if I was an Isreali . . .

I think you hit the nail on the head there allhailIndia. The borders of all countries were created through war, migration, settlement, arbitrary agreements, and thus arguing who owns what on moral grounds, especially in the ME is pointless. All there is to do is change things under the present circumstances.
 
Can I post a point or two about the 73' war?
All from memory, so I might be wrong about a few details.

First of all, regarding the Egyptian tactics.
They were brilliant for the short range, i.e. occupation of the Sinai.
As long as the Egyptian forces stayed inside Egyptian AA batteries range, they had an advantage. The Egyptians had no ability to move further since beyond EAAB range, Israel had complete air superiority. That left the Egyptians, which "Brilliantly" planned to occupy the Sinai, but hapless regarding any further advancement, in a disadvantage. The moment Israel successfully used ground forces to destroy the EAAB, Israel had complete air advantage on the rest of the territories, and the war vs. the Egyptian front was a finished business.

Concerning the Syrian front, the Syrians did not expect to advance so easily and quickly and were left at a point without any fuel to their vehicles, which left them standing strategically impaired as a pray for Israeli forces that luckily got recruited quickly enough (faster than the Syrian ability to resupply fuel, which for a mysterious reason was very slow).
 
I have one thing to say though.
That damn Moses had 40 years to travel and he goes only as far as Palestine? :confused:
He could've gotten to America, Norway, Turkey!
But no.... he must choose this land crippled with Philistines. Foolish. ;)
 
Originally posted by Sobieski II
Stole? They purchased empty land from the Ottoman empire for like a 5000 percent markup.

Bull****, the Zionist purchased the land prior to 1948 war. But they just grabbed the land of the refugees after the War:
From the Congress Library:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+il0032)

The property of the Arabs who were refugees outside the state and the property expropriated from the Arabs who remained in Israel became a major asset to the new state. According to Don Peretz, an American scholar, by 1954 "more than one-third of Israel's Jewish population lived on absentee property, and nearly a third of the new immigrants (250,000 people) settled in the urban areas abandoned by Arabs." The fleeing Arabs emptied thriving cities such as Jaffa, Acre (Akko), Lydda (Lod), and Ramla, plus "338 towns and villages and large parts of 94 other cities and towns, containing nearly a quarter of all the buildings in Israel."
 
so one moment they're a rag tag group of arabs and the other they're a superior Soviet-financed fighting force. Will you people make up your mind already?
 
They were in no way a superior fighting force, but they were heavilly funded by the soviets.
 
Originally posted by HannibalBarka


Bull****, the Zionist purchased the land prior to 1948 war. But they just grabbed the land of the refugees after the War:
From the Congress Library:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+il0032)

The property of the Arabs who were refugees outside the state and the property expropriated from the Arabs who remained in Israel became a major asset to the new state. According to Don Peretz, an American scholar, by 1954 "more than one-third of Israel's Jewish population lived on absentee property, and nearly a third of the new immigrants (250,000 people) settled in the urban areas abandoned by Arabs." The fleeing Arabs emptied thriving cities such as Jaffa, Acre (Akko), Lydda (Lod), and Ramla, plus "338 towns and villages and large parts of 94 other cities and towns, containing nearly a quarter of all the buildings in Israel."

Most of the ARabs that lost there homes left when the invading Arab armies entered Israel because they assumed that the Arabs would conquer Israel and then they could get their homes back. They waiver their rights to their homes when they flee in anticipation of their nation's demise.
 
Originally posted by Benderino

Most of the ARabs that lost there homes left when the invading Arab armies entered Israel because they assumed that the Arabs would conquer Israel and then they could get their homes back. They waiver their rights to their homes when they flee in anticipation of their nation's demise.

Benderino, I am sure you don't buy this yourself.
First the reason the Arab isn't only because they assumed that the Arabs would conquer Israel, Zionist war crimes (Dir Yassin comes to mind) are also a reason. Come on, it was a war zone, and in a lot of conflicts, people just leave the war zone waiting for the war to end.
Second, what ever the reason why these arabs left their homes, they were civilian and taking their property is a war crime.

I know this is the ONE BIG PROBLEM in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, because for Israel (and you) to recognize any sort of responsability in the refugee problem would immediatly rise the "Right of Return" issue and thus the very end of Israel as a jewish state, at least in the 67 borders.
 
Originally posted by HannibalBarka
Benderino, I am sure you don't buy this yourself.
First the reason the Arab isn't only because they assumed that the Arabs would conquer Israel, Zionist war crimes (Dir Yassin comes to mind) are also a reason. Come on, it was a war zone, and in a lot of conflicts, people just leave the war zone waiting for the war to end.
Except that they left first, some of them selling their homes to the 'Zionists' to save themselves the trouble of looting their corpses on the way back home after the war was won. Too bad for them that they lost.
Originally posted by HannibalBarka
Second, what ever the reason why these arabs left their homes, they were civilian and taking their property is a war crime.
But taking property that was sold or abandoned is not. Israel can provide documents showing land ownership, proof positive that there is no 'right of return'.
Originally posted by HannibalBarka
I know this is the ONE BIG PROBLEM in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, because for Israel (and you) to recognize any sort of responsability in the refugee problem would immediatly rise the "Right of Return" issue and thus the very end of Israel as a jewish state, at least in the 67 borders.
They displaced themselves at the request and behest of their Arab 'brothers'. Let their brothers be their keepers now. We have a saying in my country:

"You made your bed, now lie in it."
 
Originally posted by HannibalBarka


Benderino, I am sure you don't buy this yourself.
First the reason the Arab isn't only because they assumed that the Arabs would conquer Israel, Zionist war crimes (Dir Yassin comes to mind) are also a reason. Come on, it was a war zone, and in a lot of conflicts, people just leave the war zone waiting for the war to end.
Second, what ever the reason why these arabs left their homes, they were civilian and taking their property is a war crime.

No, you're wrong. There's nothing more for me to say. The Palestinians left before the war and during it to make room for Arab armies in anticipation of their victory over the Zionists. Following the war, it was assumed, everyone could return to the land that the Zionists had made arable and beautiful. They gambled, and lost. Now they are homeless, and they should've been well away that the consequence of fleeing for those reasons is not getting your home back.
 
To be more clear Benderino, are you saying that:
1. they were civilian, but since they were supporting the arab armies, than they deserve what happened
or
2. they are no to be considered civilian, and they deserve what happened after the loss of the war
 
Oh they're civilians all right, just not Israeli. Not since they self-expatriated. Their 'brother' Arabs asked them to get out of the way of their bombs and shells while they exterminated the Jews, and they did, but their 'brothers' botched the job. Now their 'brothers' can take them in.

No sympathy here.
 
Originally posted by FearlessLeader2
We have a saying in my country:

"You made your bed, now lie in it."

And in your country - this axiom only counts in certain circumstances.
 
Yeah, money and power will buy or weasel many people out of trouble, but the West Jordanians have neither, so screw 'em. They backed the wrong horse, and they lost.
 
Originally posted by Archer 007

The Palestines started a war with Israel and lost. They should have to live with what that encompasses.

A civilian never start a war. Are you saying in time of war every thing is permitted?
 
Originally posted by FearlessLeader2
Oh they're civilians all right, just not Israeli. Not since they self-expatriated. Their 'brother' Arabs asked them to get out of the way of their bombs and shells while they exterminated the Jews, and they did, but their 'brothers' botched the job.

No sympathy here.
So should they have stayed in the warzone to prove that they woudn't leave for the wrong reasons. Come on, I don't think any of us would have acted any differently, were we Palestinians.

Now their 'brothers' can take them in.
But we all know that they won't.
I really dosn't matter who's fault you think it is. Do you want peace or not? If yes, then give back the land on the West Bank or fight for ever.
________
Lovely Wendie
 
Stop arguing. All that matters is that Maccabi Tel Aviv reached the final four. :D

Ah... a shot with the buzzer. Extra time, and a sweet sweet victory. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom