Racism in the arab world

[kobayashi]

The question of who was right or wrong in the past probably doesn't have an answer. I understand why palestinians hate jews but why do all Islamic countries hate jews?

That's because they are the only group of countries which are still using an archaic religion based government - which is a gross human rights abuse which the UN prefers not to notice. This is the ultimate form of racism. That's also why different sects (Shiite and Suni I beleive) hate each other. That's why pashtuns hate the northern alliance.

In the modern world, nobody cares what race, religion or beliefs you have but in those countries they do. From the example above, Baptists do not hate Methodists etc. Is anyone afraid that christian fanatics will usurp the government of the UK and drive all hindus, muslims, buddhists away or kill them?

In Singapore, we are surrounded by two muslim dominated neighbours who hate us because we are not muslim and richer than them because we work hard. One of them recently referred to Singapore as 'a little red dot on a map'. The other one conveniently blames us for all kinds of things as a distraction from domestic problems. I and a million other guys had to waste 2.5 years in the military and over a decade of reservist training because of this.

(p.s. the Jews were the only ones willing to help us build our Army in the 60's when the British abandoned South-east Asia).

 

[amadeus]

I guess the age of geopolitics isn't over.

However, Isreal "belongs" to the people that live there, not some group that was kicked out sixty years ago.

Taiwan belongs to Taiwan.
Isreal belongs to Isreal.

That's the way they are, and the way they should stay.

 

[allan]

Here's my understanding of the situation (which may be incomplete, so anyone can feel free to correct me so long as they have facts):

Jews had been settling in Palestine since the beginning of the 20th century. After WWI, the British took control of the region after the Ottoman Empire dissolved. In 1947 (I believe it was), the British made a partition of Palestine into intended Jewish-controlled and Palestinian-controlled areas. This partition was approved by the UN. The Jewish-controlled areas would become Israel, while the Palestinian-controlled areas were intended to likewise be an independent Palestinian state (correct me if I'm wrong here). The UN treaty in 1947 was designed with this arrangement in mind.

Now then, Israel became independent in 1948, and the Palestinians in the Palestinian-controlled areas (West Bank and Gaza) were somehow persuaded by Jordan and Egypt respectively to relinquish control of these areas to THEM, so that they could join forces, along with Syria as well, and "drive Israel into the sea" as was commonly heard on Damascus radio and in other rhetoric. THUS THE PALESTINIANS FORFEITED CONTROL of their land to the neighboring Arab states. And these neighboring Arab states used these annexations as staging grounds to launch attacks on Israel. There were I understand two separate incidents of attacks against Israel (again correct me if I'm wrong here), in 1948 and 1956, where these Arab states used their Palestinian annexations to attack Israel--and Israel in neither instance occupied the territories after their victorious defense (I don't know if they were in a situation where they could have or not though).

But in 1967, the third attack, Israel finally decided to occupy these territories that had been used as a staging ground for actions that threatened their existance (just look at how the West Bank almost pinches Israel into 2 pieces--it's obvious a serious threat was there). Remember, the Palestinians had already given up control of these areas to Jordan and Egypt, who used them to attack Israel. Anyone who still tries to claim that the 1947 Treaty conditions still apply thus has a pretty weak, if not nonexistant, case. I believe the treaty among other things required that neither side become beligerent, too.

And usually treaties become obsolete when one side breaks the peace, don't they. Which clearly has happened four times at least, the first time in 1948. So claiming the relevancy of anything decided in 1947 became futile just one year later, and is ridiculous now.

Even more ridiculous, however, is the Palestinians claiming Israel is responsible for them having no state, when clearly the Arab states took over whatever state they could have had. Remember, Arab=/="Palestinian" 100%--I understand Palestinians aren't allowed to become citizens of most of the Arab states (including Jordan) surrounding Israel. Do the Arabs CARE about the welfare of their "Palestinian brothers"? No, it seems not, beyond them being a political pawn in their vendetta (likely religious-based) against Israel.

That all said, do I have some sympathy for innocent and powerless Palestinians caught in the middle between their "so-called brothers" the Arabs and an Israel worried about its national security? Yes, I actually do, it's a tragedy for them.

But Israel is hardly 100% to blame. I would say not even 50%.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

"Jews had been settling in Palestine since the beginning of the 20th century. After WWI, the British took control of the region after the Ottoman Empire dissolved. In 1947 (I believe it was), the British made a partition of Palestine into intended Jewish-controlled and Palestinian-controlled areas. This partition was approved by the UN. The Jewish-controlled areas would become Israel, while the Palestinian-controlled areas were intended to likewise be an independent Palestinian state (correct me if I'm wrong here). The UN treaty in 1947 was designed with this arrangement in mind."

I think the whole problem stems fr this settling of Jews in Palestine fr the beginning of the 20th century, which accelerated during the British Mandate and after WW2. Who allowed them to settle in Palestine? Certainly not the Ottomans, or the Palestinians. It only began in ernest after WW1 when the British got the mandate for Palestine.
Since the Islamic conquest of Palestine, there had always been Jewish communities in Palestine, living side-by-side and in peace with other peoples. However early in the century, I think (remember reading somewhere) an international Jewish movement (Zionist?) began a massive covert project to settle thousands of Jews in Palestine with the ultimate aim of creating a Jewish homeland. In spite of limits placed by the British, they constantly secretly sent in thousands more above the quotas set.
So in no time, you have this large Jewish population in Palestine and they began hankering for a Jewish state. Then the fighting and rioting began betw Arabs and Jews. It got so bad that the British pulled out sometime after WW2 and got the UN to come in. That's when the wars began I think.

Personally I think there's no conceivable solution to the Palestinian question. Even if a Palestinian state is established, it'll be so physically intertwined with Israel, there'd bound to be more problems.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Allan's argument was quite comprehensive, and my thinking on these matters is sort of along those lines. Israel is a legitimate state, established by the UN. The attacks upon it from its inception were aimed at destroying it, and the Jewish population. The general Palestinian populace has been deliberately used as a pawn by the surrounding Arab powers, and the self-serving Arafat and his terrorist associates in order to pursue their agenda.

The annexations in 1967 were done with good reason, and the territory secured is quite important to the maintenance of its security and integrity, particularly the Golan and the West Bank.

This security needs to be maintained precisely because of the attitudes being perpetuated by this Anti-Jewish filth, which in turn perpetuates the feelings of hatred and the desire to eliminate the Jews. And that is what this comes down to, have no doubt about it. If these accounts by G-man are correct, and I have no reason whatsoever to doubt him, then this stuff could come right off the cover of Der Sturmer. The effect of this disgraceful propaganda is far more than "a few words and a picture", as history shows. Given the course of events over the last 2000 years, and particularly in the 1930s and 1940s, one cannot blame the Jewish people for seeking to establish a secure homeland of their own, and do whatever necessary to protect it.

The wars waged against Israel since 1948 were not and are not wars of limited objectives, or wars of freedom, or for economic resources. The were wars of annihilation, with the oft repeated aim of driving the Jews into the sea. This is a key point, and cannot be denied.

Certainly the situation for the Palestinian people is tragic, but so was what was intended with these invasions. Having been duped into leaving their homes and lands in order for operations to eliminate Israel to go ahead, it is the natural duty of the surrounding Arab powers to look to their welfare.

The treatment of the Palestinians is not racist, and especially not genocidal, and I suggest the person who employed that word to look into its actual meaning.

One does not purport to hold the solutions to this pressing geo political problem, but it is one that requires serious thought and consideration, from the perspective of ALL sides.

 

[Dogberry]

Secretary Powell highlighted this filthy hate-based propaganda in his most recent speech. I hope it comes up again & again. I don't give a damn if feelings of so-called "allies" are hurt. This is something that really needs to be stressed.. as many of these programs could not be put on without their government's ok. Some people are making themselves sick with the poison that they spew.

Dog

 

[PinkyGen]

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon
"

I think the whole problem stems fr this settling of Jews in Palestine fr the beginning of the 20th century, which accelerated during the British Mandate and after WW2. Who allowed them to settle in Palestine?
However early in the century, I think (remember reading somewhere) an international Jewish movement (Zionist?) began a massive covert project to settle thousands of Jews in Palestine with the ultimate aim of creating a Jewish homeland. In spite of limits placed by the British, they constantly secretly sent in thousands more above the quotas set.
So in no time, you have this large Jewish population in Palestine and they began hankering for a Jewish state. Then the fighting and rioting began betw Arabs and Jews. It got so bad that the British pulled out sometime after WW2 and got the UN to come in. That's when the wars began I think.

Personally I think there's no conceivable solution to the Palestinian question. Even if a Palestinian state is established, it'll be so physically intertwined with Israel, there'd bound to be more problems.

It's not like the Jews decided "what the hell, let's move to Palestine and make it Israel."
The Zionist movement was started in the 19th century after the Dreyfuss trial exposed that anti-semestism was still strong in Europe. (Dreyfuss was convicted of selling French war plans to Prussia, the trial was a farce). Thus, you have Jews leaving Europe to escape the anti-semestism and the pogroms. Then Britain limits newcomers with the White Paper in the 30's. The Jews are unable to go to Palestine, neither can they emigrate to other countries such as the US because of quotas.

Then Hitler comes...

Then the survivor of the camps are denied permission to enter Palestine. They are smuggled in. (Movie Exodus gives a good, if somewhat to glorified account of this).

I do agree that even with a Palestine state, they will still dependent on each other. If only they did not hate each other so much.

 

[Vrylakas]

Arguing history in reference to modern political problems is ridiculous and a waste of time. If the point is to solve the outstanding issue(s), then forget the history for the moment.

Some observations:

1. Today we've got a state (Israel) and a people who want a state (Palestine).

2. Their respective borders will have to be drawn based on practical necessity, not on historical arguments. Simply said, for all the hyper-mystical-nationalist rhetoric, there is no evidence to suggest that dirt cares who or what state lives on it. If you don't believe me go outside now and ask the dirt in your yard if it cares whether your country continues to exist in its current borders. Is it mystically longing to be returned to some other people or nation? Let me know what it says.

3. Both sides utilize inflammatory propaganda and rhetoric against the other, though it must be said that Islamic propaganda is particularly virilient and violent. In another thread in this forum I quoted briefly a plethora of modern Moslem writers who all acknowledge that the extremist and irresponsible level of propaganda throughout the Islamic world is a result of a moral collapse in the Islamic world - but this is a lengthy topic for somewhere else. The point is it must all stop. Israelis and Palestinians do not have to love each other to be decent neighbors; merely not attack each other. Part of that will be achieved by stopping the education of their respective peoples through propaganda that treats the opposing side as "The Other".

4. Both sides must be made aware that any settlement will be a compromise - which means they won't get everything they want. I think Israel has come much farther on this realization than the Palestinians, though the Israeli settler question still needs some work. Arafat's gamble last September (2000) that by walking away from the table and inciting another intifada he could have it all was idiotic and has cost the lives of hundreds of people with no gain to show for it. (As I've mentioned elsewhere, Arafat has done this repeatedly in the past in Lebanon, Jordan, Algeria and Palestine itself so the Palestinians might do themselves a favor by looking for a leader with less brinkmanship qualities.)

5. Part of any settlement will also require security for both sides. Israel will have to renounce its policy of incursions into the Palestinian areas, and the Palestinians will have to restrain their extremist elements who, drugged up with the Islamic rhetoric of "Drive them into the Sea" will want to blow themselves up in a Tel Aviv shopping plaza.

6. Part of any political compromise in a settlement will have to have some overlapping areas; simply said, both sides have strong cultural connections to the same real estate. Wherever the holy areas of Jerusalem end up, they will have to have full access for Moslems, Jews and Christians alike at all times. (When Jordan ruled eastern Jerusalem, only Moslems were allowed to visit the various holy sites.)

7. Resources: This thin strip of land everyone's fighting over is a desert with few natural resources, almost least of all water. There will have to be an extraordinary level of cooperation between Palestine and Israel in administering water resources.

 

[G-Man]

Some good point were brought up.

allan
Originally Palestinian areas were much wider then the west bank and Gaza. They didn't except these borders and attacked Israel together with Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq. Israeli forces were barely able to stop them. The arrival of four S-199s, Israel's first fighter planes, was the only thing that stopped Egypt from taking over Tel Aviv.
In 1956 Egypt closed the naval passage to Eilat (The southern most part of Israel) and nationalized the suez cannal. Israel, Britain and France attacked Egypt and took over Sinai within a week.
International pressure made us withdraw from these areas.
In 1967 Egypt signed on agreements with Syria and Jordan that they'll attack Israel and unite their countries. The consentrated forces along the borders and forced Israel, that had a much smaller population, to recruit everyone we counld. Even senior citizens were helping to orgenize the country. After three weeks of waiting Israel was on the break of collapsing and was forced to start the war. In a surprise attack we destroyed all hostile air forces and 6 days later we had Sinai (from Egypt, returned in 1979), the west bank (Jordan) and the Golan (Syria). Despite heavy international pressure we stayed there. No jew would support allowing the west wall to become the dump it was during Jordan's rule.

Knight-Dragon
It's easy to criticise what happened over 100 years ago without thinking how things were then. Jews being descriminated and living in the shadow if the church (untill the middle of this century the catholic church held all jews responsible for the death of Jesus). That international movement you're talking about was founded by Binyamin Ze'ev Hertzel after he was a witness to the Dreyfuss trial as a journalist.

Vrylakas
You have some good points. However it's impossible to ignore the historical facts. Today there are no areas in Israel that have a Palestinian majority - all these areas are already in Palestinian hands. The Jordan valley, for example, is populated only by jewish farmers. But still the Palestinians won't give it up.
Also, a lot of Israelis are angry about stopping the settlments in return to stopping the violence, as the Americans want. We're willing to give up most settlments, but we won't surrender to Palestinian attacks on civilians.
About founding a Palestinian country - As Peres said in the UN, most Israelis (60%) support a Palestinian state, but not before violence stops.

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

Lots of posts, so I won'y bother with any single one.

First, there have been Jews in the mid-east for thousands of years, even during the time of the arabs and the later Ottomans.

For those who believe Europeans were objective, this is not the case.
Jews were forced into gettos throughout europe for centuries.
The Dreyfuss affair was mentioned, and a brief discription of it is in order:
Dreyfuss was a French officer of Jewish extraction wrongly accused of selling secrets to Germany in the 19th century.
The chief investigator faked evidence to convict him, and he was sent to devil's island in Cuyenne for life.
A number of people believed Dreyfuss innocent, led by the famous journalist Emile Zola, who wrote an article entiltilled "J'accuse", in which he accused the French government of a cover-up.
This was true, it was decided to sacrifice Dreyfuss to "save" the honor of France.
Most hated Dreyfuss as a "dirty jew traitor" to France, and nobody listened for years.
After 10 years his innocense was proved, and he was freed and given the legion of Honor, but most understood that because he was Jewish, it was permitted to railroad him.

The Zionist movement grew out of this. Jews started to go to Palestine at this time, while it was still ruled by the Ottomans.

During WW I, the Englishmen Lord Balflour publically promised the Jews a homeland in Palestine, to be sized from Ottoman domains.

The British renegged on this in 1918 and made the place a protectorite.
The British did all they could to PREVENT jewish immigration to Palestine during the period of the 1920s-1947.
Their Navy even prevented Holocaust servivors from entering the country.
The Jews responded to this with a Terror campaign (bombings, murders, same as today, but from the Jewish side).

The vindictive British very much wanted to see young Isreal (which was brokered by the UN, under USA leadership, not Britain) destroyed, and heavily supported the arab states against the jews. The leader of the Jordian army was a Brit, one "Glubb Pasha" (AKA John Glubb), and Britain allowed weapons and equipment left behind when they left to fall into the hands of the arabs, NOT the Jews.
Jews got help from many US and some Brit veterans to procure arms and other weapons to resist, and did so successfully to save their fledgling nation.

The Palestionains fled, and became refugees for the next 30+ years, despised and scorned by the other Muslim states, that periodically expelled them from their lands.

In 56, the Jews agreed with Britain and France to strike Nassar(this is covered in an earlier post), and were very sucessful in Sinai.

In 67 the arabs gathered for another go at Isreal, but Zahal (IDF, the Jewish armed forces) got wind of it, and struck first, and took the now disputed lands from the Arabs. (West bank from Jordan, Sinai and Gaza strip from Eygpt, Golan hieghts from Syria), and have held most of it since.

Arabs tried again in 73, where heavily defeated in hard fighting (all of these wars were halted by USA/USSR agreement, under threat of intervention).

Jews attacked Lebbonon in 82 (to strike at PLO, who where attacking Jews from there for years), and occupied southern portion till recently.

This continues to this day, and things are simple.
The Palestinies REFUSE to compromise, they want it ALL.

The USA and Europe are pressuring Isreal to accept a "land for peace" deal, with people that break agreements constantly.

If I were a Jew, I would NEVER give in, unless the Pals do also.

That's just common sense.

No compromise, no peace.

And for those who say the Jews treat Pals badly, I say BULL.

Prove it.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Originally posted by G-Man
Knight-Dragon
It's easy to criticise what happened over 100 years ago without thinking how things were then. Jews being descriminated and living in the shadow if the church (untill the middle of this century the catholic church held all jews responsible for the death of Jesus). That international movement you're talking about was founded by Binyamin Ze'ev Hertzel after he was a witness to the Dreyfuss trial as a journalist.

Sorry if any hard feelings. Just this - if the Israelis can have their own homeland cos of all their repression over the centuries, I think the Kurds shld have one too. Yet, nobody gives a damn about them nowadays, after the Gulf War. Geoplitics at work.
I believe the British promised them a country of their own, during the fighting against the Ottomans during WW1. Instead, after the war, they formed Iraq and gave it away as a kingdom to the Hashemites. Now Kurdish lands were divided up among Turkey, Iraq and Iran. And the Iraqis under Saddam certainly oppressed them a lot. And to some degree in the Turkish and Iranian controlled areas as well.
Wherea the Jews shld have their own homeland, I think it's shldn't be formed in a land, already filled by other ppls. Where would those present ppl go? And they're certainly under no obligation to share their land with you. Two wrongs wouldn't make one right.

 

[amadeus]

Better yet, why don't we just make Isreal and Palestine a single state, and take all of the fundamentalists out and ship them off to Iran?

Let the Ayatollah deal with them.

 

[King of England]

Nah, too much of a burden for the poor Ayatollah.

How bout Afghanistan? Two birds with one stone.

 

[G-Man]

AoA, just a few corrections:
Zionist orgenizations before 1947 weren't at all like today's Palestinian terror orgenizations.
- Palestinian orgenizations are terror orgenizations because they target all Israelis, including civilians. And they do it in order to get more land after Israel already gave them a lot of what they wanted.
Zionist orgenizations targeted only official British targets (Prisons that held and executed jews, HQs, etc.). They fought for their lives - their tagets were to make the British protect jews from Palestinian aggression (They used to burn fields and houses of jews) and to allow Jews to come to Israel from Nazi controlled Germany. The British did allow the Jews to form a small guard to protect themselves (~30 people) but didn't allow any more jews to come to Israel, and the lives of many in europe were lost because of it. Despite that, during both world wars Israeli Jews helped the British.
- The IDF isn't the jewish army, it's the Israeli army, and it's composed mainly of Jews, Mulims, Druzes and Christians.
- These cease fire agreements were always better for the arabs.
In 1948-1949 Israel was starting to gain power over the arabs and started to drive them back, when the US forced us to sign a cease fire.
In 1956 Israel returned all the areas.
In 1973 The arabs attacked on the holiest day in the Jewish calender. Today when the US is attacking during Ramadahn it's considered provocative. But Yom Kipur is like the entire Ramadahn in a single day. Truditionaly in this day the Jews don't eat or drink for 24 hours, so most of the soldiers were at home resting and even those that stayed near the borders were very weak and barely able to fight. Still they attacked us on this day. Israel was somehow able to stop them and drive them back. And as soon as we were able to return to our original borders the US and the USSR want a cease fire...

 

[FearlessLeader2]

Gee, I wonder where the Palestinians got the idea that Isreal is bloodthirsty?

That barren little strip of land you and they are squabbling over is called the Holy Land by three religions. All of them are wrong. It should be called the Holey Land.

Bullet holes, mortar holes, RPG holes, shrapnel holes, bomb craters. Yep, it's Holey Land all right.

Here's a thought for you G-Man. Suggest to your government that they give the Palestinians a voice in the government (a real one, not the sham setup that currently exists), quit forcibly ousting them from their homes, and stop stealing their land by settling your own people onto it in such numbers as to drive them away. Maybe if you didn't give them a reason, Palestinian men would not become so desperate that they strap bombs to themselves and take as many of you with them as they can.

Here's a nickel's worth of free advice. Once the UN is done with the Islamic terrorists, and then the Christian terrorists, they'll get around to you. America doesn't like bullies, and we backed you for fifty years agains tthe ones you were surrounded by. But we're waking up to the fact that you used our protection to set yourselves up as the new bullies in that region. America doesn't like bullies.

Edited for spelling and a few more things to say.

 

[amadeus]

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2
Once the UN is done with the Islamic terrorists...

The United Nations? Ha! They're a joke.

As long as they have that clown Kofi Annan calling the shots, the UN isn't worth more than the building they own.

 

[FearlessLeader2]

...but let's not forget that the US usually has its hand up the UN's ass, controlling it rather well. If we withdraw our support from it, and use that nice building for useful office space, we can watch it collapse overnight. Everyone knows that, so they publicly piss all over us, and privately kiss our ass and do whatever we tell them to.

Still, I shall consider my statement amended to...

"...once the US is done with the Islamic terrorists..."

 

[G-Man]

FL2, your seggestions are some of the stupidest thing I've ever heard... Israel is a democracy, and Israeli-Palestinians have the right to vote for whoever they want to represent them. How can it work differently? Also, it's very easy to accuse Israel of being a bully without proofs. Show me one thing Israel does in order to hurt Palestinians and not in order to stop terrorists.
Also, don't take credit for things you didn't do. The US backed Israel only after 1967, when you knew you're going with the winning side and that this is a chance to beat the Russians without sending any of your troop. And even then most of this support was that you agreed to sell Israel things, not give us things for free.

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by G-Man
FL2, your seggestions are some of the stupidest thing I've ever heard... Israel is a democracy, and Israeli-Palestinians have the right to vote for whoever they want to represent them. How can it work differently? Also, it's very easy to accuse Israel of being a bully without proofs. Show me one thing Israel does in order to hurt Palestinians and not in order to stop terrorists.
Also, don't take credit for things you didn't do. The US backed Israel only after 1967, when you knew you're going with the winning side and that this is a chance to beat the Russians without sending any of your troop. And even then most of this support was that you agreed to sell Israel things, not give us things for free.

I agree with G-man.
This post holds some solid facts...

 

[FearlessLeader2]

Originally posted by G-Man
FL2, your seggestions are some of the stupidest thing I've ever heard... Israel is a democracy, and Israeli-Palestinians have the right to vote for whoever they want to represent them. How can it work differently?

It can't, which is why the Palestinians are in the same boat as Native Americans, except that we actually feel bad about what we did to them, so we gave them a bunch of land that they have nigh-complete autonomy over, and do not tax them one iota. Maybe if the P's had autonomy and freedom from taxation, they'd be less inclined toward despair and hopelessness.

Oh, and thanks for the personal attack.

Originally posted by G-Man
Also, it's very easy to accuse Israel of being a bully without proofs. Show me one thing Israel does in order to hurt Palestinians and not in order to stop terrorists.

Forced settling of Palestinian areas. How does that stop terrorists? If you ask me, it is a huge source of Palestinian despair, as they are forced from their homes.

Originally posted by G-Man
Also, don't take credit for things you didn't do. The US backed Israel only after 1967, when you knew you're going with the winning side and that this is a chance to beat the Russians without sending any of your troop. And even then most of this support was that you agreed to sell Israel things, not give us things for free.

The US sells Israel technology that it doesn't even let NATO forces stand too close to. If you cannot appreciate what a dichotomy of trust that is, then you are not paying attention. Israel has a fantastically well-trained army, and that is Israel's point of pride. Israel has an extraordinarily well-armed army, and that is the US's doing.