# Please explain the Middle East crisis **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 21, 2006, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487 "2006-07-21T15:17:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/101 "2006-07-27T05:45:47Z")
[The history of Israeli Aggression from 1967](http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51a/) I must have made this up too. The Israelis are apparently blameless in the problems and I just cant understand that. There are American made munition dropping in Lebanon and its a one sided slaughter. I can not feel good about it. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/102 "2006-07-27T06:18:34Z")
> [@Least Original User Name Ever](#): > > [The history of Israeli Aggression from 1967](http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51a/) I must have made this up too. The Israelis are apparently blameless in the problems and I just cant understand that. There are American made munition dropping in Lebanon and its a one sided slaughter. I can not feel good about it. From that cite: > [@](#): > > _Hartford Web Publishing is not the author of the documents in World History Archives and does not presume to validate their accuracy or authenticity nor to release their copyright._ That doesn’t exactly inspire confidence. Interesting how the title of that compiation says it’s a history of Israeli aggression from 1967 onward but neglects to mention the Yom Kippur War (which started with a sneak attack by Egypt and Syria) in 1973. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 7:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/103 "2006-07-27T07:29:48Z")
Did you try clicking on any of the links in that so called history? Click on the one labled “The history of the Six-Day War, June 1967”. One would presume that this would take you to a discussion ABOUT the 6-Day war, some background about the conflict, maybe some facts (or even fiction) about what actually transpired. At least I would presume so. But no. It takes you to 3 links entitled: "USS Liberty: Did Israel commit one war crime to hide another? ", “Truths about the Six-Day War: U.S. CIA & military secretly helped Israelis” and “Twists and turns of standoff”. These links lead to further bullshit. This site is so blatantly anti-Israeli that its fairly sickening to even dig through it. Its no wonder that L.O.U.N.E is spouting what s/he has been spouting in this (and other related) threads of this kind if THIS is the tripe s/he has been reading. > [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > Interesting how the title of that compiation says it’s a history of Israeli aggression from 1967 onward but neglects to mention the Yom Kippur War (which started with a sneak attack by Egypt and Syria) in 1973. I’m sure the site found that even THEY couldn’t spin the Yom Kippur war in such a way as to make the Arabs look good and the Israeli’s look bad. So…it was just inconvinent for them to include it on their wonderful web site. L.O.U.N.E. has probably never heard of the conflict and thinks you made it all up…you evil person you! Here is a cite discussing the [Yom Kippur War](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War) if L.O.U.N.E is interested. Here is a brief section discussing the events leading up to the war: > [@](#): > > Events leading up to the war > > Anwar Sadat in 1972 publicly stated that Egypt was committed to going to war with Israel, and that they were prepared to “sacrifice one million Egyptian soldiers.” From the end of 1972, Egypt began a concentrated effort to build up its forces, receiving MiG-21s, SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and SA-7 Surface-to-air missiles (SAM), RPG-7s, T-55 and T-62 Tanks, and especially the AT-3 Sagger anti-tank guided missile from the Soviet Union and improving its military tactics. Political generals, who had in large part been responsible for the rout in 1967, were replaced with competent ones. > > The role of the great powers, too, was a major factor in the outcome of the two wars. The policy of the Soviet Union was one of the causes of Egypt’s military weakness. President Nasser was only able to obtain the material for an anti-aircraft missile defense wall after visiting Moscow and pleading with the Kremlin leaders. He claimed that if supplies were not given, he would have to return to Egypt and tell the Egyptian people Moscow had abandoned them, and then relinquish power to one of his peers who would be able to deal with the Americans. The Americans would then have the upper hand in the region, which Moscow could not permit. > > One of Egypt’s undeclared objectives of the War of Attrition was to force the Soviet Union to supply Egypt with more advanced arms and war materiel. Egypt felt the only way to convince the Soviet leaders of the deficiencies of most of the aircraft and air defense weaponry supplied to Egypt following 1967 was to put the Soviet weapons to the test against the advanced weaponry the United States supplied to Israel. > > Nasser’s policy following the 1967 defeat conflicted with that of the Soviet Union. The Soviets sought to avoid a new conflagration between the Arabs and Israelis so as not to be drawn into a confrontation with the