All the territories the Israelis now possess are theirs by legal right -- the right conferred by the League of Nations Mandates Commission, when it carefully defined the territory which would be set aside, from the vast territories in the Middle East that had formerly been in the control of the Ottoman Turks as part of their empire, and which had been won by the Allies.
An Arab State, a Kurdish State, and a Jewish state were all promised. The Arabs got their state -- no, in the end, they got far more than their state but rather--as of 2006--22 members of the Arab League, the most richly endowed with natural resources of any states on earth, enjoying the fruits of the greatest transfer of wealth in human history The Kurds did not get their state, because by the time things had settled, Kemal Ataturk was driving a hard bargain and would not permit it.
2006-12-21 03:22:16 · 14 answers · asked by Ivri_Anokhi 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
All the land Israel has was won in wars, much like we beat the Indians and took their land.
The US occupied Japan and Germany after WW2, and stayed until WE felt those two countries were no longer a political or military threat.
Israel should stay until the Arabs can show they are absolutely not a threat to Israel.
Israel is the only nation that has won a war, and was then asked to give back territory they won.
2006-12-21 06:32:05 · answer #1 · answered by bettysdad 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am not sure what you mean. These vast territories in the Middle East were not empty of people; a civilization much older than your own was there. Men from the other side of the world decide to carve up the land and oust the landowners with no compensation, and then think that that won't incite resentment. What were they thinking?
The Arabs didn't 'get' their state. It was always theirs. You can't give people something they already own. A Kurdish state would have had the same results as the Jewish state. But you can't 'give' peoples land without consequences to the people who were there first. While they were at it, why not a Gypsy state, an Eskimo state, an American Indian state, a Catholic state, etc. The list is endless.
The state of Israel is a done deal, and Israeli's should stick to the land they were given without trying to take over more territory.
2006-12-21 04:42:40 · answer #2 · answered by Webber 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What makes the land belong to Russian Jews? yet you're maximum surprising approximately Arabs being a minority, because of the fact Palestinians are not Arab. Palestinians have lived interior the section because of the fact the Neolithic; they are descended from the comparable center genetic inventory as countless the Jews interior the diaspora. Israelis be attentive to this- they use the Palestinian genome to evaluate with Jewish populations through the international in an attempt to coach a link with Palestine. It does exist, yet in basic terms a small proportion of Jewry it. If all Palestinians are Arab, does not that coach that Jews are Arabs too? The Crusaders did no longer somewhat expel each physique, the Crusades weren't approximately expansionism, comparable with the Turks. Do you have any information of this? there is plenty information that Jews have been expelled after all- and that i do no longer think of there are various that dispute it. in basic terms curious, the place did you arrive on the statistic, "for the reason that then Arabs have been a tiny minority in Israel, Judea and Samaria"? because of the fact there became no such place as Israel because of the fact the Assyrian conquest, nor Judea for the reason that Hadrian.
2016-12-11 13:38:13 · answer #3 · answered by vasim 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Hardev. The Arabs have 22 states, and the Muslims in totality have more than double that number. The Jews have only one tiny state, and their enemies would like to dismantle it.
One tactic is to invent a hitherto-unknown "Palestinian people."
Webber seems to think that invisible people inhabited the Holy Land. The truth is that eyewitnesses such as Mark Twain and Rev. Manning of England who visited the Holy Land in the 19th century wrote that the land was barren and empty. The population then was less that 5% of today's population.
In fact, Joan Peters in her book "From Time Immemorial" tells us that the return of the Jews in 1800's and early 1900's created jobs and Arabs from impoverished areas were drawn into the Holy Land for work. Peters also tells us that in 1948 so many Arabs were new to the area and could not qualify for the UN requirement for refugee status (people forced to leave "permanent" or "habitual" homes) that they added a clause permitting refugee status for Arabs who had been there as little as two years.
Thus the Zionist slogan "The Land without a people for the people without a land" was absolutely correct. The slogan did not mean that there were no inhabitants at all in Palestine, it just indicated that the non-Jewish population constituted a conglomeration of dozens of heterogeneous groups of residents having very little in common, i.e. not constituting a single nation, a people. These residents were not united by any specific national idea. Parkes wrote that the Balfour declaration for the first time established a "unit called Palestine on a political map. ...There was no such thing historically as a 'Palestinian Arab', and there was no feeling of unity among 'the Arabs' of this newly defined area".
2006-12-21 04:05:27 · answer #4 · answered by Mashtin Baqir 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The Kurds do really deserve a state.
The problem is they are spread out over sections of Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Iran.
If we could carve a nation out of those states it would be great.
As for the west bank. It would be foolish to give it back to an Arab group after three wars.
What Israel needs to do is pay the Palestinians in the west bank to voluntarily leave to other Muslim nations, and convince those nations to take them.
2006-12-21 14:59:18 · answer #5 · answered by Gamla Joe 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Israel, Judea, and Samaria all belong to the Jewish nation, as was G-d's promise to them in the Bible.
The 200 million Arabs surrounding Israel (a tint country smaller than New Jersey, with barely 6 million inhabitants) have 22 countries of their own!
2006-12-21 05:00:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
regardless of the vagaries of the findings of a commission almost a century ago, the West Bank is predominantly Arab and should either be a free Palestine or part of a one state Israel which does not ethnically discriminate as the current apartheid system there does.
the kurds, with 20 million people the largest minority without a state should be given a state which is protected by the UN and Turkey threatened with no EU membership if it atttacks it.
it is all a bit idealistic, i agree, but a fair democratic vote in the areas concerned would be a vote for self-determination, which is a right according to the UN charter.
2006-12-21 03:37:39 · answer #7 · answered by Boring 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes, I agree..........
The Kurds deserve a place of their own.
But as a soldier I also know that a war would break out before the treaty was signed..... and you know that as well.
So how do we do this?
Turkey has categorically stated it would "destroy an Kurdish free state on its border". Syria has said the same thing about Kurds living in Northern Iraq. Iran only bides its time, and the Kurdish Peshmurga fighters KNOW this and train diligently everyday.
2006-12-21 03:26:26 · answer #8 · answered by wolf560 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I say let's quit holding back Israel and let them take care of the Arabs. Maybe then they will get the big picture that Israel just wants to be left alone.
2006-12-21 04:34:29 · answer #9 · answered by jay r 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Israel wins the case for ownership over Judea and Samaria.
2006-12-21 14:20:10 · answer #10 · answered by mo mosh 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