Forums → WEPR → You support Israel? I DO
| 879 | 271205 |
I just feel the morals and ethics of the middle east aren't right compared to any western country.
- 879 Replies
Evidence at cleansing needed.
The 1948 Palestinian exodus and the Deir Yassin Massacre could fit into the definition of ethnic cleansing.
During the 1948 Palestinian exodus, over 700,000 Palestinians were driven out of their homes either by force or fear.
Well known incidence, largely accepted as an act of ethnic cleansing.
Source: Black, I. 2010, "Memories and maps keep alive Palestinian hopes of return", Guardian .
Both sides had ample reason to be angry with each other, so in a sense, both were responsible for it. What I was getting at was that the Palestinians attacked first.
It is highly disputed how the war started, so you would need some heavy evidence to say something like that. The roots of the war are tied to the 19th century, and it was the cause of both groups, mainly as a result of the then-popular ideas of Zionism and Arab Nationalism.
Skyla <3
It is highly disputed how the war started, so you would need some heavy evidence to say something like that. The roots of the war are tied to the 19th century, and it was the cause of both groups, mainly as a result of the then-popular ideas of Zionism and Arab Nationalism.
No. I know all that. I was saying that for those wars, the Arabs and Palestinians were the ones who fired the first shot. To me, both sides are the blame for the conflict, but for the wars itself, the Palestinians started it. They attacked Israel in 1948 in its infancy after independence for example.
The 1948 Palestinian exodus and the Deir Yassin Massacre could fit into the definition of ethnic cleansing.
During the 1948 Palestinian exodus, over 700,000 Palestinians were driven out of their homes either by force or fear.
Well known incidence, largely accepted as an act of ethnic cleansing.
Yes, I know this too, which is why I empathise as much with the Palestinian people.
I wasn't expecting any. An extremist is one who carries out terror attacks and believes only in extreme values, i.e destroying Israel. I have no qualms with freedom fighters, people who protest for Palestine peacefully. I have qualms with people who use guns and violence.
So u just favor those palestinians who bring their oratory skills against Israeli bullets?
Most came after the partition was proposed or rumored.
U r wrong, they started colonizing right after WWII.
Wow, that was a really tough one to guess. You say it as though it's a bad thing.
Its not a bad thing but in my opuinion putting up with unjustice is like helpin the unjust.
Quote book or again no cigar. Jews descended from the Israelites, who can be traced back as far as the 13th Century BC. So who got there first?
I admit I dont have a source but I will still insist on on my opinion.
Let me put it this way
If Israel is based on reason that Israelis lived here 3000 years ago(although modern day palestinians are desndents of people who lived b4 jews) Then USA should go to to red Indians, Australia to Aboriginals.(So this is the lamest excuse)
If that is not the case,
Then Israel is agressor plain and simple.
No. I know all that. I was saying that for those wars, the Arabs and Palestinians were the ones who fired the first shot. To me, both sides are the blame for the conflict, but for the wars itself, the Palestinians started it. They attacked Israel in 1948 in its infancy after independence for example.
I do not think either side is to blame. When British forces left the Mandate of Palestine and the region was marked as the Independent State of Israel in May 1948, the British were under obligation to maintain peace between both sides, but instead they were busy organizing their withdrawal and did not intervene at all. Zionists were riled up to fight against the Arab nationalists and vice versa, while the Non-Zionist of the Jewish agency, and the non-nationalist Arabs were strongly against military force, even in self-defense.
Source: Urofsky, M. I. 1982 "A voice that spoke for justice: the life and times of Stephen S. Wise" p.282.
I do not think either side is to blame. When British forces left the Mandate of Palestine and the region was marked as the Independent State of Israel in May 1948, the British were under obligation to maintain peace between both sides, but instead they were busy organizing their withdrawal and did not intervene at all. Zionists were riled up to fight against the Arab nationalists and vice versa, while the Non-Zionist of the Jewish agency, and the non-nationalist Arabs were strongly against military force, even in self-defense.
Source: Urofsky, M. I. 1982 "A voice that spoke for justice: the life and times of Stephen S. Wise" p.282.
Actually brits did same blunder with Pakistan an year B4.
@punisher
My problem with you keep saying that it was their land first is that it still wasn't. The canaanites had it, and the Jews took it from them. You said the Palestinians were either decedents of the Canaanites (which they're not), or they inhabited the land at the same time of them which I'm also fairly certain is not true.
My problem with you keep saying that it was their land first is that it still wasn't. The canaanites had it, and the Jews took it from them. You said the Palestinians were either decedents of the Canaanites (which they're not), or they inhabited the land at the same time of them which I'm also fairly certain is not true
Lets say I am wrong,
If I am wrong than tell me at what basis in ur opinion Israel is created.
If I am wrong than tell me at what basis in ur opinion Israel is created.
I'm not arguing Israel's creation, I'm arguing Palestinians claim to it.
I'm not arguing Israel's creation, I'm arguing Palestinians claim to it.
So if u live in america, So did your forefathers. wont you have a claim on it.
So if u live in america, So did your forefathers. wont you have a claim on it.
Yes, but my point was Jew's lived there before the Palestinians (and the only people we know before that are the canaanites), so if you want to claim that people have claim to a land because they lived there at one point, the Jew's should get first, or equal claim to it (I'm not sure we know if canaanites even have descendants today).
Yes, but my point was Jew's lived there before the Palestinians (and the only people we know before that are the canaanites), so if you want to claim that people have claim to a land because they lived there at one point, the Jew's should get first, or equal claim to it (I'm not sure we know if canaanites even have descendants today)
If we follow this logic, whole world will b in chaos.
USA will got red Indians, Australia to Aboriginals, and most of the europe to scandinavians.
and that is the only point I think one can give in support of Israel.
If we follow this logic, whole world will b in chaos.
So then we shouldn't give Palestinians the land because they were there at one point?
So then we shouldn't give Palestinians the land because they were there at one point?
But they should have it because it was taken from them force fully and that war is no over yet.
The moment that war ends Palestine conflict will b history.
But they should have it because it was taken from them force fully and that war is no over yet.
It was taken from everyone who's had it by force.
The moment that war ends Palestine conflict will b history.
Well that's obvious enough.
It was taken from everyone who's had it by force.
But those conflicts ended one one party's defeat.but this is a totally different case, here conflict is still ongoing.
You must be logged in to post a reply!