United States. The reality of the situation became apparent when the superpowers met in Oslo and agreed to maintain the status quo. This was unacceptable to Egyptian leaders, and when it was discovered that the Egyptian preparations for crossing the canal were being leaked, it became imperative to expel the Russians from Egypt. In July 1972 Sadat expelled almost all of the 20,000 Soviet military advisors in the country and reoriented the country’s foreign policy to be more favorable to the United States. > > The Soviets thought little of Sadat’s chances in any war. They warned that any attempt to cross the heavily fortified Suez would incur massive losses. The Soviets, who were then pursuing détente, had no interest in seeing the Middle East destabilized. In a June 1973 meeting with U.S. President Richard Nixon, Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev had proposed Israel pull back to its 1967 border. Brezhnev said that if Israel did not, “we will have difficulty keeping the military situation from flaring up”—an indication that the Soviet Union had been unable to restrain Sadat’s plans (Rabinovich, 39). > > In an interview published in Newsweek (April 9, 1973), President Sadat again threatened war with Israel. Several times during 1973, Arab forces conducted large-scale exercises that put the Israeli military on the highest level of alert, only to be recalled a few days later. The Israeli leadership already believed that if an attack took place, the Israeli Air Force would be able to repel it. > > Almost a full year before the war, in an October 24, 1972, meeting with his Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, Sadat declared his intention to go to war with Israel even without proper Soviet support (Rabinovich, 25). Planning was done in absolute secrecy—even the upper-echelon commanders were not told of war plans until less than a week prior to the attack, and the soldiers were not told until a few hours beforehand. The plan to attack Israel in concert with Syria was code-named Operation Badr (the Arabic word for “full moon”). It really illustrates those peace loving Arabs…in contrast to those aggressive and warmongering Israeli’s. > [@Least Original User Name Ever](#): > > The Israelis are apparently blameless in the problems and I just cant understand that. There are American made munition dropping in Lebanon and its a one sided slaughter. Couple of points about the whole ‘one sided slaughter’ thing. First point is…so what? As has been pointed out to you numerous times, Israel didn’t start the conflict. If I go up and kick a guy who is bigger and stronger than me in the nuts, why would I be surprised if he then comes over and kicks my ass?? Second point being…where do you get the impression its ‘one sided’? HB is putting up quite a fight from what I’ve been reading…and THEY are tossing rockets into Israel (indiscriminately at civilian targets btw…they aren’t even pretending to target only military targets). From what I read today several IDF soldiers were killed just today attempting to take out a HB command post. The other points I want to make is…appearently you CAN’T understand whats really going on, based on the numberous threads you have attempted to trot out your line of BS in. It really is more complex than you seem to understand. As to US munitions being used…so what? Iranian, Chinese, Russian, etc munitions are ALSO being used (from various sources). You don’t seem to be bitching about THAT little fact. > [@Least Original User Name Ever](#): > > I can not feel good about it. I’ll let you in on a little secret…NO ONE feels good about this (well, maybe the good folks over at HB do…and there are probably some Iranians who aren’t exactly wringing their hands in misery over events as well). Even the Israeli’s aren’t exactly jumping for joy over whats going on. But there comes a time when enough is enough, when just one more attack breaks the ole dromedaries spine. Hezbollah has finally pushed things to that point, and Israel is no longer willing to let things slide, or go back to the status quo. The only acceptable solution (from their perspective) is for HB to be removed completely from southern Lebanon. If the Lebanese want to end this thing they are going to HAVE to deal with that…one way or the other. There are several nations who are poised to help them remove HB from southern Lebanon…by force if necessary. But its going to be up to the Lebanese to decide if they really want peace…or not. -XT ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 7:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/104 "2006-07-27T07:40:30Z")
Just for drill, here is a decent history of the [6-Day war](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War) (same Wiki source)…since the one you provided L.O.U.N.E doesn’t actually TALK about the 6-day war (in any meaningful way). Here is another brief blurb about the reasons for the war: > [@](#): > > Main reasons for the war > For Egypt, the 1956 Suez War was a military defeat but a political victory. Heavy diplomatic pressure forced Israel to withdraw its military from the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza Strip. After the 1956 war, Egypt agreed to the stationing of a UN peacekeeping force in the Sinai, UNEF, to keep that border region demilitarized and prevent guerrillas from crossing the border into Israel. As a result the tense situation on the border between Egypt and Israel gradually diminished. The war’s aftermath saw the region return to an uneasy balance without any real resolution of the region’s difficulties. At the time, no Arab state had recognized Israel. > > Syria began sponsoring guerilla raids into Israel in the early 1960s as part of its “people’s war of liberation”[citation needed], designed to deflect domestic opposition to the Baath Party. Israel and Syria also had an ongoing dispute about water and territorial rights along their 1949 cease-fire line. On April 7, 1967, a minor border incident escalated into a full-scale aerial battle over the Golan Heights, resulting in the loss of six Syrian MiG-21s to Israeli Air Force (IAF) Dassault Mirage III, and the latter’s flight over Damascus. Other border incidents in which Israel and Syria exchanged artillery, tank and aircraft fire increased the tensions along this front. The Israeli government was under heavy pressure to put an end to Syrian shellings of border villages. > > On May 18, 1967, Egypt formally requested the withdrawal of UNEF from Sinai. UN Secretary-General U Thant complied, thus removing the international buffer which had existed along the Egyptian-Israeli border since 1957. Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser then began the re-militarization of the Sinai, and concentrated tanks and troops on the border with Israel. > > On May 22, Egypt announced that the Straits of Tiran would be closed to “all ships flying Israel flags or carrying strategic materials”, with effect from May 23.[10] Israel viewed the closure of the Straits with alarm and demanded the US and UK open the straits as they guaranteed they would in 1957. Harold Wilson’s proposal of an international maritime force to quell the crisis was adopted by US President Johnson, but received little international support. The Israeli cabinet met on May 23 and decided to wait 48 hours for the Tiran straits to be reopened before launching a pre-emptive strike, as well as sending Israeli Foreign Affairs Minister Abba Eban to Washington to meet with President Johnson. The US administration insisted that Israel allow more time for a diplomatic solution to be reached, and warned Israel not to attack. A similar message was received in Israel from the Soviet Premier, Alexey Kosygin, and the Israeli cabinet decided on May 28 to wait an additional two weeks before taking further action[11]. > > In his speech to Arab trade unionists on May 26, Nasser announced: “If Israel embarks on an aggression against Syria or Egypt, the battle will be a general one… and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel.”[12] > > On May 30, Jordan signed a five-year mutual defensive treaty with Egypt, thereby joining the military alliance already in place between Egypt and Syria. Jordanian forces were placed under the command of Egyptian General Abdul Munim Riad. This put Arab forces just 17 kilometres from Israel’s coast, a jump-off point from which a well coordinated tank assault would likely cut Israel in two within half an hour. Such a coordinated attack from the West Bank was always viewed by the Israeli leadership as a threat to Israel’s existence. On the same day, Nasser proclaimed: “The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel … to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not of more declarations.”[13] > > At the same time, several other Arab states not bordering Israel, including Iraq, Sudan, Kuwait and Algeria, also began mobilizing their armed forces. > > On the evening of June 1, Israeli minister of defense Moshe Dayan called Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin and the GOC, Southern Command Brigadier General Yeshayahu Gavish to present plans to be implemented against Egypt. Rabin had formulated a plan in which Southern Command would fight its way to the Gaza Strip and then hold the territory and its people hostage until Egypt agreed to reopen the Straits of Tiran while Gavish had a more comprehensive plan that called for the destruction of Egyptian forces in the Sinai. Rabin favored Gavish’s plan, which was then endorsed by Dayan with the caution that a simultaneous offensive against Syria should be avoided.[14] > > Newly declassified documents reveal that the United States of America had worked feverishly behind the scenes attempting to “hold the Israeli tiger” in the days leading up to war. The Johnson Administration received guarantees from Egypt that it would not strike first and arranged a diplomatic visit from Egyptian envoy Zakaria Mohieddin who was scheduled to depart on June 6, 1967. The diplomatic cable stated “we hope it will be possible for him to come without delay” and there were high hopes in the Johnson Administration that the visit would lead to the end of the crisis. > > On June 4, Iraq joined the military alliance with Egypt, Jordan and Syria Enjoy! 😛 -XT ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/105 "2006-07-27T13:01:32Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > How about because Israel is a modern democracy with civil rights, a well functioning economy, and people who are very much like us? You might as well ask why we are allied with Japan, or Britain, or many of the former Soviet countries who are now moving towards NATO. > > Historically, Israel was critically important to the U.S. because most of the Arab countries sided with the Soviet Union during the cold war. This is also the source of our strong ‘friendship’ with Saudi Arabia, despite the mischief they’ve gotten into lately. > > And speaking as a person who grew up in a fundie Christian community, I can tell you that the honest affection for Israel has little to do with the belief in the imminent second coming. What I learned in church is that the Jews are God’s chosen people, and as such they didn’t need to come to Jesus for salvation like everyone else did. People in the church also recognized that the Jews had been great stewards of Christian relics and holy sites, and that the Arabs were not. Jews may not be Christians, but they are fellow travelers. The Arabs were often seen as the enemy, the people who would like to kill Christians and Jews or turn them into second class citizens. That alone made Jews and Christians allies. This is all very richly anecdotal for which thanks are due. The tiniest of quibbles is that it does not particularly respond to the question; which was: > [@DragonAsh](#): > > Will have to do a bit more reading. One more question - Isreal and the US are supposed to be allies - why? **What’s in it for the US?** _Bolding added_. What indeed? Perhaps the easier response is to contemplate the losses to the US should its relationship with Israel terminate. I must confess to finding a list of such measurable demerits a little difficult to compose. Fortunately there are many voices here with more creative power than I presently command. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/106 "2006-07-27T13:11:30Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > What’s in it for the US? > [@Sevastopol](#): > > What indeed? Not a difficult question to answer. On practical grounds, promoting and protecting democracy in the Middle East as an example for other area nations with minimal freedoms is surely in the American interest. Gaining insight into effective anti-terrorist activities from a nation that has had to learn to cope with them for decades is also valuable. Israeli intelligence (Mossad) has shared information with their counterparts in the U.S. and other countries and given warning about movement of terrorists out of the region. ---
**Author:** ![Noone\_Special](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/noone_special/32/2863_2.png) [@Noone\_Special](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Noone_Special)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/107 "2006-07-27T13:21:42Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > What’s in it for the US? It gives the US a (generally) reliable ally and toehold in the region (you do realize that 6th fleet ships often use Haifa port for R&R and supplies) – At, what cost in US soldiers’ lives? Yes, I thought it was zero. Compare to Iraq. It also gives the US a only-very-slightly-roundabout way of subsidizing the American arms industry (you do realize that nearly all the $1.8 B Israel gets every year **must** be spent as $$ in the US, don’t you?) Again – cost to US taxpayers is, _ **at most** _ (if you ignore the fact that most of it is used to buoy US industries, provide American jobs, etc…), $1.8B a year. Actually, as I said, probably a lot less (if not a net gain for the US economy) Again, compare to Iraq. And this is all just hard-nosed, bottom-line stuff, not even bringing up wishy-washy concepts such as Democracy, Western ideals, freedom, friendship… ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/108 "2006-07-27T13:31:56Z")
I completely agree with the subsidy to the US arms industry. OTOH the US has plenty of reliable allies in the region, so I can’t give you that one. Had Israel contributed troops to Iraq, then the point would be sound. But most of all you are correct to repudiate **Jackmannii’s** wishy-washy stuff. Overall though, I’m more and more convinced the better way to think it through is just as I’ve outlined above. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/109 "2006-07-27T14:24:46Z")
[Here’s](http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060731/nasrallah_game) an article speculating on **why** Hassan Nasrallah, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah, decided, after things were relatively quiet for so long, to start lobbing shells into northern Israel, precipitating a predictable military response. The author thinks Nasrallah is partly just rendering service to his backers in Iran and Syria, but mainly, he acted out of desperation to prevent Hezbollah in Lebanon from being disarmed and reduced to just another political party. ---
**Author:** ![Thing\_Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@Thing\_Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thing_Fish)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/110 "2006-07-27T18:10:04Z")
In response to the OP, the best short history of the conflict that I am aware of that does not attempt to demonize either side is Healing Israel/Palestine by Rabbi Michael Lerner, available from [www.tikkun.org](http://www.tikkun.org) . I have been having trouble posting to this thread for some reason, so I will try to post this now and, if successful, will return with some of my own thoughts. ---
**Author:** ![Thing\_Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@Thing\_Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thing_Fish)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/111 "2006-07-27T18:48:55Z")
Ah, there it goes. I think **Dseid**'s post #74 is a good brief summary of the relevant history. I would stress, however, that the vast majority of the Jews who immigrated from Europe to Palestine in the pre-State period did so not because they were inflamed with Zionist ideology and just decided to leave their homes and go steal other people’s land, but because they were fleeing from discrimination and in many cases the very real threat of violent death. (and those who were Zionist ideologues at that time were much more likely to be secular socialists than religious zealots, btw). The notion that they were vicious imperialists enabled by “powerful Jewish politicians around the world” (which country exactly was it that had numerous Jews in positions of high political power in the late Forties?) is just a canard bordering closely on anti-Semitism. **Finnagain**'s long post somewhere in the mid-80s is a generally accurate overview of the way in which cynical Arab governments (and, more recently, radical Islamist movements) have manipulated the pan-Arab and pan-Muslim sentiments of their people to focus their anger at the oppressors of the Palestinians while being distracted from their own corrupt and dictatorial governments; meanwhile, they make no effort to actually contribute constructively to the resettlement of Palestinian refugees. **LOUNE**'s link in #79 provides a cogent analysis from the Palestinian perspective of the shortcomings of Israel’s negotiation posture. For the last 35 years, even while occasionally negotiating with Palestinian leaders, Israeli governments of all parties have continued to condone the settlement of Jewish civilians in the territory occupied in 1967, in clear violation of international law. Recently, Israel has built its “separation wall” largely on Palestinian land, furthering the _de facto_ annexation of much of the West Bank. To be clear, I am not saying that Israel does not have the right to maintain as much of a military presence in the Occupied Territories as it deems necessary to protect its citizens, nor that it does not have the right to build a wall for that purpose – but it does not have the right to permanently annex that territory, nor to settle civilians there. Even after the recent evacuation of Gaza, the settlements in the West Bank continue to grow, making Israel’s alleged commitment to peace look extremely dubious. The outline of the ultimate solution is clear, though getting there will be politically complicated. There will be a Palestinian state encompassing most of the land occupied by Israel in 1967; any alteration of the borders will be arrived at through a process of genuine mutual negotiation, not unilateral “generous offers”. The right of Palestinians who fled Israeli territory in 1948 to return to Israel will be recognized; however, since Israeli Jews will (justifiably) never accept becoming a minority in their own country, financial compensation will have to be offered to those choosing not to return, such that very few of them will actually choose to return (and such compensation should also be offered to Jews forced out of Arab countries around that time). Almost certainly, an international peacekeeping force will be required to enforce this agreement for many years; if we see how difficult it has been for the posters on this thread, who presumably have no direct connection to the conflict, to treat each other respectfully, how much less should we expect the people who have actually fought each other for so many years to arrive at a position of mutual trust and respect within a short time! But I still hold out optimism in the long run; who would have believed a hundred years ago that France and Germany would be in a mutually agreed-upon economic union and no longer find it necessary to fortify their mutual border?! ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/112 "2006-07-27T20:20:45Z")
> [@Thing Fish](#): > > Ah, there it goes. I think **Dseid**'s post #74 is a good brief summary of the relevant history. I would stress, however, that the vast majority of the Jews who immigrated from Europe to Palestine in the pre-State period did so not because they were inflamed with Zionist ideology and just decided to leave their homes and go steal other people’s land, but because they were fleeing from discrimination and in many cases the very real threat of violent death. (and those who were Zionist ideologues at that time were much more likely to be secular socialists than religious zealots, btw). The notion that they were vicious imperialists enabled by “powerful Jewish politicians around the world” (which country exactly was it that had numerous Jews in positions of high political power in the late Forties?) is just a canard bordering closely on anti-Semitism. > > **Finnagain**'s long post somewhere in the mid-80s is a generally accurate overview of the way in which cynical Arab governments (and, more recently, radical Islamist movements) have manipulated the pan-Arab and pan-Muslim sentiments of their people to focus their anger at the oppressors of the Palestinians while being distracted from their own corrupt and dictatorial governments; meanwhile, they make no effort to actually contribute constructively to the resettlement of Palestinian refugees. > > **LOUNE**'s link in #79 provides a cogent analysis from the Palestinian perspective of the shortcomings of Israel’s negotiation posture. For the last 35 years, even while occasionally negotiating with Palestinian leaders, Israeli governments of all parties have continued to condone the settlement of Jewish civilians in the territory occupied in 1967, in clear violation of international law. Recently, Israel has built its “separation wall” largely on Palestinian land, furthering the _de facto_ annexation of much of the West Bank. To be clear, I am not saying that Israel does not have the right to maintain as much of a military presence in the Occupied Territories as it deems necessary to protect its citizens, nor that it does not have the right to build a wall for that purpose – but it does not have the right to permanently annex that territory, nor to settle civilians there. Even after the recent evacuation of Gaza, the settlements in the West Bank continue to grow, making Israel’s alleged commitment to peace look extremely dubious. > > The outline of the ultimate solution is clear, though getting there will be politically complicated. There will be a Palestinian state encompassing most of the land occupied by Israel in 1967; any alteration of the borders will be arrived at through a process of genuine mutual negotiation, not unilateral “generous offers”. The right of Palestinians who fled Israeli territory in 1948 to return to Israel will be recognized; however, since Israeli Jews will (justifiably) never accept becoming a minority in their own country, financial compensation will have to be offered to those choosing not to return, such that very few of them will actually choose to return (and such compensation should also be offered to Jews forced out of Arab countries around that time). Almost certainly, an international peacekeeping force will be required to enforce this agreement for many years; if we see how difficult it has been for the posters on this thread, who presumably have no direct connection to the conflict, to treat each other respectfully, how much less should we expect the people who have actually fought each other for so many years to arrive at a position of mutual trust and respect within a short time! But I still hold out optimism in the long run; who would have believed a hundred years ago that France and Germany would be in a mutually agreed-upon economic union and no longer find it necessary to fortify their mutual border?! Very good post. Just a question about this: > [@](#): > > and such compensation should also be offered to Jews forced out of Arab countries around that time This I assume refers to the Shephardim, most of whom settled in Israel. Who is going to be offering them compensation? ---
**Author:** ![Thing\_Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@Thing\_Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thing_Fish)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/113 "2006-07-27T20:40:04Z")
In a perfectly just world, Israel would compensate the Palestinian refugees (or their descendants) and the Sephardim would be compensated by the governments of the countries they fled from. In reality, I think this compensation is going to have to come from some sort of international fund. Israel probably can’t afford to pay out the required sums by itself (and I will admit ignorance when it comes to having an idea of what the sums are going to be). Maybe the US can redirect those billions it currently gives in military aid to Israel (which, as has been pointed out, are really a thinly disguised government subsidy to the arms industry). ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/114 "2006-07-27T20:44:41Z")
[http://www.aljazeerah.info/Editorials/2003](http://www.aljazeerah.info/Editorials/2003) Editorials/May-August 2003/Israeli aggression in the past and present, By Hassan El-Najjar and Michael Bokerelli.htm Every incidense you will reject. I will of course have to see you as a reasonable observer. I have no dog in this fight. Im not jewish or arab. I want to see peace in the middle east. I think Isralies contribute to the unrest. How any one can find them blameless and reject every counter case I dont know. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/115 "2006-07-27T21:47:51Z")
> [@Least Original User Name Ever](#): > > I think Isralies contribute to the unrest. How any one can find them blameless and reject every counter case I dont know. Well of course, they _contribute_. Rather actively contribute, too. Most of the time, they’re not the ones who start it, though, and they’ve made the largest number of attempts to end it. I assume[this](http://www.aljazeerah.info/Editorials/2003%20Editorials/May-August%202003/Israeli%20aggression%20in%20the%20past%20and%20present,%20By%20Hassan%20El-Najjar%20and%20Michael%20Bokerelli.htm) is the link you were trying for (Al Jazeera editorial from 2003 on Israeli aggression, past and present). In the article, Michael Bokerelli asks some questions and Hassan El-Najjar (I don’t know who either of these men are, by the way) answers them. Notably (relevant excerpts taken): Bokerelli: I would just like to ask you to explain yourself when you use the terms Israeli agression [sic] and israeli [sic] wars. I certainly hope you are not referring to the War of Independance [sic], the 6-Day War, the Yom Kippur War, and the War of Attrition. These wars were all declared on Israel but the Arab world, not the other way around. Hassan: The 1948 war, which you describe as the war of independence and I describe as An-Nakba (the Calamate or the Disaster), is the original example of Israeli aggression. By the end of that war… Hassan relabels the 1948 war _but ignores who actually started it_. Further, he describes _all_ military actions of Arabs as being merely reactive to earlier Israeli actions. This is very convenient, since his earliest cite of proto-Israeli aggression goes as far back as 1897, and from this, apparently, all 20th-century Arab attacks can be justified. If I could do so without violating the SDMB policy on copyright, I’d copy and paste (with attribution) the entire article and invite analysis of Hassan’s remarks. I’m willing to bet they wouldn’t stand up to careful factual scrutiny. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2006, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/116 "2006-07-27T21:56:58Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > OTOH the US has plenty of reliable allies in the region, so I can’t give you that one. Had Israel contributed troops to Iraq, then the point would be sound. I don’t think the US really wanted Israel to contribute troops to Iraq. Israel did provide intelligence support, though, and there’s some evidence that Israel is training anti-insurgent Kurdish forces in Northern Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/117 "2006-07-28T10:03:36Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > I don’t think the US really wanted Israel to contribute troops to Iraq. Israel did provide intelligence support, though, and there’s some evidence that Israel is training anti-insurgent Kurdish forces in Northern Iraq. Makes for an interesting sort of alliance doesn’t it? When exactly has Israel contributed troops to a US war or cause? By intelligence support I assume you mean: “Keeping quiet so as not to be a wet blanket.” Are there still no takers on the challenge to list the losses to the US should its relationship with Israel terminate? Perhaps I’ve underestimated my own powers of creation. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/118 "2006-07-28T10:50:36Z")
> [@Sevastopol](#): > > I completely agree with the subsidy to the US arms industry. OTOH the US has plenty of reliable allies in the region, so I can’t give you that one. Had Israel contributed troops to Iraq, then the point would be sound. Years ago, Israeli friends of mine told me that Israeli scouts helped out in the first Gulf War Since quite a lot of Israelis are of Iraqi origin, one can be pretty sure that they have made themselves useful. It would be a bit tactless broadcasting it though. Another amusing thing I was told, is that when going undercover in Gaza or the West Bank, they would use spray on beard stubble. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/119 "2006-07-28T15:32:30Z")
> [@Thing Fish](#): > > In a perfectly just world, Israel would compensate the Palestinian refugees (or their descendants) and the Sephardim would be compensated by the governments of the countries they fled from. In reality, I think this compensation is going to have to come from some sort of international fund. Israel probably can’t afford to pay out the required sums by itself (and I will admit ignorance when it comes to having an idea of what the sums are going to be). Maybe the US can redirect those billions it currently gives in military aid to Israel (which, as has been pointed out, are really a thinly disguised government subsidy to the arms industry). Seems to me, given that the numbers of Shephardim and Palistinians displaced are about equal, that most of the Shephardim became citizens of Israel, and that it is Israel which would theoretically be on the hook to compensate Palistinians, whereas the Arab & Iranian governments would theoretically be on the hook to compensate the Shephardim, that the easiest and most fair solution would be to have the Arab & Iranian governments cut out the middleman and directly compensate the Palistinians, and the Israelis directly compensate the Shephardim. ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487/120 "2006-07-28T15:40:08Z")
[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc\_sec\_18\_00002331----000-.html](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002331----000-.html) we are all terrorists according to US code. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-the-middle-east-crisis/365487.md?page=7)