English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

6 answers

How far back do you want to go? The original conflict is between the desendants of Israel (Jews) and Ishmael (Palestinians) who were the sons of Abraham. Both claim the "Promised Land" as an inheritance from their mutual ancestor. The Hebrew invasion by Joshua killed or displaced most of the local inhabitants, and Palestine was largely Hebrew until the rise of Rome.

When Rome was preoccupied with other wars, the Jewish Zealots rebelled. In 70 A.D. Titus, with three legions, sacked Jerusalem, burned the Temple and scattered the majority of the Jewish population throughout the empire as exiles. (Hence, for centuries, the phrase "Next year in Jerusalem") Over the centuries, descendants of Ishmael (and other Arab peoples) filled the void left by the Exiles. With the arrival of Islam, most of these Arabic people converted.

Palestine was a Turkish possession until the First World War. Upon their defeat the Transjordan (Palestine and Jordan) became a British possession. After World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust, many European Jews left the countries that had oppressed them, seeking a homeland in Palestine. Others supported or joined them from around the world. The British tried to limit/stop this immigration, but not very successfully. There was a strong political push throughout Western Civilization to allow the Jews a homeland (the Holocaust was a strong moral motivator for this.) The Jewish leaders were offered territories in Africa and elsewhere, but refused. They insisted on returning to Jerusalem. Zealots, led by David Ben-Gurion and others, actually began an armed revolt against British rule. Britain, exhausted by the war and under political pressure at home and abroad, abandoned their efforts to stop the Jews from returning, and decided to allow them their own country. In 1948 the Brits divided Transjordan into Arab and Jewish sections, The Arab section to Jordan, the Jewish section to Israel. The Jews saw this as a return to their ancestral homeland. The Palestinians saw it as being displaced from their homeland (for centuries) by newcomers.

In 1948 the surrounding Arab nations invaded Israel, intent on destroying the new state and retaking "their" homeland. They were soundly defeated. Israel siezed the West Bank from Jordan, the Golan Heights from Syria and Gaza from Egypt. Tens of thousands of Palestinian families fled, fearing oppression by Israel. These are the Palestinian "refugees", wanting to return to their homes.

Who has the moral right in this conflict depends on your perspective. Ishmael is the firstborn son (from a concubine), but Israel is the legal heir (from a wife). The original inhabitants were pretty much killed by the first Hebrew invasion, but their descendants and relatives are the ones who moved in once Titus exiled the Jews. Each side can claim great antiquity. Each side can claim inheritance. Each side can claim they have been displaced by interlopers from "their" land. Each side can claim thousands of years of "ownership" of the same territory. Each side does. Add religious differences to the racial and cultural hatred, and you've got an unresolveable issue.

2006-12-19 12:35:30 · answer #1 · answered by antirion 5 · 3 0

any such vast quantity of 'large' diplomats have tried to broking service a deal contained in the midsection East. who's succeeded? Jimmy Carter is the in effortless words one i am going to imagine of, with the Camp David contract between Israel and Egypt.. appears like another US and uk negotiator develop into in effortless words attempting to impose his personal will on the Israelis and Palestinians. perchance the worst develop into GW Bush's 'Roadmap to Peace'. Bush merely laid down the words and stated 'it is whatcher gunna do.' at the same time as each and every part stated 'Hell no', Bush merely left it by myself. He couldn't lose so he did not attempt. Blair is more beneficial of a compromiser, an accommodater. it is why he took Britain into the Iraq conflict, to abode Bush. He would have fulfillment the position others have failed, because it truly isn't any longer all about HIM.

2016-11-27 21:03:12 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I am as un biased as they come, I dont like either one, but to answer your question, when the state of Israel was formed in 1940something, the combined forces of all their Arab neighbors told the Palestinian people to temporarily vacate their properties, so they could wipe out the new jewish state, and drive them into the ocean, well things did not quit work out as they had planned, and they got their arses whipped badly, with the result that the Israelis kept the conquered land, ( to the winner go the spoils of war ), so now the Palestinians are all living in refugee camps, and are still shouting for the jews to be driven into the ocean, and I guess this is it in a nutshell, hoped you learned something.

2006-12-19 12:48:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The Palestinians believe the Israelis stole their land from them and also believe they (the Israelis have no rights to the land or to be in the middle east for that matter) the fact is that Israel was formed after WWII when other countries refused to accept the Jewish refugees

2006-12-19 12:07:34 · answer #4 · answered by crawler 4 · 2 0

I have always felt that there can be a solution to anything if we all sit down together and talk about it and get along in this world, but seems some macho testron bobo has to fly off the handle and make a blood bath out of it and then the other side will never forget it so it just goes on forever

2006-12-19 12:29:08 · answer #5 · answered by xyz 6 · 0 1

The deal?.. You want to know what's the deal?, very simple, I don't need a whole page to tell you, they are natural enemies, always been, always will, forget about land or anything else, they hate each other, as simple as that..☺

2006-12-19 15:58:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers