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 Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (236847)	7/18/2007 3:43:37 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You have helped make my point. Not only were the Arabs abused by the colonial forces which exploited their tribal rivalries, but they were saddled with Israel in their midst. It's understandable why the colonial powers after creating Israel might support it, now isn't it? So...if Arab states have existed forever, that proves Israel is illegitimate. But if Arab countries are also brand new creations, then that also proves Israel is illegitimate, since those poor Arabs were "bullied" by the colonial powers, and they're mad, see, and so they must have a legitimate cause to be mad, because people don't get mad without a legitimate cause, unless they're Jews, in which case being mad about having had millions murdered and people intending to murder millions more is NOT legitimate, it's racism. Yup, I think I have the measure of this line of argument. And I think even you would agree that many countries have played a part in Israel's survival- wouldn't you? Only Britain, and only before 1936. The chief country that has supported Israel is Israel. The day Israel prooves itself unable to defend itself from attack is the day Western support for Israel vanishes. The US has a large amount of self-interest involved in an alliance with the strongest regional power and the only one it can count on not to aid or abet Islamic terrorism. The West as a whole has done far more to PREVENT Israel winning wars than to help it win them. Time and again, Israel fights against a stopwatch with the umpire yelling "TIME" before the war is over. And so the Arabs know they really don't have much to fear...besides, all the progressive types will only demand that Israel give them a do-over for the sake of "peace". It's heads I win, tails you lose for the Arabs.

To: epicure who wrote (236847)	7/18/2007 9:30:31 AM
From: bentway	Respond to of 281500

Without the United States and specifically Harry Truman's support at the UN in 1948, Israel would have never become a nation. mideastweb.org "Despite his plainspoken ways, Harry S. Truman had a sweeping grasp of geopolitical realities. He was also a friend of the Jews who had made clear his support for the Zionist cause before WWII. He was strengthened in his resolve to help the Jews following the revelations of Nazi atrocities. On May 25, 1939, following the British White Paper of 1939 that limited Jewish immigration, Truman inserted a remark in the Congressional Record condemning the White paper as a repudiation of British obligations. At a Chicago rally in 1944, then Senator Truman said, "Today, not tomorrow, we must do all that is humanly possible to provide a haven for all those who can be grasped from the hands of Nazi butchers. Free lands must be opened to them." Truman wrote in his memoirs, "The question of Palestine as a Jewish homeland goes back to the solemn promise that had been made to them [the Jews] by the British in the Balfour Declaration of 1917 - a promise which had stirred the hopes and the dreams of these oppressed people. This promise, I felt, should be kept, just as all promises made by responsible, civilized governments should be kept." Truman was inexperienced in foreign affairs and initially felt he was out of his league and crushed by the burden of his new office and responsibilities. Nonetheless, he did not forget the Palestine question as soon as World War II was over. About 250,000 Jewish displaced persons, refugees who had survived Nazi concentration camps, exile in Siberia and partisan battles, were now living in miserable camps in Europe, awaiting clearance for immigration and final settlement. The US, at Truman's instigation, began pressuring the British to modify their Palestine policy and admit displaced persons to Palestine. At the same time, Truman tried to gain support for admission of Jewish displaced persons to the United States. However, domestic opposition to enlarging immigration for Jews was fierce and adamant. Following the Harrison report on treatment of European refugees, President Truman wrote to British Prime Minister Clement Attlee, urging Attlee to allow a reasonable number of the displaced persons to emigrate to Palestine, but to no avail. On October 22, 1945, Senators Wagner and Taft introduced a resolution favoring a Jewish state in Palestine. The British were not interested in Truman's ideas or in admission of any Jewish refugees. However, as they were anxious to obtain a loan from the US to support their tottering economy, they suggested a commission of investigation that would report on the matter. Truman was still averse to the idea of a Jewish state despite his support for immigration, mostly out of concern that it would require excessive US resources to defend it. This concern was to surface again and again and influence policy in the months ahead. He wrote to Senator Joseph Ball of Minnesota on November 24, 1945: "I told the Jews that if they were willing to furnish me with five hundred thousand men to carry on a war with the Arabs, we could do what they are suggesting in the Resolution [favoring a state] - otherwise we we will have to negotiate awhile. It is a very explosive situation we are facing, and naturally I regret it very much, but I don't think that you, or any of the other Senators, would be inclined to send half a dozen Divisions to Palestine to maintain a Jewish State. What I am trying to do is to make the whole world safe for the Jews. Therefore, I don't feel like going to war for Palestine." " ================================================================== He was convinced to change his mind by dual-loyalty Zionists within his administration. A mistake we pay for today, sixty years later.