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 : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: sea_urchin who wrote (10324)3/12/2006 3:46:10 PM
From: philv  Read Replies (3) of 22250
 
"Of course, the undisputed fact that Israel took the Palestinian land in the first place is overlooked, covered-up is a better word, by all the noise generated about the Holocaust, terrorism and complaints about denial of Israel's "right" to exist, whatever that means. Frankly, and particularly while they hold the land which they took post-1967 by war, I have little sympathy for the Israeli argument."

If you could impose a border, I guess you would stick to the post 1967 one?

Even the original land, carved out of Palestine after WWII was disputed by the Arabs, was it not? Why then is that particular border important?

I have made this point before, but borders change over the years through military conquest. Have a look at the map of Europe before WWI. Or even before WWII. Clearly the losers (Germany and her allies) lost not only the war, but great chunks of their land. And with that, millions of people were forced out to make room for the new victorious owners. I don't see any sympathy for Germany's loss to Poland, Czechoslovakis, and France or Hungary's loss to all her neighbours. It is accepted as a final border, settled by war. How else can it be done? Certainly not through talking, because who wants to give up land?

Europe isn't the only example of lands won and lost through war. If one was to re-jigger the borders world wide, based on original ownership, how far back should one go? Israel can no doubt make an historic case for Jerusalem and the West Bank? And so can the Palestinians, obviously.

The question of Palestinian homeland is indeed a complicated one. Jordan is the home of the majority of Palestinians.

"Fact: While half of the Jordanian population is Palestinian, it is critical to note that most Palestinians in Jordan are not refugees. In actuality, approximately 1.7 million Palestinians, or only one-third of Jordan’s population of 5.3 million are registered with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) as of Dec. 31, 2002. Moreover, not all of those registered with UNRWA are actually refugees. UNRWA itself has acknowledged that its statistics on refugees are inflated:

UNRWA registration figures are based on information voluntarily supplied by refugees primarily for the purpose of obtaining access to Agency services and hence cannot be considered statistically valid demographic data; the number of registered refugees in the Agency's area of operations is almost certainly less than the population recorded. (Report of the Commissioner General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East - July 1997 - 30 June 1998)

Because what is now Jordan was part of the British Mandate of Palestine until 1921, many Jordanians of Palestinian descent cannot be described as refugees. They never fled, or were forced to flee, their original homes because of war."

The outright hatred and obvious mistrust between Jews and Arabs makes any compromise very difficult. In Germany's case, they were a defeated nation, the population knew they had lost everything, so they surrendered unconditionally. And now there is peace again in Europe. I am not advocating an all out war of annihilation, simply stating that in Europe's case, it was effective. For a time at least.

Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext