Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Good to see you read the thread!








/sarcasm

Emperors Faithful wrote:Good to see you read the thread!








/sarcasm

Mmhmm. I felt like getting an opinion out there on a thread that doesn't involve plastic space manz... Besides, no way I can read through all this back and forth nonsense

The policy thing, yeah. I was basically talking about this. It's not doing anything to help them, it's just pissing off arabs, yaddayadda

Samus_aran115 wrote:Israel is taking steps towards either an arab free country, or it's death.

That isn't quite true. A terror free country, but not some odd racial purge.

Samus_aran115 wrote:They seem to forget that everyone is the freaking world wants them dead.

No, not everyone in the world wants them dead. Some have that perception, which only makes the problem worse, not better.

Ahtman wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:Israel is taking steps towards either an arab free country, or it's death.

That isn't quite true. A terror free country, but not some odd racial purge.

Samus_aran115 wrote:They seem to forget that everyone is the freaking world wants them dead.

No, not everyone in the world wants them dead. Some have that perception, which only makes the problem worse, not better.

Yeah, you're right. I keep forgetting people actually need them to make more guns so they can kill each other better

But I gotcha.

Samus_aran115 wrote:
Mmhmm. I felt like getting an opinion out there on a thread that doesn't involve plastic space manz... Besides, no way I can read through all this back and forth nonsense

Oh believe me, you haven't missed much.

The policy thing, yeah. I was basically talking about this. It's not doing anything to help them, it's just pissing off arabs, yaddayadda

Yeah, what?

Yes, because taking land controlled by Arabs for pretty much 1500 years didn't piss them off. I'm sure that Israel pissing on them repeatedly in wars didn't put the fire out either.

Amaya wrote:Yes, because taking land controlled by Arabs for pretty much 1500 years didn't piss them off. I'm sure that Israel pissing on them repeatedly in wars didn't put the fire out either.

Not the most accurate, well thought out statement I have read in the thread.

It isn't so much that it was taken (though not from Arabs, but Muslims), as that it wasn't given back by the Europeans when everything else was.

Ottoman Turks are considered European? Technically, I suppose...

And yes, I know Israel wasn't formed until after WW2.

I thought it was under British authority.

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Amaya wrote:Yes, because taking land controlled by Arabs for pretty much 1500 years didn't piss them off. I'm sure that Israel pissing on them repeatedly in wars didn't put the fire out either.

Not the most accurate, well thought out statement I have read in the thread.

Yeah, usually it's my job to make those kinds of posts

They didn't 'take' anything away from them directly. It's not like the jews just said 'hey, give us this thing right here' and stole it. The UN and all that agreed on it. I believe the UN was considering a whole bunch of different places, one of them being alaska (which reminds me, there's a fascinating book about that theoretical possibility...Where all the jews go to alaska....Anyone know what it's called?)

Samus_aran115 wrote: there's a fascinating book about that theoretical possibility...Where all the jews go to alaska....Anyone know what it's called?)

I do not but now I wish I did.

http://www.amazon.com/Yiddish-Policemens-Union-Novel/dp/0007149824

Emperors Faithful wrote:I thought it was under British authority.

yeah...yeahhhhh....It's all their fault!!


GG

It was under British authority for about 30 years. The Brits had promised the land to the Arabs in return for their assistance against the Turks, but failed to do so.

generalgrog wrote:

Emperors Faithful wrote:I thought it was under British authority.

yeah...yeahhhhh....It's all their fault!!


GG

Amaya wrote:It was under British authority for about 30 years. The Brits had promised the land to the Arabs in return for their assistance against the Turks, but failed to do so.

Im not going to lie, us English did really screw over alot of countries... but we're freinds with most of em (Still Irans #1 enemy )

Amaya wrote:It was under British authority for about 30 years. The Brits had promised the land to the Arabs in return for their assistance against the Turks, but failed to do so.

We were actually quite happy to do so, but the French, Russians, and US told us to give the land to all the displaced Jews instead.Britain was agains thte formation of Israel, even if the plan was initially drawn up by them forty years previously.

Samus_aran115 wrote:Yeah, usually it's my job to make those kinds of posts

Don't stop trying though.

They didn't 'take' anything away from them directly. It's not like the jews just said 'hey, give us this thing right here' and stole it. The UN and all that agreed on it. I believe the UN was considering a whole bunch of different places, one of them being alaska (which reminds me, there's a fascinating book about that theoretical possibility...Where all the jews go to alaska....Anyone know what it's called?)

Australia was also considered, would be funny to see how that turned out.

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:Yeah, usually it's my job to make those kinds of posts

Don't stop trying though.

They didn't 'take' anything away from them directly. It's not like the jews just said 'hey, give us this thing right here' and stole it. The UN and all that agreed on it. I believe the UN was considering a whole bunch of different places, one of them being alaska (which reminds me, there's a fascinating book about that theoretical possibility...Where all the jews go to alaska....Anyone know what it's called?)

Australia was also considered, would be funny to see how that turned out.

'Oy Vey G'day'?.

