Israel..

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lynton

Lynton

awkward customer
Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,606
Name
Lynton (yes really!)
Edit My Images
No
Ok, without going into politics or religion (too much) if possible, can someone please explain Israel / Gaza / West bank to me....

My understanding was Israel was formed in about 1947 and occupied "Arab Land"... at the "disappointmen of" those who were there....

Seems to have been quite volatile for a while, more so lately, but I don't get the gaza strip / west bank thing..

Yeah I am a nugget.
 
Put as basically as possible as you've already said it was formed on occupied Arab land, those Arabs want it back, Israel don't want to give it back...that's really what it's all about as I understand it...

FYI doubt this thread will last all that long
 
Some good reading

The Great War for Civilization The Conquest of the Middle East

By Robert Fisk

:)
 
US political ties with Israel and lobbying would explain all that you see. Obama should really stand up for the good cause and at least issue an ultimatum here. What was his Nobel peace prize for some 6 years ago?!
 
President Carter wrote an interesting book called Palestine (Peace not Apartheid) which is a good read.
It's strange that for a lot of the world, it's ok that apartheid still exists out there.
 
A brief (hopefully non political) history story...

I think it all goes back to WW1. Both the French and the English were desperate to get the stateless Jewry on their side rather than on the German side. They had the money and contacts. Hence the Sykes/Picot agreement which effectively carved up what was the Ottoman Empire into the Middle East as we know today. Ever wonder why all the borders are straight lines? Then followed what is universally considered to be the most awful political statement ever known as the Balfour Declaration which promised the Jews their own land, just so long as they were on our side.

Trouble is we'd also promised the Arabs the same land just as long as they were on our side. We needed them to throw the Turks - German allies - out of what is now the Arab peninsula. We also wanted the moslems on our side to stop them revolting in India in support of the Germans which would have caused enormous problems.

WW1 finished and we sort of reneged on the deal and set up what was known as the Palestine Mandate under British control. Look up Treaty of Versailles. No home for the Jews. WW2 came along and we know what happened there. The Jews still wanted their homeland and all sorts of political machinations followed. Jews went back to Israel and conducted a terror campaign aimed at getting their independence. Look up King David Hotel massacre.

Then the state of Israel was created and the Palestinians were suddenly an inconvenience. Hence the present imbroglio.

That is briefly what happened although the actual events were far more complicated and stray into deep political areas which are better kept out of.

Arguably at the bottom of it all lies greed for power, influence, money and of course oil.
 
Last edited:
mickledore said:
A brief (hopefully non political) history story...

I think it all goes back to WW1. Both the French and the English were desperate to get the stateless Jewry on their side rather than on the German side. They had the money and contacts. Hence the Sykes/Picot agreement which effectively carved up what was the Ottoman Empire into the Middle East as we know today. Ever wonder why all the borders are straight lines? Then followed what is universally considered to be the most awful political statement ever known as the Balfour Declaration which promised the Jews their own land, just so long as they were on our side.
Click to expand...


There is, of course, a lot more to history than that but if we just keep it before 1920, with regard to the Balfour Declaration, it was Chaim Weizmann's fermentation of acetone at Manchester University that enabled Britain to beat the U-Boat blockade and manufacture enough cordite to win World War I - against many Jews who were proud German or Austrian citizens and against the many Arabs of the Ottoman Empire.

Weizmann of course went on to be the first President of Israel but you might also mention 1918's Faisal-Weizmann Agreement which was made between Zionists and Syrian/Iraqi Arabs before Sykes/Picot rode roughshod over everything
 
Totally agree. It's a vast melting pot and I doubt that the problems will be resolved in my lifetime - if ever.
So many promises made to so many people, often in direct contradiction to other promises. Secrets kept from supposed friends and allies. Imperialism at it's worst, on all sides.
 
It doesn't really help, does it Frank? Although I only listened until 5.11 when I heard the words "land grab" and switched off.

Perhaps you can find another trite little video that tells the story of those displaced Palastinian refugees between the years 1948 and 1967. Perhaps you can find a video that contrasts that experience with the story of the Jews who after 1948 found they had to leave their homes in Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Sudan, Algeria, Morocco ...
 
It is a problem that will not go away until both sides stop throwing bombs and rockets at each other. The history of the place is volatile,is is the history of the whole region.

But until they sit down and speak to each other, without the USA or UK or Saudi involved, then the destruction will continue. The vast majority,on both sides, just want to live in peace and raise their families, like most people caught up in wars that are fuelled by the bigotary of the few.
 
I agree with Fracster, the two sides have to sit down by themselves and sort out a solution but Israel is led by hard liners and Gaza is run by hard liners so it's not likely to be soon.

It's all too easy to side with the underdog in these situations and the way things get reported tend to aim you in that direction - Israel = bad, Gaza = good. Unfortunately it's not that simple, yes Israeli responses are harsh but so far in July there have been over 2,300 rocket and mortar attacks launched from Gaza, there's never a month goes by without attacks of some kind on some part of Israel.
 
And an interesting article from 2009 in the guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine


There's an interesting point at the end:

No amount of military escalation can buy Israel immunity from rocket attacks from the military wing of Hamas. Despite all the death and destruction that Israel has inflicted on them, they kept up their resistance and they kept firing their rockets. This is a movement that glorifies victimhood and martyrdom. There is simply no military solution to the conflict between the two communities. The problem with Israel's concept of security is that it denies even the most elementary security to the other community. The only way for Israel to achieve security is not through shooting but through talks with Hamas, which has repeatedly declared its readiness to negotiate a long-term ceasefire with the Jewish state within its pre-1967 borders for 20, 30, or even 50 years. Israel has rejected this offer for the same reason it spurned the Arab League peace plan of 2002, which is still on the table: it involves concessions and compromises.

Looking at the history of failed ceasefires since Hamas came to power, I'm not entirely sure that Hamas want a ceasefire without significant gains.
Hamas after all was founded to liberate Palestine from Israeli occupation and to establish an islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.
On 5 May, the deputy chairman of Hamas political bureau, said that "Hamas will not recognize Israel", adding "this is a red line that cannot be crossed".
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...rzouk-hamas-israel-fatah-reconciliation.html#

Until the hardline rhetoric stops from Hamas and the rocket attacks stop, then Israel will see itself as having to defend itself, as it has had to do since it's inception.
 
Not really into politics as such, my head's filled up with enough junk as it is but there is also the Ukraine crisis to be dealing with.

C'mon, this is the 21st Century, we should all be getting along just fine where war, greed and want should have been banished decades ago and we are all buzzing around in solar-powered driverless hover cars by now, but I guess we still have a lot to learn. Maybe mankind is just naturally destructive war-like, like the Klingons, even though we are actually capable of greater things if we put our collective minds to it.
 
Last edited:
Ian D J said:
Not really into politics as such, my head's filled up with enough junk as it is but there is also the Ukraine crisis to be dealing with.

C'mon, this is the 21st Century, we should all be getting along just fine where war, greed and want should have been banished decades ago but I guess we still have a lot to learn. Maybe mankind is just naturally destructive war-like, like the Klingons, even though we are actually capable of greater things if we put our collective minds to it.
Click to expand...

When did you last see a non-destructive 'video' game?
Where is the ongoing influence for politeness, manners and non-violence?
 
Without wishing to appear to take any side one of the major obstacles to peace has been the 1967 war in the region. There is a un resolution requiring Israel to return to its pre war borders which it has yet to do. Israel settlers grabbing Palestine land is also an issue.
 
boyfalldown said:
Without wishing to appear to take any side one of the major obstacles to peace has been the 1967 war in the region. There is a un resolution requiring Israel to return to its pre war borders which it has yet to do. Israel settlers grabbing Palestine land is also an issue.
Click to expand...

You might be surprised that I've only recently taken the side that I have!

But in answer, I'd mention that the outstanding UN resolutions placed obligations on both sides in the 1967 Six Days War, that have not been met by many of the obliged, including but not limited to the right of the State of Israel to exist. Like so many things in the middle East, the reality of ignoring UN resolutions is not so simple.

For example 'pre war borders'. Jordanian forces occupied the West Bank in 1948 and held it until 1967 in defiance of UN condemnation. There's much less Judaism there now than there was before they invaded. They spent the twenty years systematically dismantling synagogues and turning Jewish cemetaries into military lavatories. Now that's fairly unimportant to me, but imagine the outcry if the desecration were the other way round?

As for land grabbing, I was delighted when Israel physically removed extremist Israeli settlers from the Gaza Strip and returned it Palestinian habitation. Remind me how well that has worked out for everyone involved?
 
couple of points

a) i'm not clear (although i could be wrong) that palestine has ever been a self ruling state - prior to the advent of isreal was it not "British Palestine" , and I believe we took it from the turks at some point before that.

b) also are Palstinians arabs ? - my understanding was that they were a semitic people - basically jews who converted to islam while under turkish rule
 
Yves Geza said:
You might be surprised that I've only recently taken the side that I have!

But in answer, I'd mention that the outstanding UN resolutions placed obligations on both sides in the 1967 Six Days War, that have not been met by many of the obliged, including but not limited to the right of the State of Israel to exist. Like so many things in the middle East, the reality of ignoring UN resolutions is not so simple.

For example 'pre war borders'. Jordanian forces occupied the West Bank in 1948 and held it until 1967 in defiance of UN condemnation. There's much less Judaism there now than there was before they invaded. They spent the twenty years systematically dismantling synagogues and turning Jewish cemetaries into military lavatories. Now that's fairly unimportant to me, but imagine the outcry if the desecration were the other way round?

As for land grabbing, I was delighted when Israel physically removed extremist Israeli settlers from the Gaza Strip and returned it Palestinian habitation. Remind me how well that has worked out for everyone involved?
Click to expand...


Oh, I get just how complex the whole situation is. That's the whole reason I don't want to draw any judgement. They'll always be a good counter arguement either wat
 
No body can deny Israel the right to defend itself but its current strategy is completely self defeating. For every Hamas fighter/Palestinian they kill the brothers, fathers,siblings are all potential fighters, killing doesn't weaken Hamas it strengthens them. Those children now hiding from israeli bombs seeing what little they have being destroyed are future fighters. Its time to look at this differently from both sides, there has been far too much bloodshed already. Theres an interesting article in the Guardian last week here by Jonathan Freedland, I don't agree with everything he says but it is difficult to argue against the main tenet of the piece in that the current Israeli strategy is self defeating.
 
jakeblu said:
No body can deny Israel the right to defend itself but its current strategy is completely self defeating. For every Hamas fighter/Palestinian they kill the brothers, fathers,siblings are all potential fighters, .
Click to expand...

of course isreal would argue (with some justification) that they are all potential fighters anyway. The bottom line on this is that there is no solution that will be acceptable to both sides, and there is no way to prevent the two sides fighting. (short of one side or the other killing all of the oposition , or of a very heavy occupation of the area by a third party - neither of which are actually viable)
 
Hamas in May said Israel should not exist. Hamas was created as an organisation to take all of the land currently called Israel.

Don't you think that by firing rockets from heavily populated areas, knowing that israel will return fire, that Hamas know exactly what they are doing and are treating their people as expendable?
 
You cannot just look at the current conflict (which is just a rerun of 2009), you have to look at the history of the area since 1950's to even attempt to understand teh background.
 
Byker28i said:
Hamas in May said Israel should not exist. Hamas was created as an organisation to take all of the land currently called Israel.

Don't you think that by firing rockets from heavily populated areas, knowing that israel will return fire, that Hamas know exactly what they are doing and are treating their people as expendable?
Click to expand...

exactly - and exactly the same rationale various other terrorist organisations have used in engaging convential forces across the ages - but what can israel do ? not firing back is hardly an option. I'd suspect they take the view that if hamas don't give a s*** about their own people why should they care about them either
 
Byker28i said:
You cannot just look at the current conflict (which is just a rerun of 2009), you have to look at the history of the area since 1950's to even attempt to understand teh background.
Click to expand...

It goes back even further than that; back to WW1 and, in the minds of the Israelis and Palestinians, probably back into antiquity. So, no easy answers.
 
Byker28i said:
Hamas in May said Israel should not exist. Hamas was created as an organisation to take all of the land currently called Israel.

Don't you think that by firing rockets from heavily populated areas, knowing that israel will return fire, that Hamas know exactly what they are doing and are treating their people as expendable?
Click to expand...

But, it is not Hamas that are the main victims of Israel's attacks. The main victims are ordinary men, women and children. The Israeli assault will not stop the rockets attacks, it is just creating greater hatred of Jews and Israel. Whether the Israeli government chooses to kill/injure thousands of civilians or not will not prevent the rocket attacks.
 
big soft moose said:
exactly - and exactly the same rationale various other terrorist organisations have used in engaging convential forces across the ages - but what can israel do ? not firing back is hardly an option. I'd suspect they take the view that if hamas don't give a s*** about their own people why should they care about them either
Click to expand...

