Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (2726)	1/24/2003 8:30:27 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 15992

The Arabs were not living on that land when the Zionists made their move to create a "Jewish" state? Hmmm, that's an interesting question. We should probably be skeptical about whether there were any or very many Palestinians. Especially when some try to prevent it from happening. Are you worried about this being questioned? Many were very recent immigrants. Don't know how many but this should be investigated. There is a big financial incentive - anyone who claims he is a refugee gets supported by the UN. Any wonder the number of "refugees" keeps getting bigger and bigger. Len, you need to be more skeptical and questioning about the "historical facts" you accept. Did any Arab country sign a document agreeing to the partition? Didn't Hawkmoon show you his signature not too long ago?

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (2726)	1/25/2003 12:53:58 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15992

I will consider whether there is any point in getting back to you......Maybe later.....

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (2726)	1/27/2003 11:15:11 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15992

I decided to lay aside a detailed exchange for the moment, and to challenge a conceptual error. The territory of Palestine was held by the Byzantine Empire, then passed between various Muslim and Christian princes during the period of the Crusades, then was incorporated into the Ottoman Empire until the end of the First World War. The Ottoman sultan threw in his lot with Germany and Austria, and therefore was subject to punitive measures as an enemy power after the war. The British and French were given administrative power in various territories that had been Ottoman, under the mandate of the League of Nations. It was under this legal arrangement that the British, for a time, looked favorably upon Zionism. The United Nations, as the successor to the League of Nations, proposed the partition scheme, and sanctioned the idea of an independent Israel. Now, you may call this "colonialist", but it all took place under the auspices of legitimate international bodies and in accordance with international law as it existed at the time. To invalidate the state of Israel on that basis would be like saying that Idi Amin was right to dispossess and force out of Uganda persons of East Indian origin, who had entered that territory under the colonial authority of the British, or like saying that the Louisiana territory should be returned to France, since Napoleon was a dictator without the standing to sell it to the United States. We cannot unsettle all legal transactions because they were made under different rules than we currently operate under.