Wars and Conflicts听 permalink
On this day 1948
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.听
Posted by U3280211 (U3280211) ** on Wednesday, 14th April 2010
European Jews in Palestine had committed enough ethnic cleansing of the local Arab population for 'Israel' to declare itself 'Independent'.
"We stole it" ( said David Ben Gurion, for details, read the last chapter of Benny Morris's "1948 The First Arab-Israeli War" Yale University Press. 2008. ISBN 978 0 300 15112-1. Page 393, top) -
Message 2
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Wednesday, 14th April 2010
Here we go again. The "Zionists are worse than the Nazis" is back on the mission to prove that the only good Jews are those who aren't really Jews but the Communists like late Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky and mentally unstable Norman Filkenstein.
-
Message 3
Posted by Allan D (U1791739) on Wednesday, 14th April 2010
"European" Jews? A lot of them were sabras who were born in Palestine and they were to be joined by longstanding Jewish communities in North Africa and the Middle East who were similarly ethnically cleansed by the Arab majorities.
-
Message 4
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Wednesday, 14th April 2010
similarly ethnically cleansed听 You've stepped right on a carefully placed pile of waste, Alan. The war of survival against five regular armies bent on annihilation of the entire people cannot be called ethnic cleansing by definition, don't you think?
-
Message 5
Posted by Mike Alexander (U1706714) on Thursday, 15th April 2010
When did Noam Chomsky become a communist? He was a libertarian anarchist last time I looked.
-
Message 6
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Thursday, 15th April 2010
When did Noam Chomsky become a communist? He was a libertarian anarchist last time I looked.听 And where did you look? His one time publisher Peter Collier, for example, describes him as very loose with recollections and language, which he is supposed to be an expert with:
-
Message 7
Posted by Allan D (U1791739) on Thursday, 15th April 2010
Quite right, Suvorovetz. Just wanted to point out that expelling people from land and property they had owned for generations was not one-sided.
-
Message 8
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Thursday, 15th April 2010
Just wanted to point out that expelling people from land and property they had owned for generations was not one-sided.听 I actually happen to believe that it was one sided - just not the side 'progressive' audience is conditioned to unquestionably assume.
-
Message 9
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Thursday, 15th April 2010
I see the time for the deputies of the Euruparliament to make themselves busy with the next issue.. I mean the Jewish case and the members of Irgun...hah-hah...
But it still remains for me as an enigma-what were these obstacles for the Jews in America to form a Special Jewish Brigades within the US Army to help those European Jews who were in camps ? Or it was hust a such sophisticated tactics...to fight only Brits in Palestine... -
Message 10
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Thursday, 15th April 2010
Well, but what these British soldiers in Palestine had to do with the Holocaust in Europe which was unleashed by Germans...against whom the Britain fought ?
-
Message 11
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Thursday, 15th April 2010
The case seems to become not so easy for Brussels as it was in case with S.Bandera and the Ukraine.There is a need in Jew to explain the enigma.
-
Message 12
Posted by baz (U14258304) on Friday, 16th April 2010
European Jews in Palestine had committed enough ethnic cleansing of the local Arab population for 'Israel' to declare itself 'Independent'.听
Garbage! Palestinian arabs are more numerous, healthier and wealthier than they ever have been in their entire history, all because the Israelis treat them far better than their Arab 'brothers'.
A strange type of 'ethnic cleansing'! -
Message 13
Posted by White Camry (U2321601) on Friday, 16th April 2010
baz,
Garbage! Palestinian arabs are more numerous, healthier and wealthier than they ever have been in their entire history, all because the Israelis treat them far better than their Arab 'brothers'.
A strange type of 'ethnic cleansing'!听
But are they happier for it? -
Message 14
Posted by U3280211 (U3280211) ** on Friday, 16th April 2010
To Baz
Garbage! Palestinian arabs are more numerous, healthier and wealthier than they ever have been in their entire history, 听
Twaddle.
Are you saying that there was no systematic ethnic cleansing, by Jewish forces (Lehi/Stern?Irgun/Hagganah), later the IDF, in Palestine (later known as Israel) in 1948?
Perhaps you should read Ilan Pappe's "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine". He is the Israeli scholar who recently took the Chair in History at Exeter. Are you saying he invented his evidence? Careful now, there are still libel laws...
Do you have any academic articles in support of your absurd thesis that the Arabs left in Israel are delighted to experience their 'daily humiliations' (President Obama, Cairo speech, June 2009) as a result of the Nakba?
Check out the injustices of the Israeli state on the 麻豆约拍
Panorama Jan 2010 "A walk in the park"
Katya Adler (麻豆约拍 reporter Jerusalem) Israel diverts fresh water from Arab areas making them pay more for treated sewage.
For those self-proclaimed 'blinkered Zionists' such as Suv, who don't trust the 麻豆约拍, the same evidence is published in the latest issue of National Geographic Magazine (special issue on water).
NG is an American publication Suv, so it must be true? -
Message 15
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Friday, 16th April 2010
For those self-proclaimed 'blinkered Zionists' such as Suv, who don't trust the 麻豆约拍, the same evidence is published in the latest issue of National Geographic Magazine (special issue on water).
NG is an American publication Suv, so it must be true?听 So are Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn and Norman Finkelstein. I presume, at the moment this is supposed to be the final proof of the self-evident truth. Just a settled little shift from citing Mufti and SS general Al-Husseini, or KGB, which developed the infamous "Zionism is a form of racism" resolution for the Soviet delegation at the UN and ran handlers with instructions for their most valued asset in the Middle East - the future Noble Prize winner Yasser Arafat. -
Message 16
Posted by OUNUPA (U2078829) on Friday, 16th April 2010
'who don't trust the 麻豆约拍,'-well, if frankly, U2,
I didn't trust the 麻豆约拍 when they claimed in 1976 that the Number One in Britain was Rod Stewart but not the The Sex Pistols.
But in this definite case (I mean Panorama Jan 2010 "A walk in the park") I believe those men from 麻豆约拍.
But the History with the Palestinian refugees in camps , who are held as a sort of hostages of the Arabic cause..probably with the aim to show the world their sufferings, doesn't look pretty well. Where are their Arabs-brothers to give them a refuge ? Say, in Jordan..... -
Message 17
Posted by Allan D (U1791739) on Saturday, 17th April 2010
75% of the population of Jordan is Palestinian (as Palestine is defined today although Jordan was originally established by Churchill in 1921 as an Arab Palestinian state based on that part of the former Turkish province of Palestine east of the Jordan River) showing that it is perfectly possible to absorb displaced people and give them a normal life as full citizens of another state in just the same way as, after the end of WWII, the 8m ethnic Germans who were expelled from the Baltic States, the Sudetenland and the German territory expropriated by Poland to compensate for the loss of territory under the Nazi-Soviet Pact of 1939.
The 'plight' of the Palestinians contrasts with that of the Kurds, more numerous than the Palestinians and also stateless, who have been subject to ethnic cleansing and threats of genocide. However they have no wealthy backers to plead their cause for statehood or give them observer status at the UN since their persecutors are the very Arab and Islamic countries who weep crocodile tears at the plight of the Palestinians. -
Message 18
Posted by U3280211 (U3280211) ** on Sunday, 18th April 2010
To Suv (2)
Here we go again. The "Zionists are worse than the Nazis"听
Your utterly predictable red herring...
Sorry Suv, this thread is about ethnic cleansing, of Palestinian Arabs and Christians, by European Jews, in Palestine, in 1948. This is a specific historical issue.
Just one question for you, before you deploy your usual diversionary tactics:-
Do you accept or reject the evidence of Jewish ethnic cleansing of Palestinian Arabs in 1948, published in the following two sources from Israeli Jewish academics:-
1) Benny Morris, "1948" Yale Uni Press (2008)
2) Ilan Pappe "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" (Oneworld, 2006)
If you have any counter evidence now is the time to introduce it. Your usual generalist Zionist waffle and apologia will not suffice.
Have you read either of the above books? Have you any commitment to historical truth? -
Message 19
Posted by U3280211 (U3280211) ** on Sunday, 18th April 2010
To Allan D (17)
The 'plight' of the Palestinians contrasts with that of the Kurds, more numerous than the Palestinians and also stateless, who have been subject to ethnic cleansing and threats of genocide. However they have no wealthy backers to plead their cause for statehood or give them observer status at the UN since their persecutors are the very Arab and Islamic countries who weep crocodile tears at the plight of the Palestinians. 听
You make an excellent point.
The Palestinians are doing so well, while the Kurds suffer.
Come on! Both suffer "daily humiliations" to use Obama's excellent description.
For the record, I support both the Kurdish and the Palestinian causes. Both were poorly treated by the Ottomans and the regimes that followed the collapse of Ottoman rule. The Kurds have also been victims of the Sunni Iraqis.
