Re Mark's post: the UN determined that both Israel & Palestine?

Question

would be states. This is of course 100 % true.

Now will Mark please acknowledge that it wasn't the Jews who stopped that partition plan from happening! They said yes to it - it was the surrounding Arab countries that rejected it. This is verifiable fact - check any history book.

Why won't Mark and others just be fair and acknowledge this?

OLLIE - how can you agree that the UN ratified Israel, just like Jordan, and then say it was taken 'by force'??? It was not. Get your facts straight.

WILLIE V - no, you need to go further back to 1947/8 when Partition was first suggested. The British, as you will know I'm sure :) held the mandate and they proposed that Palestine be separated into two states - one Arab, one Jewish. The Jewish part was tiny but the Jews, then desperate for a safe haven, agreed. The entire Arab world rejected the idea - outright.
Don't take my word for it, though; this is all verifiable, historical fact.
Within 12 hours of Israel declaring independence, seven Arab armies attacked her. That's how she got some of the land not originally hers, she acquired it while pushing back the attacking Arab armies.
Thus - if the Arabs had agreed to partition back then, then today there would BE a Palestinian state already!

Since then, the peace talks that keep taking place are always falling apart, sadly. Hope this helped clarify :)

MIMI - I did in fact in this post stress it was the Arab leaders that prevented the Palestinian state from being formed back in 1948. But to be fair, you are the only Muslim that I personally have 'spoken' with who acknowledges that the Arab leaders did this - and yes, the Palestinians have suffered TERRIBLY as a result. I don't disagree with you on that!

That said, I don't think the Israelis have been 'greedy'. Please remember that they only got that extra land while DEFENDING themselves against attacks from Arab neighbours. But I agree there must be a Palestinian state.

MIMI - I did in fact in this post stress it was the Arab leaders that prevented the Palestinian state from being formed back in 1948. But to be fair, you are the only Muslim that I personally have 'spoken' with who acknowledges that the Arab leaders did this - and yes, the Palestinians have suffered TERRIBLY as a result. I don't disagree with you on that!

That said, I don't think the Israelis have been 'greedy'. Please remember that they only got that extra land while DEFENDING themselves against attacks from Arab neighbours. But I agree there must be a Palestinian state.

B: The British made the basic decision because rightly or wrongly, they held the mandate for Palestine. I think partition was fair because as you know, there were many Jews living there already; we didn't suddenly descend on Palestine in 1948!!
The UN then ratified the partition plan. Using your logic, there would be no such country as Jordan; after all, it too was 'artificially' created and ratified by the UN, was it not?

Under the Partition plan, the Palestinian state would have been quite a lot larger than the Jewish state. I think it's such a shame that the Arab leaders rejected it because I truly believe if the Palestinians had stayed, and not been called out so the neighbouring Arab states could attack, then the Jews and Palestinians would have been fine together - and today there WOULD be a Palestinian state, existing alongside Israel.

MICHAEL J - ok, point taken about naming Mark, though I truly didn't mean it offensively, was just trying to get his attention!!

But fair point MICHAEL J - and thank you yet again for such an excellent and well informed answer.

Answer 1

The Jews' willingness to compromise on territory was demonstrated not only by their acquiescence in the UN's 1947 partition plan, which gave them a state with squiggly, indefensible borders, but even by their earlier acceptance of the 1937 Peel Commission partition plan, which gave them nothing more than a part of the Galilee and a tiny strip along the coast.

Yet the Arab nations, refusing to accept any Jewish sovereignty in Palestine even if it was the size of a postage stamp, unanimously rejected the 1937 Peel plan, and nine years later they violently rejected the UN's partition plan as well.

When the Arabs resorted to arms in order to wipe out the Jews and destroy the Jewish state, they accepted the verdict of arms. They lost that verdict in 1948, and they lost it again in 1967, when Jordan, which had annexed the West Bank in 1948 (without any objections from Palestinian Arabs that their sovereign nationhood was being violated), attacked Israel from the West Bank during the Six Day War despite Israel's urgent pleas that it stay out of the conflict. Israel in self-defense then captured the West Bank.

The Arabs thus have no grounds to complain either about Israel's existence (achieved in 1948) or about its expanded sovereignty from the river to the sea (achieved in 1967).

The Arabs have roiled the world for decades with their furious protest that their land has been "stolen" from them. One might take seriously such a statement if it came from a pacifist people such as the Tibetans, who had quietly inhabited their land for ages before it was seized by the Communist Chinese in 1950.

The claim is laughable coming from the Arabs, who in the early Middle Ages conquered and reduced to slavery and penury ancient peoples and civilizations stretching from the borders of Persia to the Atlantic; who in 1947 rejected an Arab state in Palestine alongside a Jewish state and sought to obliterate the nascent Jewish state; who never called for a distinct Palestinian Arab state until the creation of the terrorist PLO in 1964 ­sixteen years after the founding of the state of Israel; and who to this moment continue to seek Israel's destruction, an object that would be enormously advanced by the creation of the Arab state they demand. The Arab claim to sovereign rights west of the Jordan is only humored today because of a fatal combination of world need for Arab oil, leftist Political Correctness that has cast the Israelis as "oppressors," and, of course, good old Jew-hatred.


.

Answer 2

Mark and Mimi, I disagree strongly with your assessment of history:
mark- I well recognize your point that the Zionist immigrants started the violence, as you've stated it before. As I recall, you felt that mass immigration was justification for the mass Arab riots against Jews that killed hundreds of unarmed civilians (and coincidently, convinced the Jews to form their own militias for protection). However, in an unbiased world we recognize that xenophobia is not sufficient to justify rape and murder, which the Arabs in Palestine routinely visited on the Jews in Palestine until the founding of Israel. The Arabs started the killing, not the Jews, and 'moving in great numbers' is not enough to invite violence.
Mimi- as a continuation of above, clearly the Arabs in Palestine did take part in the slaughter of Jews (look up riots such as 1929). I find it inconceivable that they would gladly riot and kill Jews, yet as soon as actual war breaks out they would desist. The most logical conclusion is that they continued, and were simply recruited into the invading armies. Even after this war, the Palestinians had 20 years to found a country, which they chose not to do. Now some of what you say is true: the Arabs did convince the Palestinians to leave. However, Israel not forcibly evict those Arabs left in Israel (hence the 18% Arab minority). You make it sound like in this same war Israel took everything; the truth is Israel was again attacked in 1967 (which the Palestinians fullt supported I might add), and only defensively did Israel conquer the land, i.e. 'greadily steal' in your terminology. You fail to mention the 20 years that land was in Palestinian hands without a mention of a drive for a country. You also fail to mention the start of Palestinian terror, which preceeded this 'gready steal'-ing by at least three years. You continue to call it Palestinian land, despite the fact that the Palestinians of that time had no qualms with calling it Jordanian land and living as Jordanians. While Israel may not be 'generous', I believe we can both agree that considering history, if the tables were turned the Palestinians would never accept a Jewish state. Considering Arab rejection of this idea since it was first proposed - even when they had all the land they currently demand - its quite clear that if the Arabs had a chance to destroy Israel they would take it (see: 1948, 1967, 1973 etc.). Israel may not be the most magnanimous, but I don't think any Arab power has the right to call Israel out on that. Lastly, Israel does diffrentiate between civilian and terrorist - if they didn't they would simply carpet bomb and kill everybody, which despite popular claims is simply not the case. Israel has killed civilians, but never intentionally, and that is a huge difference between Israel's relationship to the enemy and "the other side's" treatment of Israel (i.e. every citizen is an enemy worth killing).
To the poster: I don't think it right to call out an individual on a public forum. Wouldn't an e-mail conversation be more fitting?

Answer 3

Okay I have a question, why should the UN decide whether or not jewish people should be allowed to take the land of Palestine from the people living in it ?? why didn't the ''UN'' ask the Palestinian people what they thought about this, YOU KNOW, since they were the ones LIVING THERE ?!

And btw, if being a war mongerer makes it acceptable steal land, does this mean that I can steal American land ????

edit: ''Under the Partition plan, the Palestinian state would have been quite a lot larger than the Jewish state.''

Nope, false. The ''UN'' wanted to ''give'' 40% of the land to the Palestinians, and 60% to the jews. Even though the jews only constituted a 30% minority. And as I said, according to your analogy then I now have the right to go to the United States and steal some land ! hey maybe I'll do that.

And btw you're twisting all the facts and trying to compare this to something it's not. The state of Jordan wasn't ''created'' by the Un, it was declared by them (as an independent state), and it wasn't created on top of someone else's home. That's the difference.

Answer 4

Paperback. It is not the Palestinians who attacked the Israelis, it is the neighbouring Arabic countries. They attacked Israel and they caused so much fear and the Palestinians had to pay for their (I mean the Arab's) evil action. Now, the Arabs treat the Palestinians like animals in their countries. But here are few things I would like you to remember:
1) The Arab leaders convinced the Palestinians to leave temporarly. This was one reason the Palestinians became refugees.
2) The fear of the war and the poverty that the innocent Palestinians suffered from because of the war and the loss of their relatives. This also pushed some of them to leave.
3) The Palestinians who lived in the Areas that were assigned to the Israelis by UN lost their houses and had to leave.
4) The Israelis were so gready and occupied the other half of the land that was actually assigned to the Palestinians. They defeated the arabs but they DID steal the Palestinian land and you can't deny that.
5) Now when the palestinians are asking for a part of their right, the Israelis are acting like innocents, generous, and peaceful who are willing to "give up" a part of "their" land to a group of terrorists.
6) Generalizing is bad and the Israelis aren't able to differentiate between the terrorist and the innocent civilians, they are treating everybody the same.

Peace/Salaam/Shalom


paperback:

"I think partition was fair because as you know, there were many Jews living there already; we didn't suddenly descend on Palestine in 1948!! "

You are right about that except that you are not aknowledging the fact that ONLY 20% of the population were Jews and the rest 80% were other races (mainly Arabs).

Second you say the Partition plan was fair because the Arabs got far more land. If you mean Jordan for that, please excusme. Jordan is something else totally and it is never included and was never included it in the Map of Israel. It is totally Arabic and was always Arabic never ever belonged to Israel or to a Jew. Jordan was not given to the Arabs by UN.
We are only talking about what is NOW called Israel. Only 44% of it was given to the Palestinians and the rest 56% was given to the Jews, although as I mentioned before the Jews were minority and yet they get more land and the leadership would become theirs. That's what made the Arabs angry and they attacked Israel.

Peace


B
the website that you provided once:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYIXukpMIIY
says they were only 20% not even 30% Jews. The Jews would of course say it is biased because they disagree with it but we know it is the truth.

Answer 5

I do acknowledge that was a political mistake by the Arab leaders at that time. But you have to please acknowledge that those leaders were English subjects at that time and what they did is to carry out the English orders by all means to make sure that Israel will be created that was the English goal from the outset. Please acknowledge that the native people of Palestinian did not start the conflict the Zionist immigrants did when they moved to Palestine in great numbers.
Legal right claims do not go away by occupation as long as the Palestinians are calling for their legal rights according to international law and the world legal system which created both Palestine and Israel in the same resolution 181.
Finally, we all know the facts of the Israeli-Palestinian case. All we need is to have Israel agree to a court to rule over the issue and if Israel case is right why the Israeli continue to refuse to accept any role of international court to rule over the issue of Palestine vs. Israel.

Edit: Michal j, your conclusion clearly ignores the main issue of who started or how the conflict started and should the Palestinians be responsible as a people for the Arab leaders wrong decisions. Palestinian Jews lived in peace as Palestinians before the Zionist call for a Zionist state that fact you tend to ignore completely. But logical debate will lead to the conclusion that Zionism started the conflict from the outset. I hope you understand my point of debate. There were the Zionist movement and the Arab leaders who are equally responsible for the Palestinian tragedy up to now days.

Answer 6

PB - I fully agree with your first sentence but I would say you have to further enlighten me on your 2nd.

There was a point in time where I was under the impression that Palestine will finally become a sovereign state and if my calculation is correct - it could be next year or the year after.

That particular point in time was so momentous that it produced Nobel Peace Price Winners and for the first time, seeing a great handshake between an Arab and a Jew after Sadat and Begin.

I was reffering to that historic agreement betwen the late Rabin and Arafat which basically will serve as the cornerstone of Palestine as an eventual state. Until Mr. Rabin fell from a fellow Jew.

And as we know now, the region is again almost back to zero. My disagreement is isn't it that the ME lost it first with Mr. Rabin's downing?


EDIT 1

This is what I like about this section. Thanks for your added info. I would love to see more comments from the others contributors....will monitor this one.

Answer 7

A Muslim-Arab state was created in Palestine in 1922.
It's now called Jordan.

The UN General Assembly vote was on the creation of a second Arab state in Palestine (this one to be west of the Jordan River) and a Jewish state.

The UN voted in favor of this plan, and Israel declared its statehood on May 14, 1948. The new state was immediately attacked by the combined armies of the Arab world seeking to "finish Hitler's work" as they called it.

(Note: the only people called "Palestinians" in 1948 were Jews)

Answer 8

Paperback - its called re-writing history - the funny thing is a lot of people who say they were pro-Palestinian from the get go were initially against such UN resolutions like 242 and the like - see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242 but they now support an re-interpret it as a method to beat Israel over the head. Its just another way of showing how the Palestinians and/or their Arab supporters (or whatever you want to call them) like to politically and legally shoot themselves in the foot if what their goal is to achieve a peaceful resolution and support of the two-state Idea that was agreed upon by the United Nations back in 1947. It would be nice to see Mark and his supports on this issue agree to this facts of history, but usually they like to deflect from the history record in a manner which only leds to more conflict and death for both Israelis and Palestinians.

Good Luck!!!

Answer 9

People are going to believe what they want regardless of any proof you can offer to the contrary. Give it up you will never get them to change their positions.

Answer 10

It's not about Islam and Jews Its about Israelis and Arab Palestinians

Yes the Arab Palestinians want a piece not peace, no more pieces, no more consesions !!!!