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.

Just something I found that I remember hearing about many years ago. There wasn't as big an outcry about this at the time it happened as there was about the stopping of the flotilla or other things Israel does to defend itself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September_in_Jordan

Relapse wrote:Just something I found that I remember hearing about many years ago. There wasn't as big an outcry about this at the time it happened as there was about the stopping of the flotilla or other things Israel does to defend itself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September_in_Jordan

Point taken, but it is worth mentioning that article had factual accuracy and neutral point of view flags.

The important thing is that I think many Westerners, Americans at least, see the Middle Eastern nations as either Arabs or Jews. For instance, many people I talk to refer to Iranians as Arabs, when apparently only a small percentage of their population is ethnically Arab. Most Iranians would be what used to be called Persians, I guess, though I imagine many of them know Arabic, as my understanding is that in Islamic nations Arabic is sort of what Latin is to the West. There are lots of different ethnic groups and religions, and some ethnic groups might have members of different religions.

Like most things in life, its very complex.

Israel gets more flack than it sometimes deserves because it's a Western, fully industrialized Jewish/secular democracy in a region dominated by developing nations that are mostly autocracies of one form or another.

OTOH, Israel gets a lot of latitude because of the same things. No other first world power could act like they can and not be vilified, of course no other first world nation was invaded four times in latter 20th century, and is now faced with the choice of either hosting large hostile populations in it's borders or creating a sovereign state, at least one of whose political parties has the destruction of Israel as it's main goal.

The OP is correct in that the Palestinians are not exactly helped much by the other neighboring Arab states.

Hey look Polonius is back!!

Welcome back.

GG

I've been training at an extremist moderate compound in the mountains of Florida, learning to master the art of disagreeing with both sides of any given debate.

Soon I will be on the ignore list of every OT regular!

Fun fact! I actually did my final paper on Middle East Economies on the economic effects of the Palestinian refugee influx into Jordan. Actually, that was a boring fact, but it's too late, you've read it now and you can't unread it.



Meanwhile, the absolute first thing to remember is that the notion of a Palestinian identity is a new thing. They would likely have thought of themselves as Muslims or Christians first, who live in Palestine, not actually Palestinians. They do have an identity now - decades of shared suffering will do that. But back then it was originally felt that they would just move into surrounding areas - attempting to shift populations around to keep them to one ethnicity was the more or less the assumed way of doing things at the time, even if it's considered abhorrent today.

This didn't work out, in part because the surrounding Arab countries weren't capable of absorbing the full million or two Palestinians, it would have likely destabilised most countries in the region, and in part because the Arab nations chose to make the Palestinians stay as a political tool to hit the newly formed Israel with. It is correct to say that the Arab nations had their own part to play in creating this mess. They used the Palestinians as a tool, and still do to this day.

None of which has anything to do with the brutality the Israelis inflict on Palestinians today.

Grignard wrote:Point taken, but it is worth mentioning that article had factual accuracy and neutral point of view flags.


Like most things in life, its very complex.

This is true, but it's a good starting point for further research, and a lot of what is written there is supported by other reports.

Polonius wrote:I've been training at an extremist moderate compound in the mountains of Florida, learning to master the art of disagreeing with both sides of any given debate.

Soon I will be on the ignore list of every OT regular!

I missed you.

I think the research should be put in by those who villainize Israel into how Arabs have treated the "Palistinians".
How come they didn't weren't given their own state when Arabs owned all that land?
Like I said earlier, when Jordanians killed them by the thousands, there wasn't the outcry as what happened when the commandoes were forced to kill nine.

Relapse wrote:I think the research should be put in by those who villainize Israel into how Arabs have treated the "Palistinians".
How come they didn't weren't given their own state when Arabs owned all that land?
quote]

Colonialism

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

Relapse wrote:I think the research should be put in by those who villainize Israel into how Arabs have treated the "Palistinians".
How come they didn't weren't given their own state when Arabs owned all that land?

Colonialism

It was all part of the Ottoman Empire run by Turkey until the First World War. Then Palestine became a province, as were several other provinces created by the Sykes-Picot treaty during the First World War. Most of those boundaries form the boundaries of the modern day states of the Levant. The Brtiish and French sdequentuially moved out of the Levant, leaving Palestine in 1948 when a UN free vote allowed the State of Israel to be formed. t that time the Palestinains did not have a centralised identity, but this is not unfair as neither did Israel. Both turned up on account of the expiry of the British mandate.

A two state solution was proposed but rejected by both sides and the Swedish diplomat proposing the venture was assassinated by an Israeli terrorist organisation. There was a lot of bloodshed which cannot be ethically attributed as the fault of any one side.

Thanks for that Orlanth
I know it got complicated in the Levant due to post WW1 foreign interventions.

iirc Promises were made to both Palestinians and Israelis