites or Romans? The Jews did,until they were conquered by the romans which forced them to live in Europe.They were without a nation. And pretty much in their history,they had been removed of their lands by the :Persians,Babyloianins,including Muslims + Plus Romans. They deserve their land back,why Jerusalem is theirs! Not the muslims.

So,why not have a look at the geography of prehistoric iseral and make it the way it was once was?

Please be aware I am not trying to do anything wrong.If you think so,I shall edit it.

[Montmorency]

By that logic, we should immediately evacuate North America and return it to the First Nations. Perhaps the mixed-bloods can serve as second-class citizens?


So,why not have a look at the geography of prehistoric iseral and make it the way it was once was?
Tell me,who lived in Israel first? Jews or Muslims? Cannites or Romans? The Jews did,until they were conquered by the romans which forced them to live in Europe.They were without a nation. And pretty much in their history,they had been removed of their lands by the :Persians,Babyloianins,including Muslims + Plus Romans.

They deserve their land back,why Jerusalem is theirs! Not the muslims.

We will never know of the myriad peoples who lived in that region before Judaism existed, so even on that basis the Jewish claim to that land is not sound.

But tell me, which of these sounds like a better claim to you:

My family has lived off this plot of land for the better part of a century.

vs.

Some of my ancestors may have lived in this general vicinity several thousand years ago.

[Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout]

By that logic, we should immediately evacuate North America and return it to the First Nations. Perhaps the mixed-bloods can serve as second-class citizens?



We will never know of the myriad peoples who lived in that region before Judaism existed, so even on that basis the Jewish claim to that land is not sound.

But tell me, which of these sounds like a better claim to you:

My family has lived off this plot of land for the better part of a century.

vs.

Some of my ancestors may have lived in this general vicinity several thousand years ago.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here,....can you rephrase it? Thank you.

[LeftEyeNine]

Muslim hate :Jews.

And that level of "wisdom" finishes the thread for me.

:coffeenews:

[Tuuvi]

I am not trying to pick a fight with him because he is muslim.I was reminding him of how the whole concept is.In contary,I don't think there are bad jews. If we look at WW2,it was clear that Hitler tried to wipe them. I don't agree with good muslims,but there are good ones I know off.

There are a great many arguments including the fact there are many people who identify as Muslim / Non-Jewish who have a valid claim to their homes which are in that land. Even though there are large politics at work with different people having different agendas, it still doesn't excuse this fact.

Tell me,who lived in Israel first? Jews or Muslims? Cannites or Romans? The Jews did,until they were conquered by the romans which forced them to live in Europe.They were without a nation. And pretty much in their history,they had been removed of their lands by the :Persians,Babyloianins,including Muslims + Plus Romans. They deserve their land back,why Jerusalem is theirs! Not the muslims.

So,why not have a look at the geography of prehistoric iseral and make it the way it was once was?

Please be aware I am not trying to do anything wrong.If you think so,I shall edit it.

According to the bible, the Israelites began to exist as a people in Egypt, and were commanded by God to conquer the lands of what is now Israel. So the Jews weren't the first people to inhabit Palestine, even according to Jewish scripture.

[Catiline]

Gentlemen I appreciate this is an emotive topic, but please keep this thread free of broad generalisations about Muslim's aand Jews. Sweeping sterotypes of the sort being invoked here are not appropriate for the Monastry.

[Cute Wolf]

Gentlemen I appreciate this is an emotive topic, but please keep this thread free of broad generalisations about Muslim's aand Jews. Sweeping sterotypes of the sort being invoked here are not appropriate for the Monastry.

backroom?

[Catiline]

THey're not really appropriate there either, but I agree, it's heading that way

[Skullheadhq]

Palestinians are Arabs in disguise. They should go back to where they were prior to their violent occupation of the region, i.e the deserts of Arabia.

[Marshall Louis-Nicolas Davout]

According to the bible, the Israelites began to exist as a people in Egypt, and were commanded by God to conquer the lands of what is now Israel. So the Jews weren't the first people to inhabit Palestine, even according to Jewish scripture.

No. The Jews had lived there before they were in egypt.

[Sarmatian]

Palestinians are Arabs in disguise. They should go back to where they were prior to their violent occupation of the region, i.e the deserts of Arabia.

And who do you think Jews are?

Both Jews and Arabs are in the semitic group, just the first are Jewish and the second Muslim.

[Skullheadhq]

And who do you think Jews are?

Both Jews and Arabs are in the semitic group, just the first are Jewish and the second Muslim.

The same could be said if the Germans occupy the north of the Netherlands. Hey, we're in the same group!

Or the Bosniaks Republic Srpska

[LeftEyeNine]

Should we go back from Anatolia we've violently conquered to Middle Asia where our homeland is, Grand sire ?

[Hax]

I think this thread summarises all the reasons why there hasn't been a solution yet. There have been many logical fallacies, including "Palestinians are Muslims" and "Muslims hate Jews". The first fallacy displays a complete lack of knowledge concerning the demographics of the Palestinian people, especially the influence of the Christian Palestinian Edward Saïd. The second fallacy displays a complete lack of knowledge concerning the history of the Jews and Muslims; while the treatment of the Jews under Muslim rule was subjective to time and place, it can be said with some safety that the general position of the Jewish people under Islamic rule was quite good.

Islamic apologism aside, there is another issue that Cute Wolf pointed out; "The Palestinian people did not exist before 1947". The concept of Palestine as a sovereign nation did not exist before the 20th century, but that does not mean there was no such thing as a Palestinian people with their own Arabic dialect (comparable to, but not the same as Syrian Arabic). Additionally, at the time that Israel was founded and the subsequent war, about 400,000 Arabs living in the area defined as Israel/Palestine were displaced. Many of the descendants still possess the keys of their now-demolished houses.

The Palestinian people are caught between a rock and a hard place; on the one side Hamas, who (democratically elected or not) currently holds the power in Gaza. Then there's Israel, who continue their siege of the Gaza strip; there is also a clear discrepancy in the attitute of the Palestinians of the West Bank, who are generally luke-warm towards Israel, and the attitude of the Palestinians in the Gaza strip, who are generally(!) more hostile.

It should also be noted that the Arab countries may appear to support the Palestinian cause, but apart from Jordan and Lebanon, there are few Arab countris that have accepted Palestinian refugees. The Iranian support for the Palestinian cause, I suspect has other roots, but I'm not willing to go into details about that. Mu‘ammar Gaddafi (yes, that one) also sent back a sizeable amount of Palestinian refugees as part of a deal with Israel.

On that note, many Arab politicans have used the Palestinian issue as a way to gain political support. We should keep in mind that Arafat himself was not a Palestinian, he was Egyptian.

All-in-all, the Palestinian issue has to be resolved, and the position the Likud party has taken is not helping at all. The Arabs have to accept the Israelis aren't going anywhere, and the Israelis have to accept the same for the Palestinians. It's not going to work in any other way, not until the leaders of both parties are going to sit down and talk seriously.

[Beskar]

Out of the six possible solutions I listed, which do you think is the most viable for the future?

[Sarmatian]

Should we go back from Anatolia we've violently conquered to Middle Asia where our homeland is, Grand sire ?

Most Europeans need to go back to India first and leave Europe to Basques and such. We just need to decide who goes where and when so we don't create a traffic jam.


The same could be said if the Germans occupy the north of the Netherlands. Hey, we're in the same group!

Or the Bosniaks Republic Srpska

Being a guy from the Balkans, I'm well versed in the we-were-here-first, my-God-can-beat-up-your-God and you-committed-atrocities-first rhetoric and as a rule, when it starts it doesn't end well.

[Tuuvi]

No. The Jews had lived there before they were in egypt.

No. Biblically speaking, the Jews didn't even exist before they were in Egypt.

[amritochates]

No. Biblically speaking, the Jews didn't even exist before they were in Egypt.

