Now here is someone I can agree with.

Stephanie wrote:How should Palestinians act, in defense of genocide?

right, Steph, and I'll repeat "nobody's right when everyone's wrong."

Any cease-fire is precarious at best, and these wounds run deep over there. Best for us to stay out of it.

TerryRC wrote:And Australians, just like Americans, need to be able to encompass a little change.

It is inevitable, after all.

Why is change inevitable? Why do I have to change simply because another wants to immigrate here and then doesn't want to asimilate into our culture and form of government?

Why is change inevitable? Why do I have to change simply because another wants to immigrate here and then doesn't want to asimilate into our culture and form of government?

Because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Because history shows us NO examples where societies fail to change, with time.

People who can not adapt to change become unhappy and bitter.

Describe anyone we know?

Jihad vs. McWorld. I think the trends are for people to lose their cultural identity on the one hand, and overreact against modernity on the other. The times do change, but one's convictions should not be tossed about by every wave at sea.

TerryRC wrote:Why is change inevitable? Why do I have to change simply because another wants to immigrate here and then doesn't want to asimilate into our culture and form of government?

Because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Because history shows us NO examples where societies fail to change, with time.

People who can not adapt to change become unhappy and bitter.

Describe anyone we know?

And again I ask, Why is change INEVITABLE?

SheikBen wrote:Jihad vs. McWorld. I think the trends are for people to lose their cultural identity on the one hand, and overreact against modernity on the other. The times do change, but one's convictions should not be tossed about by every wave at sea.

In the world according to Terry and Ziggy, one cannot have convictions.

Sure one can have convictions- as long as one does not try to project those convictions onto everyone else.

ziggy wrote:Sure one can have convictions- as long as one does not try to project those convictions onto everyone else.

That is a two way street.

Stephanie wrote:It really upsets me more than mere words could ever express that so many people think the Palestinians should just lay down and die like dogs. I don't hate Jews. I certainly don't hate Hebrews, my only grandchild is 25% Hebrew. While the older I get the more useless "hate" becomes and the less energy I find myself able to commit to it, I sure do loathe fanatical Zionism.

Hi again Steph and Zig (and the rest of ya),

I do certainly see the distinction between anti-zionism and anti-Semitism, and I think people too easily blur the lines, just as anyone who opposes Obama's health care plan is dubbed racist by some.

I also do not think that somehow Israel and Israelis have the right to self-defense in a way that the Palestinians do not.

Having said that, there will never be peace in the Middle East as long as one side does not want the other to exist. Since this will always be the case, the United States, in supposing its ability to "fix" the situation, employs incredible hubris. We need to stay out of everywhere in the world not immediately in our necessary interests, and that is most everywhere.

Did the Palestinians "not want the other to exist" prior to the Balfour Declaration?

There has never been a nation of Palestine, has there? Was it not part of Jordan? If Palestinian nationhood were so important, why didn't the Arabs do it?

Great Britain held it, Michael. It didn't become an issue until the British decided to give part of it to the Jews for a state.

Before Britain who had "it?"

hmmm.........As I recall, and my memory certainly could be faulty on this regard, Palestine was acquired by the British with the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

History is not my strong suit, Mike.

btw........when somebody figures out just what my "strong suit" is, I'm hoping they'll let me know! lol

"The Balfour Declaration: After they defeated the Ottoman Turks and captured Palestine in 1918, the British began to fulfill the promise to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The League of Nations ratified this promise in 1922 by giving Britain mandatory power over Palestine with the understanding that it would eventually become a Jewish homeland.

The original Palestine mandate, promised to the Jewish people in the Balfour Declaration, and approved by the League of Nations in 1922, is the area circled by the dark blue line in the map to the right. (click on url to see map) Later in 1922, Britain wanted to find a kingdom for the son of a client king of Saudi-Arabia who had been deposed by an uprising by Ibn Saud. With League of Nations approval, England drew a line along the course of the Jordan River, splitting off two-thirds of the mandate and calling that area east of the Jordan River "Trans-Jordan."

http://israelvets.com/pictorialhist_nation_reborn.html

.

The area of the (Palestine) Mandate (which was all promised to the Jews) was originally 118,000 km2 (about 45,000 mi2). In 1921, Britain took the 91,000 km2 of the Palestine Mandate east of the Jordan River, and created Trans-Jordan (Arab Jordan) as a new Arab protectorate. Jews were barred by law from living or owning property east of the Jordan river, even though that land was over three-fourths (75.7%) of the original Mandate.
http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_overview.php[/b]

And out of the remaining 10,945 mi2 (24.3%) they took Gaza, the Golan Heights) and the West Bank, a total of 28.3% and are still trying to take the rest of it away from the Jews via the disingenuous guise of morals and human rights.

To wit:

Original Palestine mandate promised to the Jews - 45,000 mi2 (118,000 km2)
But Jordan got - 34,135 mi2 (91,000 km2) (75.7%)
And the remaining = 10,945 mi2 (24.3%) was divided up, to wit:

Israel – 7,849 mi2 (20,330 km2)
Gaza – 139 mi2 (360 sq km)
Golan Heights – 695 mi2 (1,800 km2)
West Bank – 2,262 mi2 (5,860 km2)

Thus, with respect to geographical area, the Jews ended up with only 17.45% of what they were initially promised and they are having to fight for their lives to keep that.

And all the partisan Palestinian Muslim loving “Jew Haters” are demanding that Israel give up more ….. and none of them are demanding that Jordan, who was promised nothing but got 3 times the “Lion’s share” of the Mandate, give up a single square foot of acreage.

Now you all can preach me another Sermon on morals, discrimination and/or human rights.


.

Sam,

The Jews didn't hold that land to begin with. What you're saying is they are entitled to it because somebody else "promised" it to them. Nobody asked the people living in the area at that time what they wanted, now did they?

Israel was a convenient solution to Europe's problem of Jews THEY DIDN'T WANT. So they figured they'd pawn them off on the Middle East, because nobody gave a shit about the Arabs. That doesn't make it right.

Stephanie wrote:Sam,

The Jews didn't hold that land to begin with. What you're saying is they are entitled to it because somebody else "promised" it to them. Nobody asked the people living in the area at that time what they wanted, now did they?

"To begin with" when? The time of King David, King Saul, King Herod or in 1946 before all hell broke loose, to wit:

Population of Palestine

Year .... Jewish ...... Arab
1883 ... 15,300 .... 356,000
1914 ... 61,000 .... 737,000
1922 ... 95,000 .... 726,000
1931 . 176,000 .... 881,000
1939 . 458,000 . 1,083,000
1946 . 603,000 . 1,340,000

As these population figures show, Jewish population during the period of modern Zionism grew exponentially. Arab population also quadrupled, as Jewish development attracted workers and tradesmen from surrounding Arab countries, and medical facilities established by the Jews were made available to all, reducing Arab child mortality and extending the longevity of adults. Jewish population grew dramatically in the 1930s as European Jews sought refuge in Palestine during the years of Nazi oppression prior to the Holocaust. England's "White Paper" of 1939, put severe restrictions on Jewish immigration, while Arab immigration from surrounding countries continued uncontrolled.

Stephanie, you haven't been under the impression that the Jews didn't show up in Palestine until after WWII, have you?

.

No, I have correctly been under the impression that Arabs outnumbered Jews in the area by a margin of something in the vicinity of 20 to 1 prior to the Balfour Declaration.

The reason they outnumbered Jews 20-1 BEFORE the Balfour Decision was due to the Ottoman Empire. Seems they sided with the wrong side in WW1, was defeated in the war and as such lost their land. That's how war works. And considering that's how the Arab’s gained the land to start with, well, that's how war works. As the victor, it was Great Britian's land to do with as they pleased.

But that's just my 2 cents.

Well now, it seems like every time those damn English got involved in partitioning property and those silly fanatical Muslims are involved, the killings begin and never cease It seems like those Muslims are not Happy Campers living with someone and are not Happy Campers living with themselves.

The subcontinent was to be divided into three major groups of provinces: Group A, to include the Hindu-majority provinces of the Bombay Presidency, Madras, the United Provinces, Bihar, Orissa, and the Central Provinces (virtually all of what became independent India a year later); Group B, to contain the Muslim-majority provinces of the Punjab, Sind, the North-West Frontier, and Baluchistan (the areas out of which the western part of Pakistan was created); and Group C, to include the Muslim-majority Bengal (a portion of which became the eastern part of Pakistan and in 1971 the country of Bangladesh) and the Hindu-majority Assam.

Britain's Parliament passed in July 1947 the Indian Independence Act, ordering the demarcation of the dominions of India and Pakistan by midnight of Aug. 14-15, 1947, and dividing within a single month the assets of the world's largest empire, which had been integrated in countless ways for more than a century. Racing the deadline, two boundary commissions worked desperately to partition Punjab and Bengal in such a way as to leave a majority of Muslims to the west of the former's new boundary and to the east of the latter's, but as soon as the new borders were known, no fewer than 10 million Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs fled from their homes on one side of the newly demarcated borders to what they thought would be "shelter" on the other. In the course of that tragic exodus of innocents, some 1 million people were slaughtered in communal massacres that made all previous conflicts of the sort known to recent history pale by comparison.

http://www.unigroup.com/PTIC/body_history.html

And there are silly thinking people that actually believe those Palestinian Muslims are going to start acting civilized iffen yer nice to them.

.

Aaron wrote:The reason they outnumbered Jews 20-1 BEFORE the Balfour Decision was due to the Ottoman Empire. Seems they sided with the wrong side in WW1, was defeated in the war and as such lost their land. That's how war works. And considering that's how the Arab’s gained the land to start with, well, that's how war works. As the victor, it was Great Britian's land to do with as they pleased.

But that's just my 2 cents.

Aaron,

You're analogy isn't a very good one. The people of that area didn't have the right to "choose a side". They were part of the Ottoman Empire, meaning they lacked the ability to make important political decisions like "choosing sides" in a war.

Well now, it seems like every time those damn English got involved in partitioning property

Sam,

Have you given any thought to the notion that perhaps, just perhaps, the problem isn't Islam, but instead the problem lies with Great Britain, the USA and others building nations and drawing arbitrary bounderies and telling other people how to live and installing governments? Perhaps, just perhaps, me and others like me are correct. Perhaps we should leave the Middle East to the Middle East and let the Arabs decide their own affairs.

Perhaps we should leave the Middle East to the Middle East and let the Arabs decide their own affairs.

Well Steph, therein lies the problem.

Would you be so kind to give me a synopsis of what you think would happen in the Middle East and the US over the next 20 years if the US was to do as you suggest?

And ps, have the Forum Webmaster fix this "editor" back to the way it was. I don't need to see every preceeding post in the thread when I am "previewing" my new entry.

Would you be so kind to give me a synopsis of what you think would happen in the Middle East and the US over the next 20 years if the US was to do as you suggest?

I think the Jews would be expelled from what is now Israel.