Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OpieCunningham
Well, let's start at the beginning, shall we?
In 1947, the U.N. decides that Jews will be given a bunch of land. The Palestinians living on that land do not accept that decision. In 1948, Britain ends their mandate of Palestine and refuses to secure the area for Jewish occupation. So the Arabs attack the Jews.
Is that supposed to be suprising or somehow shocking? A group of people have come in and told you the land you live on now belongs to them. There is only one righteous recourse: fight for the right to the land which they are taking from you.
|
so a group of people with no govt. other than the one run by the brits is started and it's shocking that everyone gets mad? the only reason they got so pissed was because it was the jews who were setting up the new govt.
Quote:
There were nearly 1 million people living in Palestine. Label them anyway you wish - it was their land by possession.This is irrelevant to the discussion. Both sides were used by the U.S. and the Soviets during the Cold War - but the problems between the two countries existed before the Cold War.Israel historically took the land initially. That aggression from Arabs followed is nothing short of pure logic. If you wish to call a retaliatory action an aggressive action, feel free. That Israel then uses the land they take, by offering back only pieces of it, is how Israel has successfully gained the land beyond the 1948 borders that they now control. And it is also used as the propaganda to claim that the Palestinians "refuse to negotiate and don't seek peace". As if Israel does.I did not claim Israel had signed the treaty. I simply stated 3 facts and 1 opinion based on those facts:
|
well, you're right, the land was the inhabitants who possessed it. and if it weren't that there was still a lot of colonial type thinking going on, maybe isreal would never have been created. now when you consider that when isreal was created, they didn't just kick every non-jew out. many of the arab inhabitants became isreali citzens. so why did some become citizens and some not? i don't know, i'm sure they all had reasons? and for those who left, why didn't any of the other arab countries take them in? the places that have been taken in war, as far as i'm concerned, are isreals now. in no other time in history has a country won a war been told to give land gained in said war back, especially a defensive war. the palestinians threw in with the losers, so too bad. i think isreal should treat the palestinains better, but it seems to me that everytime things quiet down, they're the owns who start things back up with a suicide bombing. so i have very little sympathy for them left.
Quote:
1- Israel does not need nukes.
2- As long as Israel has nukes, Iran is required by the laws of Cold War logic to attain them.
3- The U.S. policy of non-proliferation requires Iran to not have nukes.
Therefore, the first step towards ensuring that Iran does not attain nukes is to remove the primary incentive for Iran to attain nukes.
|
i think isreal does need nukes. if anything, i think that's one of the reasons they have not had an actual war in so long now. as long as they have nukes, other countries will back off. so the logic of these three is faulty from step 1.