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: one_less who wrote (240197)	8/28/2007 5:55:45 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

I agree with most of what you have to say in that post Nadine about the modern relations between Pals and their supporters with Isreal. I have argued with the ever hopeful Michael that the Pal/Isreal conflict is not resolvable A point of agreement at last. The conflict is relgious at its root. Muslim land must stay Muslim. Anywhere else in the world, new countries get recognized and people get on with it. Even China, though it still insists Taiwan is Chinese, doesn't mortgage its own political future to the The Great Cause of Conquering Taiwan the way the Arabs have done with Israel. I don't agree with you that Muslims have historically been rotten to Jews. We've already discussed the historical dhimmi contracts which was far and away the most just, fair, and decent treatment any subculture ever recieved up to that time, including the treatment Jews gave to sub/other cultures. And far from what you attempted to portray as the equivalent modern threat by Islam to the rest of the world. Generally speaking, a dhimmi's lot is not a happy one and basically he has only those rights that the local ruler gives him. If he has any conflict with a Muslim, check out Sharia laws, he is SOL. His word is like a woman's, it counts for half a Muslim's in court. This compares quite unfavorably to the way Jews were treated under the Roman Empire, at least before the First Jewish Revolt in 66 CE. Sharia only looks good if you compare it to the European Dark Ages. I am not talking about 1000 years ago. I am talking about the 19th or 20th century. Well okay, Muslims weren't rotten to the Jews compared to Hitler, but they did give it the good college try and supported Hitler to the max. Read up about the Great Farhood in Baghdad in 1941. Not to mention that it wasn't some country on the moon but the same one where Pals were living at the time. Would you fight if I want to have your home? The Pals weren't Pals at the time, just Arabs, not organized into any state, so they didn't fight. Half of them had just come to Palestine in the 1920s and 1930s, to take up jobs that the Zionist development had created. They lived with Jews then, and the Zionists were promising that they could continue to live with Jews in Israel. It wasn't the people who decided to fight, it was the leadership who had to whip them into fighting with rumors of atrocities and desecration of mosques. Remember, when the fight came to a head in 1947 and 1948, the Palestinian Arabs didn't fight. They ran. The educated classes evacuated to Cairo and Beirut in 1947, leaving a bunch of uneducated townsmen and fellahin, who waited for the Arab High Command to rescue them. Didn't happen. The enduring shame of the Palestinians, the one that other Arabs don't let them forget, is that the great majority of the fighting in Israel's war of Independence did not involve any Palestinian Arabs. You must remember that "Palestine", like "Iraq" was a British creation that meant nothing to the Arabs. It didn't even follow the boundaries of Ottoman provinces. It was just some arbitrary thing the Brits decided on. There never was an Arab country of Palestine. The Arabs might have used the 1920s and 1930s to organize themselves into a country, but they missed this opportunity, first of many.