Ben Gurion: "We are the aggressors"

[Coyote]

Kondor3, Saigon, et al,

Some thought, serious consideration, should be given to this.



(COMMENT)

There is nothing wrong with the concept of a "National Home." Just as it was recognized that the Jewish People needed a "National Home," so it was that simultaneously, the Ottoman Empire wanted to perserve the Palestinian National Home.



It is very clear that there was wisdom in these words. And the wise men of today (whoever they turnout to be) should see to it that such a place exists for the Palestinian.


(COMMENT)

Keeping in mind the essential need for the Israeli to maintain sovereign integrity and to secure that integrity with defensible borders, we must also be mindful that we do not trade a Jewish diaspora for a Palestinian diaspora.

I am not entirely sure that the intent to "disperse into their surrounding Arab-neighbor countries as the Israelis complete the job of nudging the Palestinians out of the few scattered remaining pockets of land" will ultimately be in the best interest of either culture (Jewish or Palestinian), the region, or the greater aspect of humanity.

The object is to live together in a lasting peace, not to disperse in order to avoid an endless confrontation.

Most Respectfully,
R

I couldn't agree more...you can't right an ancient wrong with another wrong nor can you forceably move almost 4 million people fron homes they've occupied for generations and expect other countries, who are dealing with their own problems of economy, ethnic divisions and unstable governments to take them in.

And besides, when did it become their job to clean up after Israel?

Accommodation and peace has to come about between Israel and the Palestinians in such a way that both sides have security, recognition and a viable homeland.

 

[CMike]

Their Jewish counterparts have had 1,900 years of experience in living as a scattered people at the whim of their regional or national rulers and have long-since learned how to hunker down and go quiet and survive and also to package themselves to best advantage...

At that rate, we can expect Arab and Palestinian leadership to achieve that level of marketing-savvy by, oh, say, the year 3900 CE (AD) or so.

Nature's (or God's, or whatever) way of leveling the playing field against overwhelming odds and resources.

I think Israel has had the advantage of having a very educated, very 'westernised' and very sophisticated population; whereas the Palestinian population has been a ubiquitous example of the developing world - ill-educated, näive and frequently prone to counter-productive strategies.

None of this shouldblind us to the fact that the Palestinian people deserve a homeland.

They have one. It's called Jordan. That's where they are from.

 

[Kondor3]

"...surrounding Arab neighbors... And besides, when did it become their job to clean up after Israel?"

Consider it Penance and Compensation by their Arab-neighbors for breaking their promises to the Palestinians and allowing them to rot in camps for 65 years and using them as proxies and bargaining chips - cleaning up after the mess they left by encouraging them to abandon their lands in spite of Israeli protestations of good will, and then failing militarily and then abandoning them in 1948. Besides, many so-called Palestinians are 1st or 2nd or 3rd or 4th -generation Jordanian or Lebanese or Egyptian emigres anyway, so it's more like a homecoming for long-lost cousins rather than cleaning-up after somebody.

 

[MHunterB]

"Accommodation and peace has to come about between Israel and the Palestinians in such a way that both sides have security, recognition and a viable homeland."

Sounds great, Coyote, and in theory I agree with it. But in FACT, that 'security, recognition and a viable homeland' depends at least as much on *attitude* as physical factors. As long as assorted propaganda claims that Haifa and Tel Aviv and Sderot are 'occupied Palestine' - that 'security, recognition, and a viable homeland' for Israelis cannot exist.

Mobs chanting "Free, free Palestine: From the river to the sea" are NOT promoting 'security, recognition, and a viable homeland' any more than any lynch mob ever has.

 

[CMike]

The problem is that the arabs don't want Israel to exist-period, under any uncirumstances.

In a peace negotiation, both sides need to want peace.

The arabs side doesn't want to peace. Therefore, there will never be a successful peace.

 

[Coyote]

The problem is that the arabs don't want Israel to exist-period, under any uncirumstances.

In a peace negotiation, both sides need to want peace.

The arabs side doesn't want to peace. Therefore, there will never be a successful peace.

That's not entirely true. It's not all or nothing on either side.

 

[Coyote]

"Accommodation and peace has to come about between Israel and the Palestinians in such a way that both sides have security, recognition and a viable homeland."

Sounds great, Coyote, and in theory I agree with it. But in FACT, that 'security, recognition and a viable homeland' depends at least as much on *attitude* as physical factors. As long as assorted propaganda claims that Haifa and Tel Aviv and Sderot are 'occupied Palestine' - that 'security, recognition, and a viable homeland' for Israelis cannot exist.

Mobs chanting "Free, free Palestine: From the river to the sea" are NOT promoting 'security, recognition, and a viable homeland' any more than any lynch mob ever has.

There is much propaganda coming from both sides and for every Palestinian demanding the entire enchilada there is a Jew counter demanding. How about the assorted propaganda claims that Palestinians are all Jordanians and should be sent back to Jordan? Or that settlements built on occupied territory in West Bank and Gaza are rightfully part of Israel?

There are factions on both sides who refuse to acknowledge the other's right to self determination and a homeland.

 

[Kondor3]

"...The object is to live together in a lasting peace, not to disperse in order to avoid an endless confrontation..."

Rocco, I admire your style, and you are absolutely correct, from the perspective of the humanist, that this should be the object of the exercise.

Unfortunately, unless I miss my guess, it is now far too late for such idealistic, neutral and pluralistic outcomes - they have been unattainable for many years now - 1967 comes to mind as a likely Turning Point, after which such outcomes had been rendered all but impossible.

So... IF that is true (it is too late, by decades)... THEN... we are compelled to seek the best solution that can still be accomplished under the circumstances.

It is my opinion that the capture of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights were game-changers; forever altering and dramatically reducing the chances for a peaceful coexistence.

And, after Intifada I and II, I don't see much chance for the return of Recently Annexed Lands in the West Bank or Gaza, either.

If, in the long run, avoiding confrontation through dispersal may be all that remains as a practical alternative to the status quo, then that's what we shall have.

And, frankly, I think we're 'almost there', in this context.

And that's not even taking into account the Vae Victus effect.

I could be wrong, of course, but I sense that I'm not.

 

[MHunterB]

Speaking of 'cleaning up after others' - the assorted Arab League nations which unilaterally re-defined their Jewish communities as 'hostile aliens' and stole their lands, property and assets, need to compensate those (950,000) refugees and their descendants *as per those UN Resolutions which are so often cited on "Palestinian" refugees*. Because the Resolution applied to BOTH.

 

[Coyote]

"...The object is to live together in a lasting peace, not to disperse in order to avoid an endless confrontation..."

Rocco, I admire your style, and you are absolutely correct, from the perspective of the humanist, that this should be the object of the exercise.

Unfortunately, unless I miss my guess, it is now far too late for such idealistic, neutral and pluralistic outcomes - they have been unattainable for many years now - 1967 comes to mind as a likely Turning Point, after which such outcomes had been rendered all but impossible.

So... IF that is true (it is too late, by decades)... THEN... we are compelled to seek both the best solution that can still be accomplished under the circumstances.

It is my opinion that the capture of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights were game-changers; forever altering and dramatically reducing the chances for a peaceful coexistence.

If, in the long run, avoiding confrontation through dispersal is all that remains as a practical alternative to the status quo, then that's what we shall have.

And, frankly, I think we're 'almost there', in this context.

I could be wrong, of course, but I sense that I'm not.

Even if it is "too late" (for a two state solution?) - you can not practically, ethically or in anyway other than something like ethnic cleansing move 4 million people into neighboring countries who are unwilling and ill equipt to take in more population.

Either Israel will have to find a way into a two state solution, or they will have to accept one state that includes the palestinians within their boundaries or they will be forced into a continuation of the "status quo" and I don't think Israel wants that - it costs them financially and politically to protect what is essentially a very small number of people living in the occupied territories. 300,000 vs 4 million (or something along that line)

 

[Coyote]

Speaking of 'cleaning up after others' - the assorted Arab League nations which unilaterally re-defined their Jewish communities as 'hostile aliens' and stole their lands, property and assets, need to compensate those (950,000) refugees and their descendants *as per those UN Resolutions which are so often cited on "Palestinian" refugees*. Because the Resolution applied to BOTH.

I think we talked about this before and I fully agree that the Jews who were forced out have as much right to redress from those countries as the Palistinians.

 

[José]

Can anyone even imagine a prominent american politician, artist or businessman stating that "white americans have a right to a national home and a viable homeland by providing a separate state for black and hispanic americans to live in" and surviving the uproar?

The shitstorm such statement would create would last for months on end and totally destroy their political, artistic or business carreer.

But we are talking about palestinians here... the redskins of the 21th century... so just about anything is "kosher".

 

[Kondor3]

Can anyone even imagine a prominent american politician, artist or businessman stating that "white americans have a right to a national home and a viable homeland by providing a separate state for black and hispanic americans to live in" and surviving the uproar?

The shitstorm such statement would create would last for months on end and totally destroy their political, artistic or business carreer.

But we are talking about palestinians here... the redskins of the 21th century... so just about anything is "kosher".

At the end of WWII, the Poles expelled all Prussians (Germans) from their territories and made them go to a recently-defeated Germany.

At the end of WWII the Czechs expelled all Sudetenland Germans from their terriroties and made them go to a recently-defeated Germany.

And there have been other expulsions, even in the 20th.

Not to mention the large number of times that Jews have been expelled from European and Arab countries - including large-scale expulsions of Jews from Arab countries in the 1940s - still within living memory - and forcing them all to move to Israel.

So, finally, the Jews may get around to returning the favor.

One cannot compare the Jews and Palestinians to American Whites versus American Natives (Indians) for any of several significant reasons.

Not to mention that Blacks and Hispanics are not swearing before God to drown the Whites in the Sea and are not suicide-bombing Whites nor lobbing rockets at Whites.

Apples and oranges.

I understand the concern, but...

Apples and oranges.

The comparison does not hold up under a closer scrutiny, not even at the macro level.

 

[Coyote]

One cannot compare the Jews and Palestinians to American Whites versus American Natives (Indians) for any of several significant reasons.

To some degree, I think some valid comparisons can be made.

For one, as with American immigrants vs American natives - there were no angels on either side. For example, like the Palestinians, the native tribes engaged in warfare, particularly terrorism and guerilla tactics in reaction to the invasion of their lands (the nobel savage is a myth).

The European immigrants came fleeing persecution in their homelands, seeking land or a future they couldn't have in Europe. The American settler movement was largely driven by the concept of "Manifest Destiny" - a concept that gave them a divine entitlement to the continent. The result of that was the removal of native tribes through superior force and dishonest dealings - from their traditional lands and onto reservations - lands that was seen to have no value at the time. Native tribes were regarded as barbarians, animals, savages - sound familiar?

There are a lot of similarities...

 

[CMike]

Great.


Why don't you give your home to an American Indian mister grand wizard?

 

[CMike]

Better yet how about giving your home to an al Qaida terrorist?

 

[José]

Originally posted by Kondor 3
Not to mention the large number of times that Jews have been expelled from European and Arab countries - including large-scale expulsions of Jews from Arab countries in the 1940s - still within living memory - and forcing them all to move to Israel.

The displacement of sephardic Jews from ME countries was an unfortunate result of all the anger and indignation generated by the creation of the state of Israel, kondor.

It's an aditional tragedy that resulted from Israel's creation... not an excuse to deny Palestinians the rights Indians, blacks and hispanics take for granted in America.

Originally posted by Kondor3
Not to mention that Blacks and Hispanics are not swearing before God to drown the Whites in the Sea and are not suicide-bombing Whites nor lobbing rockets at Whites.

Of course they're not, Kondor!!

Last time I checked they were being compensated for past injustices (tax-free cassinos, AA, etc, etc...) and not being herded in Florida or Maryland to provide a "national home", a "viable homeland" for white americans.

 

[Coyote]

Great.


Why don't you give your home to an American Indian mister grand wizard?

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[CMike]

Great.


Why don't you give your home to an American Indian mister grand wizard?

What does that have to do with anything?

Everything.

If you aren't ready to give up your home to people sworn to kill you don expect others to do it.

 

[Coyote]

Great.


Why don't you give your home to an American Indian mister grand wizard?

What does that have to do with anything?

Everything.

If you aren't ready to give up your home to people sworn to kill you don expect others to do it.

Which has what to do with historical similarities between Americans and Israeli's?

Or, what does it have to do with Israeli settlements in Occupied Territories taken from the Palestinians?

Seriously. Your comment comes off as pretty non-sequitor.