SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: kumar who wrote (118461)11/3/2003 9:59:34 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
the only potential explanation I can come up with, is that in the India/Pakistan situation, there were created 2 legitimate nations. That seems to be missing in the Israel/Palestine situation. Mind you, I'm not placing blame on anyone, but it seems to me a significant difference.


There were multiple proposals to create a third nation out of the Mandate of Palestine (Jordan being the first and Israel the second), starting with the Peel Commission in 1937, and of course the UN Partition Plan of November 1947, which partitioned Palestine into Arab and Jewish states.

But Arab Palestine was rejected utterly by the Mufti and all the surrounding Arab states, who invaded Israel in an attempt to destroy it.

So that explanation doesn't work either.

You're right to notice that the absence of a legitimate Arab Palestine makes the situation different from India/Pakistan. However, imo you are noticing a symptom of the conflict, not its cause.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News