On what breaking archaeological discovery do you state the above sir??

When even a cursory perusal of the either the bible or wikipedia indicates otherwise!

Plus though I would add my two cents:

http://www.hudson-ny.org/1120/what-about-the-arab-apartheid-part-ii

Though I must confess the remembered the above only on seeing the Coptic church incident in Egypt on the news.

[Tuuvi]

On what breaking archaeological discovery do you state the above sir??

When even a cursory perusal of the either the bible or wikipedia indicates otherwise!

The word "Jew" means a member of the tribe of Judah, one of the twelve tribes of Israel. IIRC, the twelve tribes of Israel are the descendants of Jacob's twelve sons, who settled in Egypt.

[Noncommunist]

anyway, while absorption to Israel is the most viable option, I doubt Palestinians have the gut to swallow their own false sense of pride.

maybe forced relocation (just like what European colonists do with Native Americans and Australian Aborigines) of Palestinian people to somewhere else should be better. in the long run

Move them to North Dakota? I'm sure there's plenty of room for both peoples up there.

[KrooK]

maybe forced relocation (just like what European colonists do with Native Americans and Australian Aborigines) of Palestinian people to somewhere else should be better. in the long run

Speaking this style maybe we should relocate Jews. There would be no conflicts with muslims and Israel (into new place - maybe in the middle of USA) wouldn't have to spent so much money on army.

Sorry but theories about no Palestine nations before 1947 are funny. I can reply - Palestinians might not have been a nation, but Israel was definitely not a state.
These people feel that they are nation. They are not only muslims - they are Christians and muslims. Their cultural level is quite high (definitely much higher than into half of Africa). Why they should not have a state? Because they fight with agressor that sent them to camps. Sorry - this explanation seems wrong.

[Hax]

When even a cursory perusal of the either the bible or wikipedia indicates otherwise!

The Bible or Wikipedia. Truly, two great examples of fine historical sources.



What's all this :daisy: about relocating? Have we all lost our minds? This isn't some strategy game on the computer with simplistic mechanics that allows you to generate generic happiness by commiting genocide or forced relocation on a population, we're dealing with real people here. How would you feel if suddenly some arm-chair social historian that glanced sideways at Wikipedia a couple of times, from halfway across the globe suddenly dictated that you should move to North bloody Dakota, eh?

Not everyone's an expert, and people don't have to state theior opinion all the time. It's absolutely critical that people are well-informed, and if people can't make the effort to do more rudimentary research on a specific subject, in this case the history of Israel/Palestine, they should either not state their opinion, or shouldn't be surprised if that provokes a possibly hostile reaction from people that have invested some effort into this issue.


Sorry but theories about no Palestine nations before 1947 are funny. I can reply - Palestinians might not have been a nation, but Israel was definitely not a state.

The concept of the nation state is completely irrelevant; although the idea of the state exists in Islamic philosophy, the particularities that are commonly associated with the exact functioning of the state is factually a western concept. As such, the idea of the nation state as we know it was introduced by the Ottomans (and specifically through the Young Ottoman movement), but we shouldn't apply our concepts of the state on a society where that concept did not exist in the same way.

The pretension that "Palestine" was an empty land claimed by no-one is to be honest, quite silly.

[Kralizec]

The word "Jew" means a member of the tribe of Judah, one of the twelve tribes of Israel. IIRC, the twelve tribes of Israel are the descendants of Jacob's twelve sons, who settled in Egypt.

Strictly speaking, the term "Hebrew" is the name of the original ethnicity of the people we're discussing; whereas Judaism is a conventional name for the religion - derived from one of the tribes, as you say.

You're right about the Biblical origin story, but I have no idea what archeological evidence would lead us to believe.


The concept of the nation state is completely irrelevant; although the idea of the state exists in Islamic philosophy, the particularities that are commonly associated with the exact functioning of the state is factually a western concept. As such, the idea of the nation state as we know it was introduced by the Ottomans (and specifically through the Young Ottoman movement), but we shouldn't apply our concepts of the state on a society where that concept did not exist in the same way.

Generally speaking (about Europe), the existence of states preceed the formation of what we would call "nations". Of course there was a kingdom of England and a kingdom of France early on; but the people living in it weren't what we'd call homogenous, they'd be lucky if their respective dialects were mutually intelligable. The people in the Netherlands weren't a culturally homogenous bunch when we formed the Republic, and besides, in those days we basically spoke (several different) regional variations of germanic. Basically it's because of historical anomalies that we're not part of Germany; today our cultures are distinct but that's because we got seperatated and formed our own, distinct state centuries ago.

I also disagree with the "no Palestinian nation" line of reasoning, as previously said on page 1.

[Hax]

I'll take your word on that, as I haven't really looked into the formation of the nation-state in Europe, but rather its influence in the Middle East (and especially in the late Ottoman Empire), and how the concept of the nation-state was applied by the Young Ottomans.

[Cute Wolf]

Should we go back from Anatolia we've violently conquered to Middle Asia where our homeland is, Grand sire ?

well, that's allready 700 years ago

America is hardly 400 years ago

Australia is 300 years ago

...

well? Israel is allready 50 years, and more than 2 generations of refugees has been out there, how much the statue of limitation then? :clown: how long it can be said to be "ok, it's allready too long for complaining now"

...

and as we speak about history, we all know history is cursed to repeat itself, heck, it's a complete rarity now if a nation state today didn't have their ancestors at some points violently expel the "natives" of the land.

...

Palestine is just history in the making, and we all know this... let's speak about palestine issues 100 years from now

I'm not saying Israel can rightfully claim the land, but by all practical means, they are now controlling the land, peaceful solutions, if not nigh-impossible, is very very very unlikely, and if we want a short-term solution.... just let an open war to determine it like WWI and WWII.

In long term, and relatively more peaceful solution, it's better to simply kick out the Palestinians and relocate them somewhere else.

...

It works for anatolian greeks, it works for native americans, it works for australian aborigines, it always works in history.... so?

[Hax]

I'm not saying Israel can rightfully claim the land, but by all practical means, they are now controlling the land, peaceful solutions, if not nigh-impossible, is very very very unlikely, and if we want a short-term solution.... just let an open war to determine it like WWI and WWII.

I don't dislike Israel or Israelis, nor do I dislike Palestine or Palestinians.


But what I find absolutely disgusting is when people pretend to know politics and believe that the best solution to anything is forced relocation and/or violence. It's absolutely horrific and I have no qualms calling you out on this. Shame on you.


it works for native americans, it works for australian aborigines

Spoken like a man that has no comprehension of the history of either peoples.

[lars573]

Palestine is just history in the making, and we all know this... let's speak about palestine issues 100 years from now

I'm not saying Israel can rightfully claim the land, but by all practical means, they are now controlling the land, peaceful solutions, if not nigh-impossible, is very very very unlikely, and if we want a short-term solution.... just let an open war to determine it like WWI and WWII.

In long term, and relatively more peaceful solution, it's better to simply kick out the Palestinians and relocate them somewhere else.

...

It works for anatolian greeks, it works for native americans, it works for australian aborigines, it always works in history.... so?
Actually what happened to the Native American and Australian populations is what Israel is doing to the Palestinians now. Minus the necessary genocides that would occasionally pop-up.

[Cute Wolf]

Actually what happened to the Native American and Australian populations is what Israel is doing to the Palestinians now. Minus the necessary genocides that would occasionally pop-up.

yeah, I meant that, like it or not, history is cursed, and Palestinians will ultimately fail...

plus the Biblical prophecy as well... you just can't change fate

[LeftEyeNine]

plus the Biblical prophecy as well... you just can't change fate

You can not bring subjective approaches on life into a debate meant to be made within reasonable arguments. This is Monastery forum where history based on actual facts are discussed, not "The End Is Nigh, Embrace The Savior" board.

[Cute Wolf]

You can not bring subjective approaches on life into a debate meant to be made within reasonable arguments. This is Monastery forum where history based on actual facts are discussed, not "The End Is Nigh, Embrace The Savior" board.

well, let's settle this, Palestine, no matter where did you look from now, are History "in the making", and like it or not, the Bible actually is the one who correctly predict that the Israelites will return to their promised land, and they are now returning. Well, I'm not gonna shove any faith-based subjects here, but just look another way, whoever wrote the Bible, allready predicted the return of the Israelites and Philistines (palestinians) would be expelled from the promised land.

Israelite has been returned despite odds...

now, how much the chance Palestinians will be expelled, well dunno about the time, but in the end, they are cursed to be expelled from the promised land anyway, if you're gonna to the most humane solution, relocating them is the one option, since if you decide to stay there.... what if God (or if you don't believe about God, or think that Christian God is not your God... whoever the higher being... or alien... or conspiracy...) simply decide to mass kill the Palestinians that decide to stand their ground there by supranatural means?

well, according to "human morality" that was evil thing... but who can say about that to God Himself? Whatever he decide is his own wisdom, and we all know that God is the one who tell the Israelites to exterminate the Canaanites thousands of years ago anyway, and now He may decide to finish this once and for all maybe? He allready give grace by letting them go outta there... so?

It sounds God is dictactor of the universe then? of course, if he's dictactor of the universe, that means whatever he do will happen anyway... so?

[gaelic cowboy]

well, let's settle this, Palestine, no matter where did you look from now, are History "in the making", and like it or not, the Bible actually is the one who correctly predict that the Israelites will return to their promised land, and they are now returning. Well, I'm not gonna shove any faith-based subjects here, but just look another way, whoever wrote the Bible, allready predicted the return of the Israelites and Philistines (palestinians) would be expelled from the promised land.

Israelite has been returned despite odds...

now, how much the chance Palestinians will be expelled, well dunno about the time, but in the end, they are cursed to be expelled from the promised land anyway, if you're gonna to the most humane solution, relocating them is the one option, since if you decide to stay there.... what if God (or if you don't believe about God, or think that Christian God is not your God... whoever the higher being... or alien... or conspiracy...) simply decide to mass kill the Palestinians that decide to stand their ground there by supranatural means?

well, according to "human morality" that was evil thing... but who can say about that to God Himself? Whatever he decide is his own wisdom, and we all know that God is the one who tell the Israelites to exterminate the Canaanites thousands of years ago anyway, and now He may decide to finish this once and for all maybe? He allready give grace by letting them go outta there... so?

It sounds God is dictactor of the universe then? of course, if he's dictactor of the universe, that means whatever he do will happen anyway... so?

Eh the Israelites never left Palestine you know there must have been plenty of jews in the holy land during the Ottoman and British governed times.

Think about it are you telling us that every single jew left Palestine hundreds of years ago and suddenly popped up again in 1948

Therefore the bible has yet to tell us when they will all leave so as to fulfill the prophecy.

[Hax]

Eh the Israelites never left Palestine you know there must have been plenty of jews in the holy land during the Ottoman and British governed times.

Think about it are you telling us that every single jew left Palestine hundreds of years ago and suddenly popped up again in 1948

Therefore the bible has yet to tell us when they will all leave so as to fulfill the prophecy.

This is arguable. The area of Palestine has always known a Jewish population of some degree, but in general, other areas in the Middle East sported a much more sizeable Jewish population: there was a large Jewish population in Baghdad and also in Persia/Iran, which continues to hold the second-largest population of Jews in the Middle East.

[LeftEyeNine]

well, let's settle this, Palestine, no matter where did you look from now, are History "in the making", and like it or not, the Bible actually is the one who correctly predict that the Israelites will return to their promised land, and they are now returning.

I'd call this motivating the believers doing so rather than attributing superficial features to a holy book.

Still it has nothing to do with the science of history.