Arab Regimes, Not Israel, Are Guilty of Racism (page 2)

Kenneson

"God, I know we are your chosen people, but couldn't
you choose somebody else for a change?"
Shalom Alichem

Arguably, the Arabs and the Israelis deserve each other. Perhaps we should just build a wall around the whole area, supply both sides with weapons, and let them sort out the final resolution between themselves. Who knows, perhaps the last 10 survivors on each side would finally agree that they should try a peaceful solutions?

- Jan
--
- "How do you write women so well?" - "I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability." (Jack Nicholson in "As Good as it Gets")

ThiChi

JanH: I agree. Alexander the Great brought in a “sword” to settle the long bickering of peoples in the Macedonia area. It worked.

SS: The "true historical setting" takes place long before the 1940's........... This is important when considering the "historical/legal rights" to the Land of Israel. Please re-read the history post below.........

History:

"""Jewish Resistance to Invaders

It is this land which the Romans, incensed by the fury of the Jewish resistance to their oppressive rule, later (135 B.C.E.) called Palestina, an illegal imposition by a foreign power, derived from the Philistine Indo-Europeans of Aegean origin who settled in the southwest maritime plain of Canaan and, after their defeat by King David around 1000 B.C.E., eventually disappeared. Thereafter, the Romans and succeeding invaders destroyed and obliterated this land so that for almost two millennia there could have been -- and was -- no "Palestine" or "Palestinian" identity.

With the Arab conquest, the Roman-Byzantine province of Palestine, by then fragmented, further degenerated into the Junds of Filastin and Urdun, mere subdivisions within the wider domains of the Damascan Caliphate. Filastin was, therefore, never a country but the fading vestiger of its Judean precursor and generated no corresponding identity. Following the Crusaders, even these shadowy descriptions disappeared as the area was repeatedly invaded and further fragmented into subdistricts now identified only by the sub-capitals from which they were ruled. The manner of its division and rule under the Ottoman Turks shows that by then this region had ceased to play any distinguishing role in the life and culture of the Arab-Islamic world.

During these sterile centuries, the Land of Israel/Palestine persisted only as an abstract Judeo-Christian concept -- the subliminal image of its Jewish past. Even the Arabs have confirmed this truth, not least by their hostility to the creation of Mandated Palestine in what, for them, had become merely a southern part of Syria. Ironically, this mandate for regenerating the Jewish homeland, provides even for the PLO the only real definition of Palestine in their history. In short, the Jewish homeland was destroyed almost from the moment that it was called Palestine, so that Palestine never became an established reality. All this leads to three conclusions of paramount importance:

1. The Jewish homeland is the first and only indigenous, self-defined entity to have emerged in a region which otherwise was merely an arena for conflict, or within the subject domain of foreign powers. This entity is uniquely rooted in Jewish national history, which constitutes the very essence of its being. Indeed, the case for Zionism is not that Jews are justified to a "homeland in Palestine," but rather that Palestine's reconstitution is itself justified primarily by the Jews' right to recover their homeland.

2. As the Peel Commission observed, "Palestine had dropped out of history," so that the Palestine Mandate did not preserve an existing entity but, through Zionism, recovered the Jewish homeland from its biblical foundations.

3. The dimensions of this state were expressly designed to reflect this biblical precedent, its only precursor, which at various times had covered both banks of the river Jordan (from the Hebrew "Yored Dan" -- descending from Dan). It therefore emerged as a composite of various configurations induced by internal and external pressures on the Hebrew kingdoms, its actual borders being determined by those of then existing entities.

The False Image

Hence, modern Palestine was created for the Jews, who had never surrendered their title to the land nor ever acquiesced in its foreign domination. Moreover, this Palestine included, for the same historical reasons that justified the Mandate itself, the topographical area of "transjordan," which Britain later caused to be illegally differentiated as the unprecedented Arab state of Jordan. That collective sovereignty in this land (of which "TransJordan" is a natural part as defined by the history of the Jewish nation which gave it birth), is the prerogative of the Jewish people, a truism enshrined in all documents leading to and including the Palestine Mandate.

Unfortunately, revival of the slave name "Palestine" has enabled the creation of a false image. Arabs could never claim Eretz Yisrael but, by portraying its historically disparate peoples as an indigenous nation, they now lay claim to an imagined Arab Palestine. Yet a true nation finds its expression in common ideals, institutions and achievements, for an y evidence of which we would search non-Jewish "Palestine" in vain. A true nation is united by a sense of kinship and a kindred ethos, whose group consciousness has been molded by a common history, culture and tradition, by a common language and common institutions, all of which are distinctive from others among whom, or next to whom, it lives and who are uniquely associated with a particular territory. No Arab "Palestinian" entity qualifies on these terms. No such entity existed or recognized itself or was recognized as such by others. The local non-Jewish population not only failed to achieve their own specific identity, but even failed to contribute to the well-being and preservation of the country pioneered by the Jews. The encapsulation of these peoples within the newly revived Jewish homeland gives them the semblance of a political unity without historical foundation and which they had not previously sought nor claimed.

Due attention to the true historical setting therefore plays a crucial role in correctly appraising and defining the parameters relating to the Arab/Israel conflict and in the search for a solution reflecting the true balance of historical/legal rights to the Land of Israel.""

Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once - Buckaroo Bonsai

roybatty

JanH, I agree.

But one point. I'd rather an Arab living in Israel then then an Arab living in any of the nations surrounding Israel.

Satanus

Thichi

The 'history lesson' basically says, 'what the hell, it wasn't much of a country anyway?'. So what? Does that rationalization justify driving out three quarters of a million people?

SS

ThiChi

SS: That is not the main point........sorry if you missed it..

Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once - Buckaroo Bonsai

Satanus

Thichi

The part of the arguement that reaches back 2000 years carries no wieght and i reject it as i do the hate filled genocidal old testement.

SS

Utopian Reformist

Fighting will end in this region when religion is replaced with secularism, materialism, humanism, and above all, education!

ThiChi

Utopian Reformist:

I understand your statement. However, with all the biblical sites in the area, you must admit that Religion (Zionism, Christians, and in the last 600 years, the Muslims) will forever be part of the equation. I feel that this fervor will only increase as new archaeological discoveries continue (so far) to confirm many biblical referenced personages and events that continue to be affirmed, for the most part.

There is a very strong move to start digging on the old temple mount area, which the Rock of the Dome now sits. If secondary references are discovered relating to the “Family of David” history/legend issue, this alone will explode the religious questions and "God’s plan” for this area.........

Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once - Buckaroo Bonsai

ThiChi

SS: “The part of the argument that reaches back 2000 years carries no wieght and i reject it as i do the hate filled genocidal old testament. “”
This is another issue altogether. God's plans and ways are another matter. The question here is “do the Jews have a right to this area?” I must say, based on the history, the answer is yes.
History has always been unfair when land rights are involved. All things being equal, you could rightly call California “Occupied Territory,” based on how we screwed the Mexicans for this land.
Do two wrongs make a right? No. However, historically, the Jews claims must be considered, in light of the facts. Might does make right in most of History, right or wrong. I feel the Jews have a strong case to stay.......

SS: I enjoy debating with you. I have given pause more than once to your viewpoints.

Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once - Buckaroo Bonsai

Arab Regimes, Not Israel, Are Guilty of Racism

Share this