Yes, Israel can choose not to bomb/shell civilians.
 
PatrickO said:
Yes, Israel can choose not to bomb/shell civilians.
Click to expand...

For that to happen Hamas will need to stop concealing and firing rockets from urban areas within Gaza.

Personally I feel that this thread is rapidly drawing to it's foreseen and inevitable climax, where the Mods step in.
 
PatrickO said:
But, it is not Hamas that are the main victims of Israel's attacks. The main victims are ordinary men, women and children. The Israeli assault will not stop the rockets attacks, it is just creating greater hatred of Jews and Israel. Whether the Israeli government chooses to kill/injure thousands of civilians or not will not prevent the rocket attacks.
Click to expand...

How do you identify the 'fighter' from the rest of the civilian population.
 
Last edited:
PatrickO said:
Yes, Israel can choose not to bomb/shell civilians.
Click to expand...

and how do they do this when the hamas fighters are using their own civilians as a human sheild ? (lets not forget that hamas are also firing rockets at israili civilians - not purely at the IDF installations.
 
End of the day its war , civilians (on both sides) get killed in war - its unpleasant but thats what happens - if what israel is doing is a war crime , why does that differ from the RAF fire bombing Dresden or the USAF dropping atom bombs on hiroshima and nagasaki ?
 
big soft moose said:
End of the day its war , civilians (on both sides) get killed in war - its unpleasant but thats what happens - if what israel is doing is a war crime , why does that differ from the RAF fire bombing Dresden or the USAF dropping atom bombs on hiroshima and nagasaki ?
Click to expand...

The British and USA governments targetted civilians with their bombing in WW2. I regard those as war crimes. In addition it did very little to shorten the war. Bombing of military and industrial/transport targets is, of course, different. However, the Nazis, British and Americans intentionally targetted civilians.

I feel the Israeli government is venting it's frustration at being unable to prevent rocket attacks by attacking civilians. The point I keep coming back to is that the Israeli attacks are NOT preventing attacks on Israel. How can they when most of the people killed/injured are just ordinary folk like you and me?
 
Yves Geza said:
@PatrickO. We both know what's wrong. It's much harder to know what's better.

Dan Hodges wrote this excellent piece in The Telegraph last week.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/d...esponse-in-gaza-they-want-no-response-at-all/



Edited, just noticed - btw, thanks for mentioning anti-Semitism in your post. Israel is a great reason for anyone who wants to hate Jews but it's only a recent one for that same old bigotry!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. I'll have a look later. I agree that anti-semitism is an ancient problem - good old King Edward I in 13th century England set a good example to the Nazis. However, I still feel that the Israeli government is increasing hatred of both Jews and the Israeli state while doing very little to improve Israel's security.

And, yes I agree knowing how to move forward is almost impossible. Neither side is willing to make the compromises needed.
 
Last edited:
PatrickO said:
I feel the Israeli government is venting it's frustration at being unable to prevent rocket attacks by attacking civilians. The point I keep coming back to is that the Israeli attacks are NOT preventing attacks on Israel. How can they when most of the people killed/injured are just ordinary folk like you and me?
Click to expand...

And the point I keep coming back to is that hamas are killing civilians as well (and using their own civilians as a human sheild) - if Hamas didnt hide behind their own population israel wouldnt be targetting them - unlike Hamas who deliberately target the isreali civilian population. - seem's to me that its not the Isreali side who are the ones commiting war crimes here
 
big soft moose said:
And the point I keep coming back to is that hamas are killing civilians as well (and using their own civilians as a human sheild) - if Hamas didnt hide behind their own population israel wouldnt be targetting them - unlike Hamas who deliberately target the isreali civilian population. - seem's to me that its not the Isreali side who are the ones commiting war crimes here
Click to expand...

Both Hamas and Israel are guilty of war crimes IMHO. Both sides are deliberately targetting civilians.
 
Last edited:
PatrickO said:
Both Hamas and Israel are guilty of war crimes IMHO. Both sides are deliberately targetting civilians.
Click to expand...

So pretty much anyone who goes to war is guilty of a war crime then - unless they arrange to meet on a feild of battle well away from any civilian population. so thats pretty much the entire world.

fortunately the war crimes court requires a rather higher burden of proof
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top