Ketara wrote:

Amaya wrote:It was under British authority for about 30 years. The Brits had promised the land to the Arabs in return for their assistance against the Turks, but failed to do so.

We were actually quite happy to do so

If they were happy to do so they would have, but they didn't, and they had decades to do so. They liked having influence in the region even more.

Ketara wrote:but the French, Russians, and US told us to give the land to all the displaced Jews instead.

That is a bit of an oversimplification on the forces at work.

Ketara wrote:Britain was agains thte formation of Israel

Well of course, considering the Jewish sentiment toward Britain at the time it mean t a huge loss of influence in the region. They didn't bomb the King James Hotel becuase they liked the British government at the time.

Of course there were people in Britain who were sympathetic and vice versa. This is a complicated bit of history and everyone has their skin in it.

Ahtman wrote:

Ketara wrote:

Amaya wrote:It was under British authority for about 30 years. The Brits had promised the land to the Arabs in return for their assistance against the Turks, but failed to do so.

We were actually quite happy to do so

If they were happy to do so they would have, but they didn't, and they had decades to do so. They liked having influence in the region even more.

Ketara wrote:but the French, Russians, and US told us to give the land to all the displaced Jews instead.

That is a bit of an oversimplification on the forces at work.

Ketara wrote:Britain was agains thte formation of Israel

Well of course, considering the Jewish sentiment toward Britain at the time it mean t a huge loss of influence in the region. They didn't bomb the King James Hotel becuase they liked the British government at the time.

Of course there were people in Britain who were sympathetic and vice versa. This is a complicated bit of history and everyone has their skin in it.

Certainly I'm oversimplifying. But anyone who would take an serious interest in this thread probably already knows about it, so I won't waste my time giving a detailed response.

Ketara wrote:Certainly I'm oversimplifying. But anyone who would take an serious interest in this thread probably already knows about it, so I won't waste my time giving a detailed response.

Fair enough.

It doesn't change the fact that Arab land was taken from Arabs and given to a people who hadn't ruled it in over 2000 years.

Well, they're there now.

The reasons for it are purely academic.

Amaya wrote:It doesn't change the fact that Arab land was taken from Arabs and given to a people who hadn't ruled it in over 2000 years.

I'm not following your arguement here.

What?

Israel hasn't been ruled by Jews for well over 2000 years. It has been controlled by Arabs for the better part of 1500 years. Taking it away from Arabs and giving it Jews was bound to tick off the Arabs.

Amaya wrote:It doesn't change the fact that Arab land was taken from Arabs and given to a people who hadn't ruled it in over 2000 years.

That's not really true. It is true that many Arabs lived in what is now Israel, but it hadn't been governed by Arabs in a fully independent sense for something like 400 years; having been first governed by the Ottomans, and then the British.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Monster Rain wrote:Well, they're there now.

The reasons for it are purely academic.

Not purely. The debate over whether or not Jews have a right to Israel is a big part of the conflict; especially in the internal sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:Ottoman Turks are considered European? Technically, I suppose...

No, Ottoman Turks are considered Muslims, which is why I said that the land was taken from Muslims, but not from Arabs since Turks are not Arab. No one in their right mind would call the Ottomans European, and neither would I.

dogma wrote:

Amaya wrote:It doesn't change the fact that Arab land was taken from Arabs and given to a people who hadn't ruled it in over 2000 years.

That's not really true. It is true that many Arabs lived in what is now Israel, but it hadn't been governed by Arabs in a fully independent sense for something like 400 years; having been first governed by the Ottomans, and then the British.

Amaya wrote:Ottoman Turks are considered European? Technically, I suppose...

No, Ottoman Turks are considered Muslims, which is why I said that the land was taken from Muslims, but not from Arabs since Turks are not Arab. No one in their right mind would call the Ottomans European, and neither would I.

Thank you for clarifying these two points. The widespread ignorance of the cultural and religious distinctions in the region, many of which are at the heart of the turmoil, is depressing.

dogma wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Well, they're there now.

The reasons for it are purely academic.

Not purely. The debate over whether or not Jews have a right to Israel is a big part of the conflict; especially in the internal sense.

I have to agree with Monster Rain on this one. I think in this case it is really does come down to the old adage, "Might makes Right." The Israelis have a firm grip on their land, and they're not going to let go, and anyone who is powerful enough to do anything about it doesn't care enough.

IAmTheWalrus wrote:
I have to agree with Monster Rain on this one. I think in this case it is really does come down to the old adage, "Might makes Right." The Israelis have a firm grip on their land, and they're not going to let go, and anyone who is powerful enough to do anything about it doesn't care enough.

Not necessarily. For example, the main reason that West Bank settlements are such a difficult issue that a very vocal minority of Israeli citizens sees the land as theirs by what is essentially divine proclamation.

Its true that no one with the power to remove the Jews from Israel has any interest in doing so, but its also true that Israeli power is largely governed by the extent to which the Israeli public considers its right to the land as legitimate.

It isn't any more legitimate than anyone else's claim, and they happen to live there.