You mean the way a million ethnic Frenchmen who’d been living in Algeria for over a century were treated?
There’s a reason Shukairy said the Palestinians would “throw the Jews into the sea” and you’ll notice that in the 1948 War(the last time Jewish territory was conquered by an Arab army) every section of land taken by the Arab armies had it’s Jewish population promptly expelled.
It’s not a fact, but in this case I agree that it’s an obvious implication. But I would think it’s almost as obvious that there would be some sort of accommodation, and not automatic expulsion, for Jews who arrived after WW II. How generous that accommodation would be is sheer speculation.
I will refer you to Mr. Mace, who a few posts ago said the establishment of Israel did not necessitate the displacement of any Palestinians.
So are you retracting the statement you made a few posts ago, about how the establishment of Israel did not necessitate the displacement of Palestinians?
No. Why should I? Most of the Israeli Jews in Israel are either immigrants or descendants of immigrants who came there after the 1948 war.
Yes, and two years before that, Jewish terrorists blew up the King David hotel.
Look, I’ve conceded several times that the Palestinians could do something stupid. OF COURSE it’s possible. But IMO it’s borderline racist to assume that they would (that is a general comment, not directed at you or anyone else on the board), and citing incidents from over 60 years ago, AGAIN, does nothing to add to your case.
And I will refer you to post #144.
Huh?
You’re referring to the blowing up of the HQ of the British military intelligence in Palestine by the Irgun.
The Irgun didn’t become the government of Israel.
The Revisionists were a minority despised by most of the Jews in Palestine.
Furthermore, the most moderate of Palestinian leaders have been guilty of terrorist acts far, far worse than that.
For example, Abbas was one of the moneymen behind the Munich massacre.
Er, you’re completely dodging the issue.
You first tried to claim that the Palestinians would respect the Jews and pointed to the Covenant which, with all due respect, you didn’t seem to really understand.
I pointed out that the founder of that organization and one of the men drawing up that Covenant specifically called for “kicking the Jews into the sea”.
You’ll also notice during the recent talks about declaring a Palestinian state, PA leaders announced that any Jews living there would have to leave.
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about people you’ve never met and a topic which you seem to have some hazy recollections about.
I’m not sure what you mean to accomplish by a tu quoque. Obviously, the creation of Israel did result in the displacement of many Palestinians, whether this was “necessary” or not; and subsequent to that displacement, hundreds of thousands of Jews immigrated to Israel (in fact, many from other nations in the ME, where their living became increasingly under threat). This, when the population arab & jew was considerably smaller than it is now.
The obvious corrollary would be that, were the Palestinians to return, some similar displacement of the current inhabitants would be required - all the moreso that the populations are now much increased.
Er no, this discussion began because you misquoted Cole and I commented that Jews weren’t considered Palestinians by Palestinians.
The view of “what the guy on the streets” matters in such a case and I can assure you that the Palestinians of Ramallah don’t consider Jews living anywhere to be “Palestinians”.
Moreover, the idea that Yasser Arafat or Ahmad Shukairy ever considered David Ben Gurion a Palestinian, which you seem to be peddling, is utterly asinine.
Precisely.
Ahmadinejad certainly seems to think so. He’s suggested that the Palestinians be allowed to hold a referendum on sending Israel’s Jews to Alaska or Canada.
Huh?
Are you trying to suggest that there are Palestinians considerably more moderate than either Fayyad or Abbas who could take over?
That’s the only way your above quote makes any sense.
Please give me their names and tell me why you think they’ll come to power.
Everyone else seems to think if someone other than the Fatah leadership(the equivalent to the Irgun) came to power it would be the vastly more radical Hamas or possibly Marwan Barghouti(though he’s currently cooling his heels in jail for a number of bombing vastly more morally questionable than the King David bombing).
As a side note, Franco did feel the need to return the favor and help the Axis in WW2 by allowing the recruiting of the Blue division for the German Army from Spanish volunteers. As you say Spain and Iran were neutral, if having pro-Axis leanings. The only way that “insisting that that Shah wasn’t allied with Hitler is like claiming that Franco wasn’t ,” is that they both are very imprecise with the use of the word ‘allied’ as neither was allied with Germany. Even Finland insisted that it was not an ally of Germany, but was rather a co-belligerent in the war against the USSR.
Israel has a de facto alliance with the US? How interesting.
At least this is progress from the shopworn “Israel is strongest military ally of the US in the region.” Progress is meaningful.
The content of Israel’s obligations under this alliance is a topic for another thread.
Clearly, Turkey is a stronger ally, being a member of NATO.
But, yeah, we don’t get much from Israel out of our alliance, other than some intelligence. It’s not like we stage anything militarily out of Israel. We save that for Kuwait and other Arab allies in the region.
So’s mine, and I’m a betting man. But only a third of my horses actually win. And I only break even on my bets, long-term, which, while it does mean I beat the track cut, it doesn’t mean I can quit my day job on that “profit”…
Don’t risk your day job over that money. But I see that others have addressed the political and religious questions. Inshallah.
Shalom.
I don’t mean to come across as being snarky, because I think Flying is being a bit too certain, but you used the phrase “Inshallah” improperly.
Why must it be with conventional airstrikes? Why not a continuation of the current methods, for example; Stuxnet? Or targeted assassinations? You need to not just make a case that Israel has to take action, but also make a case that airstrikes are the best action.
Once again, what makes you think they can?