<p>Because at a certain time enough is enough. The mistake was waiting this long and allowing Hezbullah to build power. If Israel did not act kidnappings and rocket attacks would have continued to occur. Israel has to do something to stop the terror.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What I'm trying to get across is, they held off for so long...why was this time different?
[/quote]
Now only were two soldiers kidnapped, six were killed. (I guess the only good thing you can say about this is that at least Hezbolla attacked military targets and not civilian targets this time.) I think Israel's approach is "enough is enough". American put up with bin laden's attack on the world trade center in the 1990s and then on the U.S. Cole. Once he hit the WTC on 9/11 it was pretty much "enough is enough". 9/11 is probably not at the same level of attack as was what Israel just experienced, but it seems to me that the country being attacked has the discretion to determine when "enough is enough." For example, I think American could have gone into any country harboring bin laden right after the first WTC attack in the 1990s even though the buildings did not fall. The reason we didn't do so is because Clinton was a wimp.</p>
<p>P.S. 89 beat me to the "enough is enough" line (I type slow) but I suspect it means a lot of people are thinking that.</p>
<p>Also 2 kidnapped soldiers and 6 dead may not seem like alot but its a country of i think a bit less that 6 million jews. Given the population differences imagine about 20 kidnapped and 60 dead soldiers. I just do not understand how someone can expect a country to allow itself to be hit for 6 yrs and not once mount a real attack.</p>
<p>This is an interesting article on the media reporting from Lebanon. I would just read to the end of the part on CNN. Alot of reporters give a testimonial to what it is like to report from Lebanon under the watchful of eye of Hezbullah. A good example of this would be the Soviet Union inviting a reporter to tour the gulags and the world expecting a fair report.</p>
<p>article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjVlMmRjNDllNzhkZmE1OWM3NmE1OGQ4OGQxMDA1YjQ=
<a href="http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=b0d85941-2565-4b47-b853-4041944114ee%5B/url%5D">www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=b0d85941-2565-4b47-b853-4041944114ee</a></p>
<p>Skisaloman, you are only partially correct when you say that the Lebanese did not like Hezbollah. I'd say 60% of Lebanon does not like Hezbollah. However, 40% of Lebanon loved Hezbollah. Those 40% are Shi'ite who lived in that 20 mile strip of land north of Israel's border that Israel occupied for 20 years. Notice I am speaking in the past tense. Today, after the 4 week destrouction of our country, I'd say 80% of the Lebanese respect and admire Hezbollah. Nothing Hezbollah did can justify destroyjng an entire country. Nothing! Two soldiers are not worth an entire country, even if they are Israeli. Israel is to blame here, just as they are to blame for their invasion of Lebanon in 1982. </p>
<p>And by the way, most Lebanese were shoked at what happened in Sabra and Shatila in 1982. We did not support it and we were not thinkful to Israel. A few twisted Lebanese were pleased and those were indeed thankful for what Israel did. Of course, I am sure the US media made it seem like that small minority of sickos were a majority, but being Lebanese, I can tell you that it was one of our darkest hours in a pretty dark history. But that's not what created the monster that is now Hezbollah. Israel then decided to invade and occupy Lebanon for 20 years. The Lebanese, even the few twisted ones, were not pleased with Israel's oppresive occupation. Can you name me one civilization that enjoyed being occupied? That is what created Hezbollah. And then, after 20 years of occupation, you really expect Hezbollah to be thankful and stop entirely? That is very naive. When a people is oppressed for 20 years, when its pride and honor has been completely marginalized, you really expect them to go on about their business as though nothing had happened? Get real. Israel created a monster. Not a terrorist group. A terrorist group is self made, not created. </p>
<p>And your comment about all Arabs hating Israel and wanting to see its dismantling is very simplistic. I am sure many Arabs do want Israel to be dismantled and the Jews to leave the area. I am sure many Israelis feel the same way about Arabs. But when those too poor peoples have experienced so much turmoil and personal loss and sacrifice, what else do you expect? I cannot blame some Israelis for feeling that way...and one cannot blame Arabs for feeling that way too. But I am an Arab and I do not hate Israel. I personally don't mind Israel's existance. I do, however, find its government highly unethical, which isn't saying much. I find Lebanon's government just as corrupt and Lebanon's government is one of the most ethical in the Arab World. But Israel claims to be a democracy, and that it isn't. Israel is a fascist state, just like Syria and Egypt. </p>
<p>At any rate, I am not going to start a conversation about Israel's standing as a fascist democracy. But I will say this. All Israel need do is take 5 or 6 steps to ensure peace. Given Isreal's vastly superior military, its Arab neighbours will be willing to compromise a little, but Israel must meet them half way. So far, all those "peace" overtures from Israel have been deliberately unacceptable. Israel simply isn't serious about wanting peace. Clearly, peace is not something Israel wants. And even if it did take srious and genuine steps toward peace, after so many years of oppression, one cannot expect peace to bring about complete security immediately. Like I said above, a people cannot be oppressed for decades and return to normal as if nothing happened. Monsters have been created and it will take time for them to cease to exist.</p>
<p>This is the problem. That there are arabs who sincerely believe that Israel, (I am an israeli jew) causedd all this suffering and is a facist state. Its ludicrous. You come to Israel and you will be able to vote. I step into any Arab country for too long and I will be killed. Israel did not start this conflict. In 1948 it did not ask to be invaded by armies from Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Iran. But Israel has done everything for peace. I dont know what more you can ask from them. They left Lebanon in 2000. Great, yet Hezbulla continued to threaten Israel. They left Gaza in 2005. Great. Yet Hamas continued to treaten Israel, and I can go on and on. Look at Israel blooming in the desert with no oil and constantly at war. Look at their neighbors and the condition of their countries. If the Arabs just dropped their weapons they could accomplish so much as a nation. Look at Egypt and Jordan. Tell me why did Arafat not accpt Barak's offer in 2000. Because they did not and do not want land or peace they just want dead Jews. I do not know how characteristic that is of the whole Arab population but their leadership, their governments, their institutions deplore the Jews and deplore Israel.</p>
<p>Skisaloman, I do not doubt that to Israelis, Israel is a true democracy. I am sure Israelis are given all the benefits that other modern democracies give their citizens. </p>
<p>But its actions toward its neighbors to toward non Israelis are not that of a democracy. A democracy does not occupy other lands and it does not destroy an entire country indiscriminately. Furthermore, and I do not know if this is true, but I hear that there are levels of classes within Israel based on origin and religion. Like Ethiopian Israelis and Arab Israelis are not given equal opportunities as the rest. I don't know how true that is though.</p>
<p>Barak's proposal was unacceptable because it left out a very central point to the Palestinians. No East Jerusalem. No Palestinian would accept a sollution that does not include East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine. But I don't claim to know everything there is to know about the Israeli-Palestinian struggle. </p>
<p>And the reason why most Arab governments deplore Israel and its government, as unjustified as this may seem, is to calm their populations, who feel very strongly for the Palestinian cause.</p>
<p>Actually, Barak did offer East Jerusalem...</p>
<p>Ethiopian Jews are not treated poorly, but there is racism everywhere and there are people who do not like blacks in Israel and in america and everywhere. However, there is no government discrimination against them. In fact the reason the Ethiopians ever made it to Israel is because of Operation Magic Carpet and Operation Solomon. Israel airlifted thousand of africans jews from their countries into Israel.</p>
<p>Arab Israelis have all legal rights as Jews they can even serve in the army if they want, but they are not required to. If you ever visit Israel take a trip up north and on the road to Tiberias and Afula you see beautiful sprawling Arab towns and cities. They have villas and aparments there that are no better than what the Jews live in. Ofcourse they too have their slums. However there is not really a widespread problem with Israeli Arabs. Acco and Acre have a nice arab population who respect and like the jews for their buisness and for the respect of their rights.</p>
<p>Tell me why did the Arabs start the war with the Jews. They had a chance for a country in Israel (which is 20% of Palestine) yet they opted to fight Israel and they lost. Again in 56 again in 67 again in 73. When Egypt, Jordan, and Syria controlled the terretories the Palestinian Arabs had no aspiratons for statehood there. However come 1967 things changed for them</p>
<p>Only part of East Jerusalem. Some very important parts of East Jerusalem were left out. Also, I recall something about refugees and the right of return. Either way, I think the Palestinians should have negotiated a little more diplomatically, but Arafat was an incompetent.</p>
<p>Not all Arabs attacked Israel. Lebanon was only involved in the 1948 war. They did not get involved in the other wars. None of the Gulf states or North African states (other than Egypt) were involved either. Out of over 20 Arab countries, only 4 were invloved. I have no idea why they did it. If I understand Arabs, it is for two major reasons. The first is the reluctance of Arabs to deal with Palestinians. They wanted the Palestinians to have their own country so that they could get rid of them. The second is that Israel was seen as being a divisive force and they did not want to risk having them there.</p>
<p>Israel offered every arab neighboorhood in east jerusalem include control over all of muslim religious sites in any part of east jerusalem and continued control over temple mount. You mention the right of return. In 1948 roughly 650,000 Arabs left Israel during the war of independance. Most of them left at the bequest of the arabs countries who spread lies and propoganda about what jews would do to the arabs remaining. At the same time roughly 550,000-600,000 Jewish arabs left arab countries because their lives were actually in danger and now they had a place to go. One of the requests of the Palestinian Arabs is that the refugees and all of their children be allowed to return to Israel. However now their are millions of them and their return is a de facto way of destroying Israel because ti would soon cease to be a Jewish state. The other problem was that while Gaza, Judea, and Shomrom were controlled y Egypt and Jordan from 48-67, there was no effort made to settle the refuggees thus allowing them to grow. The Arabs pretty much refused to take care of their own. To make it even more lopsided in the count of refugees the UN gave the Palestinian Arabs a whole new definition for refugee, one that was not used for anyother people. Obviously Israel refused this request. But they compromised and gave Arabs 97% of Judea and Shomrom, Gaza, generally speaking East Jerusalem.</p>
<p>Libya was involved in the independance war. Ugunda sponsored terror. Tunisia sponsored terror as will. You are right that the Arabs did not want to deal with the Palestinian Arabs. To them the Palestinian Arabs are just a tool in the fight against Israel. But truthfully the Palestinians are not an ethnicity of their own, they are no different from "regular" Arabs. The only difference is that Palestinian Arabs came from the Palestine region of which roughly 75 precent is Jordan. </p>
<p>Those countries attacked Israel not because of its divisive force but because they hated Jews. Look at the history of the region prior to Israel's independance. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was terribly anti-semitic and him and Hitler were close buddies. The Mufti once wrote him a letter saying that he will be holding the fort in the Middle East by helping take care of the Jew problem there. And there are many more examples. The simple fact was and is the leadership, institutions and orginizations that represent most arab nations do not want israel there, they do not want jews there or anywhere. Its in their literature and its in their charter etc...When it comes to the people i dont konw. The only poll i remember is from a few yrs back where 80% of the palestinian arabs wanted israels complete destruction. The election of hamas can be though of as a poll also on what the palestinian arabs think about jews and israel...</p>
<p>You are wrong regarding Palestinians. They are very much an identity, as are the Lebanese and the Iraqis and the Egyptians etc... We all speak out own dialects, we all look different, we have different names, we have different cuisines etc... Arabs are not one people. And many people who are intimate with the 2000 Camp David effort say that it was not really much of an offer.</p>
<p>And Arabs do not hate Jews. Jews have not been harmed in Lebanon. Lebanon has thousands of Jews, not one of which has been harmed. I am not surprised that 80% of the Palestinians want Israel destroyed. Can you blame them? Come on, they are at war. And do not mention Hamas being elected without mentioning Sharon's being elected. Sharon hates Arabs. He would rather seem them all dead than co-exist with them. What does Sharon's ascenssion to power say about Israelis? We should stop accusing the people of hatred and look at the bigger picture. Israel's military is powerful enough to defend itself. Israel must take the necessary steps to make peace with its neighbours. Saudi Arabi and Lebanon are willing. Jordan and Egypt have already made peace. Iraq is too weak to matter. The rest of the Arab countries are too far to matter.</p>
<p>"Those countries attacked Israel not because of its divisive force but because they hated Jews. Look at the history of the region prior to Israel's independance. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was terribly anti-semitic and him and Hitler were close buddies."</p>
<p>That is true, but surprisingly, there were Jewish terrorist groups in Palestine that contacted the Nazi's. The Lehi group, or Stern Gang (not cause he went to the school, that was the leaders name) contacted Werner Von Hentig to ask for help to expell the British from the Palestinian region and to help bring Jews over from Europe, thus working with the Nazi's to solve Hitler's "Jewish Problem". He stated that(quote from the letter) :
""common interests could exist between the establishment of a new order in Europe in conformity with the German concept, and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as they are embodied by the NMO (Lehi)." </p>
<p>The Palestinians left in 1948 as refugees because they were being killed by groups such as the Irgun, Hagana, the Hagana's Special Night Squads. The Night Sqaud were taught "... how to kill without compunction, how to interrogate prisoners by shooting every tenth man to make the rest talk; and how to deter future terrorists by pushing the heads of captured ones into pools of oil and then freeing them to tell the story" (van Creveld, 2004, p. 46).</p>
<p>Another group, Freedom Fighters of Israel, advocated terrorism, and the Irgun, led by future prime minister Menachem Begin, and Hagana worked together to blow up the king david hotel.</p>
<p>This is why the Palestinians fled Israel, and lived in refugee camps and are still fighting. I doubt too many Palestinians will be satisfied until they get all of thier land back. I think its a hopeless cause, cause no way can they get all their land back, but i doubt they do, which is why they are still fighting and will probably continue to fight no matter how many peace plans are made.</p>
<p>Well what you said about correspondance with Nazis isnt true. Its anti-semitic lies. The stern and irgun did not exist in 1948. When israel gained indpeendance in may 14 it disbanded the groups and callled them illegal. Those terrorists were completely different from the terror israel experiences now. Their tactics were similar to the IRA. Also they did not massacre arabs. There was one incident that no one is really sure about. However, there are jewish terrorists that are deplorable like Baruch Goldstien who killed 40 or 30 some arabs in hebron. They exist but they are not supported by the israeli government. The israeli government has declared 2 jewish groups terrorist orginizations and they are now illegal. What arab countries have declared hamas, hezbulla, Fatah etc.. illegal?</p>
<p>By the way here is an article by liberal Alan Dershowitz. I think it is very telling and his analysis is spot on</p>
<p>There is no democracy in the world that should tolerate missiles being fired at its cities without taking every reasonable step to stop the attacks. The big question raised by Israel's military actions in Lebanon is what is "reasonable." The answer, according to the laws of war, is that it is reasonable to attack military targets, so long as every effort is made to reduce civilian casualties. If the objectives cannot be achieved without some civilian casualties, these must be "proportional" to the civilian casualties that would be prevented by
the military action. </p>
<p>This is all well and good for democratic nations that deliberately locate their military bases away from civilian population centers. Israel has its air force, nuclear facilities and large army bases in locations as remote as anything can be in that country. It is possible for an enemy to attack Israeli military targets without inflicting "collateral damage" on its civilian population. Hezbollah and Hamas, by contrast, deliberately operate military wings out of densely populated areas. They launch antipersonnel missiles with ball-bearing shrapnel, designed by Syria and Iran to maximize civilian casualties, and then hide from retaliation by living among civilians. If Israel decides not to go after them for fear of harming civilians, the terrorists win by continuing to have free rein in attacking civilians with rockets. If Israel does attack, and causes civilian casualties, the terrorists win a propaganda victory: The international community pounces on Israel for its "disproportionate" response. This chorus of condemnation actually encourages the terrorists to operate from civilian areas. </p>
<p>While Israel does everything reasonable to minimize civilian casualties -- not always with success -- Hezbollah and Hamas want to maximize civilian casualties on both sides. Islamic terrorists, a diplomat commented years ago, "have mastered the harsh arithmetic of pain. . . . Palestinian casualties play in their favor and Israeli casualties play in their favor. "These are groups that send children to die as suicide bombers, sometimes without the child knowing that he is being sacrificed. Two years ago, an 11-year-old was paid to take a parcel through Israeli security. Unbeknownst to him, it contained a bomb that was to be detonated remotely. (Fortunately the plot was foiled.) </p>
<p>This misuse of civilians as shields and swords requires a reassessment of the laws of war. The distinction between combatants and civilians -- easy when combatants were uniformed members of armies that fought on battlefields distant from civilian centers -- is more difficult in the present context. Now, there is a continuum of "civilianality": Near the most civilian end of this continuum are the pure innocents -- babies, hostages and others completely uninvolved; at the more combatant end are civilians who willingly harbor terrorists, provide material resources and serve as human shields; in the middle are those who support the terrorists politically, or spiritually. </p>
<p>The laws of war and the rules of morality must adapt to these realities. An analogy to domestic criminal law is instructive: A bank robber who takes a teller hostage and fires at police from behind his human shield is guilty of murder if they, in an effort to stop the robber from shooting, accidentally kill the hostage. The same should be true of terrorists who use civilians as shields from behind whom they fire their rockets. The terrorists must be held legally and morally responsible for the deaths of the civilians, even if the direct physical cause was an Israeli rocket aimed at those targeting Israeli citizens. </p>
<p>Israel must be allowed to finish the fight that Hamas and Hezbollah started, even if that means civilian casualties in Gaza and Lebanon. A democracy is entitled to prefer the lives of its own innocents over the lives of the civilians of an aggressor, especially if the latter group contains many who are complicit in terrorism. Israel will -- and should -- take every precaution to minimize civilian casualties on the other side. On July 16, Hasan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah, announced there will be new "surprises," and the Aska Martyrs Brigade said that it had developed chemical and biological weapons that could be added to its rockets. Should Israel not be allowed to pre-empt their use? </p>
<p>Israel left Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005. These are not "occupied" territories. Yet they serve as launching pads for attacks on Israeli civilians. Occupation does not cause terrorism, then, but terrorism seems to cause occupation. If Israel is not to reoccupy to prevent terrorism, the Lebanese government and the Palestinian Authority must ensure that these regions cease to be terrorist safe havens.</p>
<p>Alexandre to answer you about Palestinians I am just gonna send 2 articles that articulate the facts very well. They are both short and i would appreciate if you read them...They were writtin in 2002 and 2003 respectively...</p>
<p>If you are so sure that “Palestine, the country, goes back through most of recorded history”, I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about that country of Palestine: </p>
<p>When was it founded and by whom?
What were its borders?
What was its capital?
What were its major cities?
What constituted the basis of its economy?
What was its form of government?
Can you name at least one Palestinian leader before Arafat?
Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation?
What was the language of the country of Palestine?
What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine?
What was the name of its currency? Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese yuan on that date.
Have they left any artifacts behind?
Do you know of a library where one could find a work of Palestinian literature produced before 1967?
And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?
You are lamenting the “low sinking” of “once proud” nation. Please tell me, when exactly was that “nation” proud and what was it so proud of? </p>
<p>And here is the least sarcastic question of all: If the people you mistakenly call “Palestinians” are anything but generic Arabs collected from all over — or thrown out of — the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, why did they never try to become independent until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War? </p>
<p>I hope you avoid the temptation to trace the modern day “Palestinians” to the Biblical Philistines: substituting etymology for history won't work here. </p>
<p>The truth should be obvious to everyone who wants to know it. Arab countries have never abandoned the dream of destroying Israel; they still cherish it today. Having time and again failed to achieve their evil goal with military means, they decided to fight Israel by proxy. For that purpose, they created a terrorist organization, cynically called it “Palestinian people” and installed it in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. How else can you explain the refusal by Jordan and Egypt to unconditionally accept back the “West Bank” and Gaza, respectively? </p>
<p>The fact is, Arabs populating Gaza, Judea, and Samaria have much less claim to nationhood than that Indian tribe that successfully emerged in Connecticut with the purpose of starting a tax-exempt casino: at least that tribe had a constructive goal that motivated them. The so called “Palestinians” have only one motivation: the destruction of Israel, and in my book that is not sufficient to consider them a “nation” — or anything else except what they really are: a terrorist organization that will one day be dismantled. </p>
<p>In fact, there is only one way to achieve piece in the Middle East. Arab countries must acknowledge and accept their defeat in their war against Israel and, as the losing side should, pay Israel reparations for the more than 50 years of devastation they have visited on it. The most appropriate form of such reparations would be the removal of their terrorist organization from the land of Israel and accepting Israel's ancient sovereignty over Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. </p>
<p>That will mark the end of the Palestinian people. What are you saying again was its beginning? </p>
<p>You are absolutely correct in your understanding of the “Palestinians'” murderous motives. I am afraid however that you, along with 99% of the population of this planet have missed the beginning of WWIII (the enemy call it Jihad) quite a few years ago. The siege of the US embassy in Tehran in 1979, an event to which the latest Nobel Peace Prize winner had so miserably failed to respond, can be very well used as the day WWIII stepped out of the pages of the Koran and into the current events. I pray the United States and Israel lead the world to victory in this war. Come to think of it, there is no choice, be you a Christian, a Jew, or even, believe it or not, a Muslim. </p>
<pre><code> AND NUMBER 2
</code></pre>
<p>-----Original Message-----
From: GY
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 10:56 AM
To: <a href="mailto:ysagamori@hotmail.com">ysagamori@hotmail.com</a>
Subject: Palestine </p>
<p>Sir, </p>
<p>My Grandfather was born in Palestine, he traveled on a Palestine passport, spent Palestinian pounds and his family has lived in the land of Palestine for a thousand years. To even question if Palestine ever existed would be akin to asking if Paris ever existed, even if it never was an independent nation. Since when do we judge if a region existed by the standards of modern day nationhood. If this were the case, 90% of the nations today would NOT exist in your mind, or under your warped logic. </p>
<p>Go back to your Zionist 101 propaganda books and try to come up with a different approach to this question. By the way, when exactly did the “State of Israel” exist? The Jewish Kingdoms of past lasted for no more than 500 years while Palestinians (Muslim and Christians) controlled the region for 1500 years. Caanan (Palestine) did not start nor will it end with Jewish domination. </p>
<p>G.Y. </p>
<p>PS - your name is plastered all over the Zionist websites. </p>
<pre><code>Dear Mr. Y:
Thank you for your letter. This is the first time I received a letter from an Arab that would attempt to reason against my arguments rather than simply curse me.
In response, I would venture a guess that your grandfather's passport, as well as his pounds, were issued by the authorities of Great Britain — a country that was entrusted by the League of Nations with keeping the Jewish homeland for its rightful owners and then blatantly betrayed that trust by establishing Arab kingdoms at its whim. You know as well as I do that, regardless of all the different names people have applied to the geographical area in question, there has never been a nation called Palestine: not during the British Mandate, not prior to it, and not afterwards. So, what's your rationale for creating it now? Unless your argument is purely toponymical, Paris presents a very poor analogy — precisely because, to the best of my knowledge, the Parisians have never attempted to turn their city into an independent political entity.
Furthermore, If you carefully (and honestly) consider all possible outcomes of the ongoing Arab war against Israel, you will most probably agree with me that under no plausible scenario (Israel wins, Israel looses, or whatever else one can think of) a viable “Palestinian” state is realistically possible at the outcome. Even the worst (from my point of view) case scenario, in which Arafat's terrorist organization achieves its goal of wiping Israel off the map, is not going to result in a “Palestinian” state. If you need proof, please consider the sovereignty of Lebanon today.
And since the state of “Palestine” has never existed, the state of Israel, no matter how many times destroyed in the past, has an infinitely greater right to that land than an Arab terrorist organization created for the purpose of its destruction.
Your attempt to connect Arabs to the ancient Philistines is misguided. Arabs in general and those occupying Gaza, Judea, and Samaria in particular do not descend from the Philistines, just like modern-day Egyptians do not descend from those who built the pyramids thousands of years ago. This is a commonly accepted, scientifically established, historical fact.
Having said that, I must agree with you that the lack of common ethnic identity among the so-called “Palestinians” cannot alone serve as a sufficient reason to deny them a right for self-determination. I have attempted to address this argument in an essay called Genius and Evil. If you have time and desire to continue this discussion, I would appreciate your opinion on that piece.
Finally, I have no reason to doubt that your family has lived in the area you call Palestine for a thousand years. A thousand years is a very respectable chunk of time. My family has lived there five times that long, but even that is not the point. If Arabs can use prolonged residence to support territorial claims, then, as a fair person you no doubt are, you should agree that Jews must have the same right. Would you be ready and willing to support similarly based Jewish territorial claims against Egypt? Iraq? Saudi Arabia? Lebanon? Jordan? Yemen? Ethiopia? Iran? All of Europe? Unless your only concern is the destruction of Israel, you must.
If however you are saying that a thousand-year-long history in the area entitles your family to remain there, I will agree with you wholeheartedly. Each one of us has a right to live wherever we choose — as long as we do not engage, either directly or indirectly, in attempts to exterminate our neighbors.
With the most sincere regards,
</code></pre>
<p>Yashiko Sagamori </p>
<p>These are written by Yashiko Sagamori</p>
<p>Skisaloman, I do not have time to read through all of this. I did skim through it though and whether Palestine existed in a manner that you see fit doesn't matter. To the Palestinians, they had a nation, albeit one that was always occupied by oppressors, and their desire to have a country of their own is absolutely genuine. You ask me not to use biblical references to support the past of a Palestinian state and yet, Israel's entire existance is based on biblical claims. Did Israel exist as an organized country at any time between the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ and when it was created in 1947? I don't think so. The same can be said of most countries in the Middle East and Africa. Does that mean none of those countries have a right to exist? Of course not. All of those countries have a right to exist, including Israel...and Palestine.</p>
<p>As a side note, almost all Palestinians today have lived in the same area for 10s of thousands of years. They were once Jewish themselves but they believed Jesus was the Messiah and they converted to Christinaity. In time, many of those converted to Islam. Does that make them any less worthy of that land than those who remained Jewish?</p>
<p>When you have time read the article is all i can say. It answers everything you just pointed out.</p>
<p>Also there never was a Palestinian nation. It simply never existed. And 2/3 of Jordan is Palestinian by definition. There wasnt a biblical palestinian nation either.</p>
<p>"As a side note, almost all Palestinians today have lived in the same area for 10s of thousands of years. They were once Jewish themselves but they believed Jesus was the Messiah and they converted to Christinaity. In time, many of those converted to Islam. Does that make them any less worthy of that land than those who remained Jewish?"</p>
<p>I dont know what to tell you but that stuff is not true. Its just not historicaly accurate. The non Jews that lived in what is now Israel were mostly nomadic or peasent arabs. The property mostly belonged to syrian landlords. It was a very barren country. ALl of the inhabitants there were also greeks excaping turk rule.</p>
<p>Ski:</p>
<p>You cannot confuse religious identity with ethnicity. A russian jew cant claim that hes from Israel, because most probably whatever jews went to russia mixed in and he is a russian. An african jew isnt israeli, they are african, they do not descend from that area. Palestinians were living there all the time. They did not go any where. They were just there, then all the jews came, they had to flee thier homeland, the surrounding arab countries are way to weak and dumb to beat them, and the Palestinians dont have any where to go. And now they are fighting, like the goold Malcolm X said, "by any means necessary". It is terrorism, but its also a fight for freedom. Same goes for Israel, they use terrorism, and they also fight for freedom.</p>
<p>PS - On the whole thing about Hezbollah mixing in with civilians, on the "War on Lebanan" thread I posted a report from Human Rights Watch, where they interviewed Lebanese witnesses and survivors who said there was no Hezbollah fighters in the area at all when Israeli bombs dropped.</p>
<p>Ski, I have only known a handful of Palestinians and a handful of Israelis in my life. All of the Palestinians have lived in what is modern day Palestine of Israel since before the Ottoman empire came into being. Most of the Israelis I have met actually lived in Central and Eastern Europe (from Germany to Russia) for centuries. I am sure a lot of Palestinians were once nomadic Arabs with no real ties to any land, but those aren't many. In fact, there have been almost no nomads in the Middle East since the late 18th century.</p>
<p>ALl of that is factually incorrect. In around 1860's the censusput what is now israel at 500, 000 people of which many were jews. Jews have always lived in israel and the many which came as immigrants, came to a land that was virtually uninhabitated. There were no cities. Jerusalem, which the arabs want so bad now and hold so dear to their hearts now, was in complete ruins and desolete. There was nothign growing and nothing living. Tel Aviv at that time was one big sand dune surrounded by swamps. The only real structures and buildings were built either by the jews thousands of yrs ago or by the romans and other conquering armies. The jews that came bought the land from the arabs at inflated prices, and hired the peasant arabs to work. At that time anyone who liverd from the sea to the eastern border of what is now jordan was a palestinian. The Palestinian Brigade which fought as part of the british army in WWI was comprised of all jews, the same thing in WWII. The first newspaper in the region was called the Palestinian Post. It was run by jews. The first radio was called the Palestinian Voice and was run by jews. Jews and Arabs alike had palestinian on their passport. Golda Meir for instance carried a palestinian passport. In the 20's Jordan was established in 75 percent of Palestine. Palestine was a geographic term given to the land of modernday jordan and israel. There was never a country called palestine. In 1948 when armies from many arab countries and iran invaded israel there were two sets of arabs living there. Those arabs who stayed in israel and became citizens and those who left or who became part of jordan or egypt becasue of the land grabs they made. The arabs who did not remain israel all of a sudden became palestinians. They got their own ethnicity and became palestinians. The UN even afforded them a whole new refuggee status and gave them a definition that was not given to any other refugees in history. Those who stayed in israel are considered arabs. So there are cases where two brother from the same parents split up- one remains an arab and the other transforms to a palestinian.</p>
<p>Human Rights Watch cannot be trusted after its disgusting reporting in Jenin. They failed miserably there and I would bet you my life that when this war ends the truth will come out to be different than reported. I am sure you both are well-informed enough to have see nic robertson anderson cooper and other journalists on american news give a very strong anti-israeli report and then later when back in the safety of israel or america they have revealed that hezbullah trailed them and told them what to say. And took them around to only certain sites. They also told them who to interview and closely watched them...very similar to CNN reporting from Iraq during the first gulf war. ALso it defies all logic to say that hezbullah doesnt fight from civillian areas when there are videos of them shooting rockets from apartment complexes and there were fights in hospitals and in the streets. So that either means hezbullah fights there or that israel was just massacring the people and hezbullah comes in to defend the lebanese. Also do not forget the UN soldeirs who called in to their HQ to report that hezballa was using them as sheilds and at times they were no more thant 10 feet from the UN</p>
<p>Ski, I happen to be a student of History. I am seldom factually wrong. In fact, I am 100% correct. You sound like South African whites, trying to convince me that South African was rightfully theres because they improved it. They always say that South Africa was nothing until they came along and that it will now return to nothing because blacks are running it. </p>
<p>The reason why the British prefered dealing with Jews than with Arabs is because Arabs did not welcome British rule. They wanted them out. Similar situation in India. Muslims were almost never placed in responsible positions because they did not cooperate. But that does not mean that modern day Israel was primarily Jewish. Not by a long shot. The number of Arabs outnumbered Jews by a significant margin. Since the late 1940s, many Arabs were forced to leave and many left because they were so severely discriminated against, they could no longer support their families. Many such Palestinians live in the Gulf states. Of course, at the same time, millions of Jews who's families had not been to the Middle East in over a 1,000 years migrated to Israel, mainly from Eastern Europe.</p>
<p>There were 250,000 arabs in what is now israel at the end of the 1800s there were a bit less the jews. The area was also never exclusively arab, many turks and greeks took turns living there. It was essentially a land without a people for a people without a land. Except that the arabs living there benifited from a jewish state as they do now. Notice how no israeli-arab wants to move from israel and how arabs in judea and shomrom try to be on the israeli side of the anti-terror fence. Plus many of the 250,000 arabs were recent migrants to the region since no one really lived there. Just take a look at the writings of those who visiited, UN High Commisioner, Mark Twain and so on...Also the arabs never made or left any significat mark on the land. It amazes me how important jerusalem became to them in 1967 after how they treated it up until that pt. And by the way all those institutions werent set up by the british but by jews. The british limited the amount of jews that could come in to palestine. Ever heard of the famous white paper that stopped immigration or how they discouraged the sale of land to jews. When jews did by land they usually paid 1000-1100 dollars per acre for very arid land, at the same time an acre of good soil land in iowa sold for 110 dollars. Also as the jewish population rose so did the health figures among arabs. Infant mortality dropped because of the health care that the jews provided in the region. Many arabs began to move to the area because of the mployment and better lifestly around the jews. Many arab village leaders were offered help by jewish agricultural enginneers. Those areas that accepted some much imporved lifestyle.</p>