But you are right to point-out that English-language history highlights some human suffering (Armenian genocide of 1915-17; Holocaust of 1938-1945) whilst it draws a veil over the Ukrainian genocide of the early 1930's and the Nakba of 1948, the theme of this thread. -
Message 20
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Monday, 19th April 2010
Your utterly predictable red herring. Sorry Suv, this thread is about ethnic cleansing, of Palestinian Arabs and Christians, by European Jews, in Palestine, in 1948. This is a specific historical issue听 Ditto about red herring(s). The issue here is not Palestinian Arabs, but the Jews 鈥 in fact, any Jew will do, it figures. As Alan eloquently put it here 鈥 those who weep crocodile tears about Palestinian Arabs 鈥 you鈥檙e included 鈥 could not possibly care less about the Palestinian Arabs. And this is why: Arabs, particularly Jordanian Hashemites, for example, killed more Palestinian Arabs than Israelis did in all those years of conflict. The same Hashemites rule the Palestinian majority without affording them basic rights. And, of course, the Hashemites are much better than Hamas:
By all accounts - and there are plenty on these boards to-date - this is not part of your 'cause.' So, I figure that it does not matter for you if the Palestinian Arabs get killed or 鈥榖eing oppressed鈥 for as long the Jews are not involved. Hence, 鈥淚t鈥檚 the Jews, stupid!鈥 Moreover, even the term Palestinians as a People did not come about until after the 6-day war, when Israel pushed Syria from Golan, Egypt from Gaza and Jordan from West Bank and the latter failed to 鈥減ush the Jews into the sea鈥 with the help by their big brother Brezhnev. If nobody had complained about Egypt鈥檚 occupation of Gaza or Jordan鈥檚 occupation of West Bank prior to 1967, nobody REALLY cares about no Palestinian People. And that鈥檚, ladies and gentlemen, is the evidence.
. Do you accept or reject the evidence of Jewish ethnic cleansing of Palestinian Arabs in 1948, published in the following two sources from Israeli Jewish academics:-
1) Benny Morris, "1948" Yale Uni Press (2008)
2) Ilan Pappe "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" (Oneworld, 2006)听
I reject this whole premise for two reasons:
1. Being Jewish or an Israeli does not make anyone an expert on Middle East conflict; just like being a Russian or a Ukrainian does no t make anyone an expert on the Russian Revolution. I called you on your persistent Jew baiting before, but you don鈥檛 seem to care, probably because you think that Jew baiting helps your 'cause.' By the way, by and large I鈥檓 ok with Morris, but you just can鈥檛 help yourself and not take truncated quotes completely out of context. Well, ok, I get it 鈥 it鈥檚 just you being you.
2. I consider Pappe and some other radicals you鈥檝e cited before as wrong, moreover, indifferent, on facts. In fact, Finkelstein once himself admitted on one of the neo-Nazi site he used to frequent that facts were irrelevant to him for as long as his statements served the cause.
I consider John Loftus (everything, particularly 鈥淭he Secret War Against the Jews鈥); Alan Dershowitz鈥檚 鈥淐ase for Israel鈥 and everything written by Steven Plaut as credible information on this particular subject. And last but not least, it is important for everyone to recognize completely different set of sources: the highest ranking Warsaw Pact Intelligent officer ever defecting to the West, Romanian Securitate General Mihai Pacepa and a former KGB officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky, among some other, similar ones. These two described in detail how the KGB trained Arafat, and ran his PLO and all that jazz, propaganda a la 鈥淧alestinian People vs Zionist Aggression,鈥 during their tenure in those glorious organizations.And the best part is that I鈥檓 not even asking if you accept or reject them 鈥 I don鈥檛 really care. Rest assured that I can live with my sources with or without your approval. -
Message 21
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Monday, 19th April 2010
suv,
If association with the Soviet Union weakens or invalidates the case, how do you explain crucial diplomatic and military support for Israel from the Eastern Bloc, in particular Czechoslovakian arms, in 1948? Zionism has always been able to secure the backing of the most powerful outside powers, whether from the British, the Soviets, the Americans. Israel represents old fashioned colonialism. -
Message 22
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Monday, 19th April 2010
If association with the Soviet Union weakens or invalidates the case, how do you explain crucial diplomatic and military support for Israel from the Eastern Bloc, in particular Czechoslovakian arms, in 1948?听 Good question,stuart. As son as Ben Gurion disarmed and disbanded Israeli Communists, Stalin turned on the Jews everywhere he could find them. As for the armament shipments from Czechoslovakia in 1948, Loftus described the mechanics of that particular venue in "The Secret War Against the Jews." None other than British Intelligence agent Robert Maxwell (Czech born as Lev Hoch) organized weapons smuggling from Czechoslovakia using his personal ties with the head of the Czech government Clementis. Needless to say that Stalin had not sanctioned this deal, and, among other things, this cost Clementis his life.
Zionism has always been able to secure the backing of the most powerful outside powers, whether from the British, the Soviets, the Americans. Israel represents old fashioned colonialism.听 So, you're saying that Israel is the joint colony for the British, the Soviet and the American metropolis? Is there any way we can throw in a Trilateral Commisiion into the pot as well? -
Message 23
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Monday, 19th April 2010
suv,
The reality of the situation is that after world war two the British were in retreat from Palestine whilst the two super powers, the US and the USSR, were moving in. Both considered Israel as an ally worth backing at this stage. Stalin was turning against various communists across the Eastern Bloc who were considered to be slightly independent of the Moscow line (in general).
