Meanwhile in Palestine

[JFSOCC]

Ah the fundamental "who owns the land" question.

Somewhat irrelevant. Israelis live in Israel now, and Palestinians live in the Palestinian territories.

Do we accept right of conquest? We'll, I think we kind of have to. You can't kick out the Israeli's now, they're there, they've roots there now. (even if they didn't before 1948)

Should they have come there in 1948? No, not on the shaky claim they had. but that's all moot now. Both sides can each have their territory AND live in peace, this I believe.

 

I would like to say that the Palestinians were already living there when Israel was founded, but they were part of a territory under the control of the British (ever great administrators of the land, look what they did with India, Afghanistan, Persia, the American colonies, etc. lovely cases of ignoring local populace, culture, traditions and sensibilities.)

 

The Argument that Israel is the land that Jews originated from and should be theirs, well, I guess if that's true then we should give back the United States to the native Americans, we should give back Turkmenistan to the Turkish, Turkey to the Greeks, the Netherlands to the Spaniards, Hispaniola to the now extinct native people.

Why doesn't that happen?

Well because of the history. It's not that it got conquered fair and square, as no conquest is ever fair nor square, it's because people are living there, people who have a shared cultural identity, who call the place they live their homeland, who have roots there. By the time Israel was created, the Palestinians (in a world where great Britain was rapidly losing control of it's colonies after fighting two ruinously expensive wars) had the right to Palestine. The British figured it still belonged to them, so considered this killing two birds with one stone.

 

But that's all moot now. Israel got created, several generations have lived and died there, you can't deny the Israelis their land now.

What you can do, is partition the land in such a way that there is space for both peoples. Israel should stop annexing more land, they don't need it. (though there is a fear that if Israel can't keep growing it will die a demographic death. I'm not sure if I care. Israel as a Jewish state rubs me the wrong way. I'm fine with it being a secular state, in which all religions are welcome. Right now it isn't.)

[obyknven]

[Calax]

Ah the fundamental "who owns the land" question.

Somewhat irrelevant. Israelis live in Israel now, and Palestinians live in the Palestinian territories.

Do we accept right of conquest? We'll, I think we kind of have to. You can't kick out the Israeli's now, they're there, they've roots there now. (even if they didn't before 1948)

Should they have come there in 1948? No, not on the shaky claim they had. but that's all moot now. Both sides can each have their territory AND live in peace, this I believe.

 

I would like to say that the Palestinians were already living there when Israel was founded, but they were part of a territory under the control of the British (ever great administrators of the land, look what they did with India, Afghanistan, Persia, the American colonies, etc. lovely cases of ignoring local populace, culture, traditions and sensibilities.)

 

The Argument that Israel is the land that Jews originated from and should be theirs, well, I guess if that's true then we should give back the United States to the native Americans, we should give back Turkmenistan to the Turkish, Turkey to the Greeks, the Netherlands to the Spaniards, Hispaniola to the now extinct native people.

Why doesn't that happen?

Well because of the history. It's not that it got conquered fair and square, as no conquest is ever fair nor square, it's because people are living there, people who have a shared cultural identity, who call the place they live their homeland, who have roots there. By the time Israel was created, the Palestinians (in a world where great Britain was rapidly losing control of it's colonies after fighting two ruinously expensive wars) had the right to Palestine. The British figured it still belonged to them, so considered this killing two birds with one stone.

 

But that's all moot now. Israel got created, several generations have lived and died there, you can't deny the Israelis their land now.

What you can do, is partition the land in such a way that there is space for both peoples. Israel should stop annexing more land, they don't need it. (though there is a fear that if Israel can't keep growing it will die a demographic death. I'm not sure if I care. Israel as a Jewish state rubs me the wrong way. I'm fine with it being a secular state, in which all religions are welcome. Right now it isn't.)

Except that the issue with the "who owns the land" argument, is that it validates what the Palestinian leadership and groups like Hamas are saying. That they're an ethnic group stuck on land they used to own but were kicked off, and that the Israeli's are the outside invader. Yes Israel has existed for 50odd years now, but that still doesn't mean that the Palestinian argument isn't valid.

 

Israel has to balance it's public image to the world because of that. If they're coming down to hard on Palestine, they loose support. If that support is lost, they're dead meat because the local Arabic states will pop in and just steamroll them in a Jihad. I mean if they loose the American support, then the "allies" of America in the area (Saudi's mainly) could probably be drawn into the situation fairly easily.

[Meshugger]

A suggestion: Stop blaming the sins of the fathers and focus on the present, because that is the only thing that matters if you truly want peace.

[Volourn]

"If that support is lost, they're dead meat because the local Arabic states will pop in and just steamroll them in a Jihad."

 

The Arabs tried that before... it didn't work out so well.. in fact, it cost Palestinians even more land. And, now Isreal has nukes so the Arabs aren't gonna able tot ake a direct approach any time soon.

 

This idea that palestinians are more 'legit' there than isreal is stupid since the Palestinians themselves are not exactly standing on solid ground in terms of claims themselves.

 

Instead of worrying about the past, it's the future that should be looked at. Everyone seems to miss that.

[Calax]

Ah, but the entire conflict is built on the past. If you look to the future how do you get over the inherent discrimination of the Jewish state against Arabic speaking and Muslim adherents? Hell, you could probably compare the situation to the one found in South Africa during Apartide, except that the entire world sided with the discriminated population rather than feeling sorry for the discriminator.

 

As to the Israeli's winning. The only reason they've been winning is because they have constant military support (although not direct) from the US. Oh, and economic support in the form of millions/billions of dollars being funneled into the state.

[Meshugger]

....and we're back to square one.

[Calax]

We always will be. The argument will neither go away ever (it's been had for centuries) it's just that the semantics will slightly change

[Volourn]

"As to the Israeli's winning. The only reason they've been winning is because they have constant military support (although not direct) from the US. Oh, and economic support in the form of millions/billions of dollars being funneled into the state. "

 

Oh, please. palestine also gets aid from the US and others. And, Hamas has multiple countries supporting their 'war' effort. The only reason Isreal is winning is because they arehave superior forces.

 

Still, I like how people will point out stuff about Isreakl when he works the same for Palestine. L0L

[Reventine]

Here is an interesting question I have always wondered yet never really had the time to research and answer so forgive my ignorance. Why does Israel even allow Palestine to continue to exist ?. Why haven't they brought their foot down like they always say they will when these conflicts arise and send the last Palestinians running to the border instead of consigning Palestine to the slow death of being encircled and crushed...what stays their hand ?.

[Gorth]

what stays their hand ?.

 

The need for cheap labour?

[TrashMan]

"As to the Israeli's winning. The only reason they've been winning is because they have constant military support (although not direct) from the US. Oh, and economic support in the form of millions/billions of dollars being funneled into the state. "

 

Oh, please. palestine also gets aid from the US and others. And, Hamas has multiple countries supporting their 'war' effort. The only reason Isreal is winning is because they arehave superior forces.

 

 

Not even remotely the same amounts and kinds of support.

[JFSOCC]

Here is an interesting question I have always wondered yet never really had the time to research and answer so forgive my ignorance. Why does Israel even allow Palestine to continue to exist ?. Why haven't they brought their foot down like they always say they will when these conflicts arise and send the last Palestinians running to the border instead of consigning Palestine to the slow death of being encircled and crushed...what stays their hand ?.

Well, I guess I am a cynic, but I think that a slow death of the Palestinians avoids the pesky accusations of genocide, though the end result is the same.

[Calax]

what stays their hand ?.

PR. Palestine was created at the same time, and if Israel were to eliminate it they'd either A) have to integrate the muslim population into their own or B) have to expel the muslim population.

 

One is entirely unwanted by them, the other becomes a PR nightmare.

[Orogun01]

what stays their hand ?.

PR. Palestine was created at the same time, and if Israel were to eliminate it they'd either A) have to integrate the muslim population into their own or B) have to expel the muslim population.

 

One is entirely unwanted by them, the other becomes a PR nightmare.

That's one likely cause, the other one is probably Western support.

[Volourn]

"Not even remotely the same amounts and kinds of support."

 

L0L

 

Isreal doesn't destroy Palestine outright ebcause it is 2012, and that sort of thing is heavily frowned upon in the modern world which Isreal wants to be a part of.

[BruceVC]

what stays their hand ?.

PR. Palestine was created at the same time, and if Israel were to eliminate it they'd either A) have to integrate the muslim population into their own or B) have to expel the muslim population.

 

One is entirely unwanted by them, the other becomes a PR nightmare.

That's one likely cause, the other one is probably Western support.

 

Yes I think its a combination of all 3 factors. Nowadays annihilation of a nation or ethnic group is generally frowned upon

[Bos_hybrid]

The only reason Isreal is winning is because they arehave superior forces.

 

Entire Middle East population: 384,218,000

 

Israeli population: 7,695,000

 

Without the military support of the US and Europe, Israel would be conquered.

 

Here is an interesting question I have always wondered yet never really had the time to research and answer so forgive my ignorance. Why does Israel even allow Palestine to continue to exist ?. Why haven't they brought their foot down like they always say they will when these conflicts arise and send the last Palestinians running to the border instead of consigning Palestine to the slow death of being encircled and crushed...what stays their hand ?.

 

Relations with every other country, that's the only reason. They would lose most foreign support, and enrage the other Muslim countries that surround it. Mainly due to the fact that these countries don't want Palestinian refugees flooding their borders.

[Volourn]

"Entire Middle East population: 384,218,000

 

Israeli population: 7,695,000"

 

This is 2012. Numbers aren't as important before. this isn't when Britian dominated the world by lining up their soliders across the enemies and both sides just took pot shots at each other. A huge amount of the ME populkation would be totally effective while nearly all the Isreali adult population has at least some military training plus they have a lot of war toys.

 

Plus, Isreal has nukes. As NK, and Pakistan has shown. You can't simply invade nuke carrying coutnries even if you want to.

 

Let's not forget that Japan conquered the much alrger China in the past, and Germany and its handful of allies dominated most of Europe and was a 'threat' to conquer the world. And, that was decades ago when the toys weren't as fancy.

 

Afterall, the US invaded a country of 25million with what? A million of troops. And, won.

 

Quote popualtion numbers is meaningless.

[Calax]

IF the Israeli's end up in a position to use the nukes, it'd be interesting to see what happens if the pop one or two off.

[Bos_hybrid]

This is 2012. Numbers aren't as important before. this isn't when Britian dominated the world by lining up their soliders across the enemies and both sides just took pot shots at each other. A huge amount of the ME populkation would be totally effective while nearly all the Isreali adult population has at least some military training plus they have a lot of war toys.

 

So over 370,000,000 Muslims are ineffective in war? Because they aren't currently in the military. You do know that the majority of people fighting in both WW were civies conscripted?

 

Plus, Isreal has nukes. As NK, and Pakistan has shown. You can't simply invade nuke carrying coutnries even if you want to.

 

NK has a massive army, with rumored weapon and ammo bunkers and tunnels dotting the land. That's why no one wants to invade NK, besides despite much bravado, they have done little to warrant it. Pakistan has limited means of deploying a nuclear payload anywhere but towards India. And again, about the only nation with frosty relation with Pakistan are India. Another point about Pakistan is that while it's not in the middle east, it is a Muslim country. One with quite a lot of hardliners.

 

Nuclear arms are a deterrent to nuclear attack. Not so much full scale ground invasion. Unless of course you want to nuke your own land and civilians.

 

Let's not forget that Japan conquered the much alrger China in the past, and Germany and its handful of allies dominated most of Europe and was a 'threat' to conquer the world. And, that was decades ago when the toys weren't as fancy.

 

Lets not forget that both of those nations eventually lost.

 

Afterall, the US invaded a country of 25million with what? A million of troops. And, won.

 

The Taliban are as prominent as ever and Iraq is even more destabilized now then it ever was. There has been no victory, unless you consider Saddam's death as a victory.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Bos_hybrid

[Oerwinde]

Re: Middle East Population vs Israeli population

 

Has anyone looked at the stats for the 6 day war? 11 nations declared war on Israel, deploying 240,000 troops. Israel deployed 100,000.

 

For every 1 Israeli killed, they killed 200 muslims. This was in 1967, with a population of 2.7 million. The combined populations of only the countries who declared war on them at the time was 101,545,934.

 

With a population of 2.7 million, they beat 101.5 million in 6 days. And gained territory.

 

Population means nothing.

[Volourn]

"The Taliban are as prominent as ever and Iraq is even more destabilized now then it ever was. There has been no victory, unless you consider Saddam's death as a victory."

 

Winning a war and holding land long term is two different things.

 

The Taliban are nowhere enar as prominent as they used to be, and Iraq is no less stable than it used to be - unless your idea of 'stable' is having all the power in the hands of one man and his cronies.

 

The US took out both gov't and their armies nwith ease. What were the casulaty levels like? Certainly not even and the Iraqi army folded like rinkadinks. Sorry, dude, war isn't about mere numbers. Not anymore. Nothing you wrote chanegs that.

 

 

"Lets not forget that both of those nations eventually lost."

 

That's ebcause Japan didn't have the man power to hold a vast coutnry like China. That doesn't change the fact they defated the much bigger China in a war. And, Germany didn't lose to justv Europe. They lost because non European countries like the US and Canada also pitched in. Nice try, though. Bottom line is one country was able to take on a whole continent.

 

And, orewinde provided more evidence that your population argument is just silly.

 

 

"So over 370,000,000 Muslims are ineffective in war? Because they aren't currently in the military. You do know that the majority of people fighting in both WW were civies conscripted?"

 

Depends on their tools, absolutely yes. You do realize that the two world wars wasn't merely decided by population numbers right?

 

Just ask the NA natives about that as well. Their numbers surely didn't help them fighting guntoting invaders.

 

Sorry. You lose.

[Oerwinde]

You also have to look at demographics. If they're fielding an army, they likely aren't fielding seniors or kids, that eliminates like half the population that brings 370,000,000 down to 185,000,000. Then, being muslim, they definitely won't draw from their women, which brings that down to 92,500,000. Now if you go by the numbers from the six day war you need more than 200 muslim soldiers for every 1 Israeli. An Israeli army of 460,000 would be able to defeat a muslim army of 92,000,000. Again, based solely on numbers and previous stats.

 

Israel has a population of over 7 million and employs women in combat. Meaning an army of 3.5 million potential fighters. that's enough to beat the population of the middle east 7 and a half times.

 

that's just going by the casualty numbers from the 6 day war, the Israelis are much better equipped now.

[Zoraptor]

Using figures from the 6 day war is... not great, as that was a surprise attack by Israel. Comparative death tolls for the US and Japan for Dec7-13 1941 would show pretty much exactly the same thing for exactly the same reason, as would the figures for Barbarossa. A better comparison would be the Yom Kippur war where the Egyptian performance really rattled the Israelis, and Egypt's army is far better now than it was then.

 

Pointless anyway. Israel words are backed by nuclear weapons, and that's all that is required 95% of the time.

 

And Volo, Japan never conquered China, not even close.