To: tejek who wrote (155657 ) 12/4/2002 9:03:45 AM From: hmaly Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1579987 Ted Re..Because two different entities made the same proposal does not mean it was a fair one. First, the Partition Plan was pushed onto the UN by the British at the last minute. Why would the UN start to make changes at that point? So. You have just said why it could be unfair, but you have yet to give one reason why it was unfair. Secondly, there were considerable politics that went into that plan. The Zionists had better control of those politics than the Palestinians and actively participated in the crafting of the Plan. How can you be so sure, without even reading the plan, and knowing the exact populations of each etc. Simply put, you are just giving me reasons to justify your bias, not because you know it was a bad deal, but because you felt it was a bad deal. You make it sound like the British were accountable to a higher authority. To the contrary, they were the higher authority. They had the mandate to do what they wanted. You said it yourself that the Zionists held all of the cards; the partition plan simply recognized reality. To single out one year is to not get the full picture. The concept of ethnic cleansing was a major topic of conversation among the Zionists well before 1947. However, they really did not put their plan into effect until 1948. Once again, as I showed you in the last post, the topic was whether Palestine was offer a chance at statehood; not whether the Zionists engaged in ethnic cleansing. For the record, I will agree that Israel did engage in ethnic cleansing; just as the Arabs tried to do the same to the Zionists and destroy Israel. Secondly, you should remember that ethnic cleansing didn't have the political overtone 50 yrs ago, such as it does today. However, I will agree that either Britain or Israel should have figured out how to incorporate the Palestinians, rather than remove them; possibly one single state with a democratic gov. and with stringent protections for the rights of the minorities; such as we have here in the US. . However that is my opinion, I wasn't there and have no direct first hand knowledge. Both the UK and the UN thought partitioning was the way to proceed, I must assume they were far more knowledgeable about the circumstances than I. When Israeli statehood looked imminent, the neighboring Arab countries told the Palestinians to flee Palestine since the Arabs anticipated attacking and defeating the fledgling state of Israel. The Palestinians complied. As you suggested earlier, it looked like Israel would be easy pickings. The neighboring nations and the Palestinians were sadly mistaken. Israel turned out to have far more firepower than the surrounding nations. The Arabs were handily defeated. Clearly, the Palestinians sided with the wrong people but really, they did not have much choice in the matter. I agree entirely, until the no choice part. Palestine did have a choice, which was to agree to the partition. As we both agreed, the Palestinians backed the wrong horse and paid dearly for it; but they did have a choice.