In fact the early Zionists, before gaining British sponsorship from Balfour, sought backing from the anti-semitic Tsarist ministers.
My point was that Zionism was adept at gaining crucial sponsorship from the Great Powers at various stages. Initially the British up until the second world war, and again together with France in 1956. Particularly after the rise of Arab nationalism (and the threat to crucial oil supplies) in the late 1950s, the US gave increasing backing to Israel (who served the US as a loyal watchdog state) whilst the Soviets aligned with the nationalists. -
Message 24
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Monday, 19th April 2010
The reality of the situation is that after world war two the British were in retreat from Palestine whilst the two super powers, the US and the USSR, were moving in. Both considered Israel as an ally worth backing at this stage. Stalin was turning against various communists across the Eastern Bloc who were considered to be slightly independent of the Moscow line (in general).听 So was Ben Gurion, quite obviously. When the war of 1948 broke out, neither Stalin, nor Truman, nor anybody else but Clementis did anything to arm Israeli militias together with his buddy Maxwell-Hoch. If you go through the trouble of reading the news of the time, you can't really say that anybody gave the Jews a fighting chance. The opposing 5 regular armies, including the Arab Legion, were very well armed by comparison. Who do you think armed them?
-
Message 25
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
suv,
The Zionists were able to establish significant fund raising networks, especially in the US,and were therefore able to buy arms cheaply at the end of WW2. Israel was far more adept at getting around the arms embargo. Also Israel had some arms producing capacity. The British observed the arms embargo and did not supply spare parts for Arab weaponry.
But there is more to it than that. The Zionists were far better educated and trained, much better organised and determined,they had more fighters, they saw themselves as fighting for a cause. The Arabs armies by contrast were poorly co-ordinated, the fighters were peasant conscripts, poorly trained with no real stake in the outcome. They were simply fighting on behalf of (rival) feudal regimes recently installed by the British and the French.
The most 'effective' Arab army was the Jordanian who were advised by British officers whilst the Jordanian king negotiated with the Israeli leadership. The Jordanian monarchy ended up with about one fifth of Palestine whilst Israel (with 30% of the population) gained 78% after having been given 55% of Palestine under the UN plan.
Unfortunately, there is a lot of mythology attached to this war. -
Message 26
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
Unfortunately, there is a lot of mythology attached to this war.听 Ditto that.
The Zionists were able to establish significant fund raising networks, especially in the US,and were therefore able to buy arms cheaply at the end of WW2. Israel was far more adept at getting around the arms embargo. Also Israel had some arms producing capacity. The British observed the arms embargo and did not supply spare parts for Arab weaponry.听 The much lauded armament fund raisors and shipments from the US were a joke - as was the embargo. There's no question that - at least at the beginning of the war - the Zionists were outnumbered and out-armed by a big margin. Again, the content of news media of the time is still available.
Arabs armies by contrast were poorly co-ordinated听 There absolutely were a few very close calls, and - if, say, a Wehrmacht brigade was advancing on Tel Aviv in place of the Egyptian one at the end of May - there's little doubt that it would overrun the town. What does it have to do with colonialism and/or imperialism and/or whatever-ism anyway? -
Message 27
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
By the way, The Jordanian monarchy ended up with about one fifth of Palestine whilst Israel (with 30% of the population) gained 78% after having been given 55% of Palestine under the UN plan.听 This is a pretty good illustration of the shell game persitently applied to this issue. I'm not going to reinvent the bycicle and just quote Steven Plaut:
...two-thirds of Mandatory Palestine's territory had been sliced off in the 1920s and used to set up Jordan, an Arab Palestinian state much larger than Israel. The remaining territory, Western Palestine, was to become the Jewish homeland. That was the original "two-state solution," the same "innovation" now being promoted for the Western third of the remaining part of Palestine.听 -
Message 28
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
The assessment of General D'Arcy, commander of British forces in Palestine (1946)
鈥淚f you were to withdraw British forces, the Haganah would take over all Palestine tomorrow,鈥 he said flatly. But could the Haganah hold Palestine under such circumstances? 鈥淐ertainly,鈥 he replied. 鈥淭hey could hold it against the entire Arab world.鈥
From David Hirst - the Gun and the Olive Branch (1977) p 134
Wehrmacht Brigade? German imperialism lost out to US and Russian imperialism. What does Israel have to do with colonialism? As a settler state, since inception, Israel has received vast subsidies from America. In return Israel has acted as military force, willing and able to fight on behalf of the US where necessary whilst the US, in turn, does not challenge the occupation and settlement building to any degree. -
Message 29
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
Regarding Jordan. Having promised old Ottaman lands to Arab rulers in return for Arab help in defeating the Turks, the British also promised a homeland to the Zionists- therein lay the problem.
Zionism set itself up as a closed economy, Arabs were denied the right to work, to sell goods etc. Palestinians were driven off land as landlords sold it to Zionists, thereby creating antagonism. The point is that Britain was using the Zionist settlers to advance its own cause namely protection of the Suez canal. That's why when the Paletinians revolted in the 1930s, the British worked together with Zionist militias, having trained them, to put down the revolt. The British were helping the Zionists, the Zionists were helping the British.
After the revolt was crushed the British tilted more towards pacifying Arab regimes due to the oil interests it had in the region. So Zionist miltias turned on the British whilst looking more towards US support. The British relied on its puppet monarchies (such as Jordan, Iraq, Egypt)to protect its interests. -
Message 30
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
Re: Message 29.
Well said Suart.
Cheers, Paul. -
Message 31
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
Re: Message 27.
Suvorovetz,
97.74.65.51/readArti...
As the topic nearly each year flares up on this board, I did along the years alreeady a lot of research about the history of the Israeli/Palestian question.
I have not the time for the moment to reiterate the whole range of arguments against your article that I used in the past.
But I only looked to the "麻豆约拍" of the article:
About David Horowitz:
founder and president of David Horowitz Freedom Center, edits the conservative tabloid Front Page Magazine
It seems to be biased history writing from an ultra-right American source.
Not to say that I am not afraid of American Leftist biased history too.
In fact I prefer accurate history writing from real historians, not led by whatever "beliefs".
And there is a lot of actuality in it too, which is related to the present political situation... Let us try to stick to the history of the past...just an opinion...
Kind regards,
Paul. -
Message 32
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
As the topic nearly each year flares up on this board, I did along the years alreeady a lot of research about the history of the Israeli/Palestian question.听 I'm not a big fan of this topic for the said reasons, and, if you noticed I haven't started this one either, Paul. However, as in other cases, when I see glorified urban myths mixed with sophisticated propaganda - more often than not coming from the same quarters - the pleasure is all mine to challenge, and challenge I will.
-
Message 33
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
Wehrmacht Brigade? German imperialism lost out to US and Russian imperialism.听 The jury is out, whether you are genuinely missing the point or just playing a fool. I need the second opinion on this. Anybody?
What does Israel have to do with colonialism? As a settler state, since inception, Israel has received vast subsidies from America. In return Israel has acted as military force, willing and able to fight on behalf of the US where necessary whilst the US, in turn, does not challenge the occupation and settlement building to any degree.听 So, without getting into the weeds of this - with all due respect - vastly inaccurate and/or incoherent statement, since Egypt, Jordan, Hamas and Fatah all receive vast subsidies from both America and EU, it is only logical to extend colonialist status to all those entities. -
Message 34
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
Regarding Jordan. Having promised old Ottaman lands to Arab rulers in return for Arab help in defeating the Turks, the British also promised a homeland to the Zionists- therein lay the problem.听 Of course. As I said, "It's the Jews, stupid!" Stalin also used to say, "If there's no man, there's no problem." So, some quicker cats put two and two together, and there we have it.
-
Message 35
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Tuesday, 20th April 2010
suv,
The point I was making was that Germany was not able to take control of the Middle East in WW2, it was in response to your hypothetical point about the Wehrmacht marching on Tel Aviv. The British war strtegy was to defend its interests in the area at all costs (although they would eventually lose out to the US).
Of course the US uses financial incentives/manipulation to bolster its position in the region although Israel recieves considerably more than anyone else. Furthermore, Israel functions as a settler state, it receives enormous subsidies due to its strategic role and is therefore able to encourage settlers to move to Israel and enjoy living standards far superior to elsewhere in the region - in fact the living standards have to compare with Europe or North America in order to attract the numbers. Of course settlers are encouraged to move whilst Palestinians are denied by a law of return.
There is no need to make such remarks about 'the Jews, stupid'. For me it is not about religion. My point about Britain creating the problem in the first place a reference to making contradictory promises, effectively setting up and divide and rule scenario in order to further its interests. Unfortunately you resort to labelling opponents of Zionism as anti-Jew. -
Message 36
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Wednesday, 21st April 2010
The point I was making was that Germany was not able to take control of the Middle East in WW2, it was in response to your hypothetical point about the Wehrmacht marching on Tel Aviv. The British war strtegy was to defend its interests in the area at all costs (although they would eventually lose out to the US).听 Err鈥k, the verdict is out: the Wehrmacht brigade went clean over your head. Of course the US uses financial incentives/manipulation to bolster its position in the region although Israel recieves considerably more than anyone else. Furthermore, Israel functions as a settler state, it receives enormous subsidies due to its strategic role and is therefore able to encourage settlers to move to Israel and enjoy living standards far superior to elsewhere in the region - in fact the living standards have to compare with Europe or North America in order to attract the numbers. 听 What time period exactly are you talking about? Granted, Paul has already complained about this subject predictably derailing straight into the current events domain, but I鈥檒l try to get away with another snide comment here. At present, Israel receives subsidies in the amount roughly equivalent to 1.5% of its GNP. Suppose, Obama 鈥 and many here will surely cheer him on 鈥 in a dramatic fashion announces that he cuts Israel loose. Your guess is that Israel鈥檚 economy collapses and she turns into Gaza, judging from your comment here. My guess is that Obama not only finally succeeds in turning away predominantly liberal Jewish voters in New York and Florida (a good chunk of electoral votes for the looming 2012 election), but also a lot of his union voters employed in the defense industry, as a result of Israel鈥檚 withdrawal from quite a few defense contracts and arms sales agreements. Israel then likely more than makes up in revenue just on high-tech weaponry, some of which she is presently restricted from putting on the market. And guess what, Obama may still do it, the way he is going. So, it will be very interesting to watch. My other crazy guess is that the suites in Brussels may have quite a second thought about this whole thing, particularly, about the Great Uniter they had been waiting for all this time.
There is no need to make such remarks about 'the Jews, stupid'. For me it is not about religion听 Well, let me ask you this: how much sleep did you lose over the right of return for the German refugees expelled from Sudetenland and Konigsberg, or Japanese refugees from Kuril Islands? The honest answer is 鈥 none whatsoever. Thank you very much. Unfortunately you resort to labelling opponents of Zionism as anti-Jew.听 I did not quite put it this way, actually. But this is a pretty good straw man you came up with, I give you that. I鈥檓 not even going to argue. I would just insert one modifier: the opponents of Zionism are essentially the proponents of the same old Judenrein policy. Does it bring any more clarity? -
Message 37
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Wednesday, 21st April 2010
Err鈥k, the verdict is out: the Wehrmacht brigade went clean over your head. 听
I did wonder that you were trying to draw me into some bizarre Dershowitz theory about how the Arabs were trying to continue the Holocaust in 1948.
What time period exactly are you talking about? 听
Well since Israel was established the subsidy has been immense. I do not agree with the Measheimer and Walt argument, the one that suggests that US will not stop funding Israel because of a 'Jewish lobby' but that really it is in their interests to do so. Backing Israel to the hilt is likely to remain a key strategy over the forseeable future, Obama or whoever.
Well, let me ask you this: how much sleep did you lose over the right of return for the German refugees expelled from Sudetenland 听
You make too many assumptions. The expulsions were wrong and should not be used as a model of how to assess the Middle East.
the opponents of Zionism are essentially the proponents of the same old Judenrein policy. Does it bring any more clarity?
听
This is pretty offensive. Zionism has from the outset been about seeking the backing of those stronger powers that have historically oppressed weaker powers. To criticise it on those terms should be regarded as humane and acceptable. -
Message 38
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Wednesday, 21st April 2010
I did wonder that you were trying to draw me into some bizarre Dershowitz theory about how the Arabs were trying to continue the Holocaust in 1948听 My Wehrmacht brigade comment has nothing to do with that. As for Dershowitz, I'm not sure what theory are you referring to. There's no question, however, that some Arab leadership - in fact, the Arab leadership that the proverbial Arab Street identifies itself with at present - not only signed on, but in fact predated Hitler's Final Solution policy. Particularly, Mufti Al-Husseini, who became SS General, personally recruited infamous SS Hanjar division and actively participated in mass murder of Jews in the Balkans.
Well since Israel was established the subsidy has been immense.听 Israel did not receive any subsidies from the US government until well into the 60s. Of course, American Jews did support Israel financially, but, contrary to the urban myth you seem to have hung up on, it was small change in the big scheme of things, in addition to being far from unprecedented phenomenon. American Armenians send money to Etchmiadzin, Puerto-Ricans send their American dollars to Puerto-Rica, etc, etc.
Well, let me ask you this: how much sleep did you lose over the right of return for the German refugees expelled from Sudetenland听 You make too many assumptions.听 You mean, you're advocating for the right of return of the German refugees to Sudetenland and Konigsberg? I'd like to see you starting a thread on that. The expulsions were wrong and should not be used as a model of how to assess the Middle East听 There was a war, you know. People kill and maim other people during the war. It's all very bad, but you can't accuse one warring side of war crimes every time they shoot to kill their enemy.
This is pretty offensive.听 This is very much mutual, pal. As I said here before, I cherish my right to detest "political correctness," especially when it comes to history. -
Message 39
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Wednesday, 21st April 2010
Particularly, Mufti Al-Husseini, who became SS General, personally recruited infamous SS Hanjar division and actively participated in mass murder of Jews in the Balkans.
听
Not sure what point you are making here. Are you saying entire groups (Muslims, Croats or whoever) should be associated with a particular brand of politics and be collectively punished as a result of such an association?
it was small change in the big scheme of things 听
You wish. In the years 1949-65 Israel received an income of $6 billion from abroad, mainly US, that effectively enabled economic expansion on the cheap. Imports were not being paid for by equivalent exports. It enjoyed a position unique across the world in this respect.
You mean, you're advocating for the right of return of the German refugees to Sudetenland and Konigsberg? I'd like to see you starting a thread on that. 听
People should not be denied the right to move if they wish to.
There was a war, you know. People kill and maim other people during the war. It's all very bad, but you can't accuse one warring side of war crimes every time they shoot to kill their enemy.
听
Again, not really clear as to your point. Are you saying Sudeten Germans should accept their 'cleansing' because they 'lost the war' and that, likewise, Palestinians must accept the same fate? Just tough luck really?
I cherish my right to detest "political correctness," especially when it comes to history. 听
So opposition to ethnic cleansing is 'political correctness' and therefore a bad thing? -
Message 40
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Thursday, 22nd April 2010
Are you saying entire groups (Muslims, Croats or whoever) should be associated with a particular brand of politics and be collectively punished as a result of such an association?听 Oh, such a sincere indignation from somebody who just called Dershowitz's "theory" bizarre.
In the years 1949-65 Israel received an income of $6 billion from abroad, mainly US, that effectively enabled economic expansion on the cheap. Imports were not being paid for by equivalent exports. It enjoyed a position unique across the world in this respect.听 That's 1 billion per year. You think it's a big deal - fine, but, you know, it came from the other Jews mostly. Why are you so worked up about this? These were not money stolen from people who were slaughtered en mass in death camps, as far as I know. Did you count the oil sheiks money yet? I suggest you do - to at least pretend impartial.
Again, not really clear as to your point. Are you saying Sudeten Germans should accept their 'cleansing' because they 'lost the war' and that, likewise, Palestinians must accept the same fate? Just tough luck really?听 No, I am suggesting for you to take up the Sudeten Germans' cause, as well as the cause of the Japanese expelled from Kuril Islands. Because - strangely enough - nobody did so this far. Be the hero. -
Message 41
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Thursday, 22nd April 2010
That's 1 billion per year.听
Not even that. Wher's my calculator? Less than 400 million per year. That would be from about $300 in 1950 to just over $150 in 1965 per capita. Wow. -
Message 42
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Thursday, 22nd April 2010
Why are you so worked up about this? These were not money stolen from people who were slaughtered en mass in death camps, as far as I know. Did you count the oil sheiks money yet? I suggest you do - to at least pretend impartial.
听
I'm not 'worked up', I'm just keen to set the record striaght. You are wrong to dismiss the amounts as trivial and uphold the myth that Israel became prosperous more or less independently. In this period before the Six Day War, after which outside support increased tremendously, the income that was received (income that did not demand a return on investment) enabled Israel to enjoy privileges available to no other economy. Investment throughout this period amounted to 20% of GDP whereas net saving amounted to zero. That means that investment was not down to funds generated internally by the Israeli economy, it was due to outside intervention. And it meant that the settlers could enjoy material privileges (housing, jobs). Israel was effectively an outpost of the US and in receipt funds as a result of its being regarded as an asset to the US in the region.
You raise the question of oil. Well of course Israel was not the only 'asset' to the US. Saudi Arabia and Iran were both key allies, in fact Israel helped Iran to set up its notorious torture police, the SAVAK. -
Message 43
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Friday, 23rd April 2010
Israel helped Iran to set up its notorious torture police, the SAVAK.听 Oh, I see. I heard that notoriously humanitarian Revolutionary Guard is infinitely better, especially since they are not mixed up with no Zionists.
I'm just keen to set the record striaght. 听 You mean, about private donations? Of course. Too bad that not all the Jews around the world had been taken to the cleaners during the world war. -
Message 44
Posted by baz (U14258304) on Friday, 23rd April 2010
German imperialism lost out to US and Russian imperialism. 听
Sixth-form politics at its best. -
Message 45
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Saturday, 24th April 2010
suv,
Private donors were given tax exemption from the US government, that is to say money donted to a state that had carried out widespread ethnic cleansing was considered 'charity'.
You keep resorting to highlighting the presence of Jews as if this somehow gives the topic a unique status, as if this makes Israeli aggression always 'defensive' or that it confirms critics of Israel as anti-semitic conspiritory theorists.
What I am proposing here is no different to that proposed by Ha'retz on 30/9/1951...
"Israel has been given a role not unlike that of a watchdog ... Should the West prefer for one reason or another to close its eyes it can rely on Israel punishing severely those of the neighbouring states whose lack of manners towards the West has exceeded the proper limits."
So the vast amount of support flowing from the US, either by the state or by business sources, is due to the specific role assigned to Israel as elaborated by Ha'aretz above.
It is NOT a religous question. There is no essential difference between funding Israel and funding death squads in Central America in the 1980s. Both served the needs of US imperialism. -
Message 46
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Saturday, 24th April 2010
Private donors were given tax exemption from the US government, that is to say money donted to a state that had carried out widespread ethnic cleansing was considered 'charity'.听 It was considered charity, because non of the wars fought by Israel were considered ethnic cleansing - not conducted by IDF anyway. I'm sure, you consider Hamas fund raisings as charity, but the United States - at least, pre-Obama United States - considered Hamas a genocidal terrorist organization. And - for the record - I do as well.
You keep resorting to highlighting the presence of Jews as if this somehow gives the topic a unique status, as if this makes Israeli aggression always 'defensive'听 It absolutely does.
it confirms critics of Israel as anti-semitic conspiritory theorists听 Not all the critics of Israel - just anti-Zionist critics of Israel. "Zionism as a form of racism" is a blatant ant-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda tool designed by the KGB to aid KGB's friends of the time to try making Palestine, including proper Israel, Judenrein. It's a very simple, almost dull in its simplicity fact.
It is NOT a religous question. There is no essential difference between funding Israel and funding death squads in Central America in the 1980s. Both served the needs of US imperialism.听 I thought you were very concerned about the plight of Sudeten Germans, Germans from Konigsberg and Japanese from Kuril Islands. Or so you said. Yet, some invisible force inexplicably makes you run circles around the Zionists and American Imperialism. My Hypothesis is gaining empirical evidence with your every post. -
Message 47
Posted by stuart (U1648283) on Saturday, 24th April 2010
because non of the wars fought by Israel were considered ethnic cleansing 听
Of course, they were 'defending' themselves against the 750,000 Palestinians that fled. The massacre at Deir Yassin on 9/4/48 that caused so much fear amongst the Palestinians was a model of self defence. Nice spin.
"Zionism as a form of racism" is a blatant ant-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda tool designed by the KGB to aid KGB's friends of the time to try making Palestine, including proper Israel, Judenrein. It's a very simple, almost dull in its simplicity fact.
听
Only the fact that Moscow supported the creation of Israel(and the ethnic cleansing that accompanied it) against the wishes of the Arab population rather undermines your case.
I thought you were very concerned about the plight of Sudeten Germans, Germans from Konigsberg and Japanese from Kuril Islands. Or so you said. Yet, some invisible force inexplicably makes you run circles around the Zionists and American Imperialism. My Hypothesis is gaining empirical evidence with your every post.
听
I support the right of return for everyone. Simple. Do you? -
Message 48
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Saturday, 24th April 2010
Of course, they were 'defending' themselves against the 750,000 Palestinians that fled.听 They were defending themselves against 5 regular Arab armies, including the Arab Legion, bent on "driving the Jews into the sea." (that's a direct quote from the popular rallying cry, of course).
The massacre at Deir Yassin on 9/4/48 that caused so much fear amongst the Palestinians was a model of self defence.听 Der Yassin is a big fat red herring. Jewish civilians have been regularly terrorized and murdered since the very end of the First World War. Hebron massacre is just one example of that.
Only the fact that Moscow supported the creation of Israel(and the ethnic cleansing that accompanied it) against the wishes of the Arab population rather undermines your case.听 Exactly how? Are you saying that the KGB did not draft the resolution "Zionism is a form of racism," which the Soviet delegation introduced in the UN? Or you're saying that Brezhnev did not support Nasser, Assad, Sadat and Hussein during wars in 1967 and 1973? Or you're saying that Pacepa, Preobrazhensky and other ex-KGB type are all lying about Arafat being a KGB agent?
I support the right of return for everyone. Simple.听 In my opinion, no, you don't. You support genocide of the Jews in the Middle East. Just like the Jew baiter who started this thread, you couldn't care less about Palestinian Arabs, in my opinion. -
Message 49
Posted by fascinating (U1944795) on Saturday, 24th April 2010
You support genocide of the Jews in the Middle East.听
If you can come out with that libellous rubbish, you prove you cannot conduct a civilised discussion. -
Message 50
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Saturday, 24th April 2010
If you can come out with that libellous rubbish, you prove you cannot conduct a civilised discussion.听 History is full of bigots considering themselves very civilized - dressed sharply, pleasantly smelling, looking attractive and even articulate (in some cases). These boards are not exception. Granted, I'm no Einstein, yet I for one dislike when my intelligence being insulted.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or 听to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
麻豆约拍 iD
麻豆约拍 navigation
麻豆约拍 links
麻豆约拍 漏 2014 The 麻豆约拍 is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.