TROLL > AntiSemitism > AntiPalistinianism ! Did the Jews learn from WWII?

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Sirotnikov is probably living on land that was once owned by some poor Palestinian now languishing in a refugee camp.

Yeah, I live on a palestinian mass grave. I like digging up bones and playing fetch.

(Sorry if any one is hurt, but I address viciousness with viciousness.)

I wasn't claiming those numbers as refugees. I appear to have misinterpreted what MtG was trying to get at with his comments. I thought he was suggesting that vacating the Territories would not force "millions" from their homes, as I oriinally claimed.

Ok, well, so see it as "clearing the facts".

If I mistakenly thought you spoke of refugees, so did others.

Why did you repost about the rapes? When have I ever said anything about rapes? Honestly, I'd never heard any accusation of rape, which is odd, because it accompanies almsot every war.

I copied and pasted it from a larger aritcle disprooving claims of massacare.

Yes, it's true, many people did run away at the apporach of the Arab armies. Only a great fool stays in the path of an advancing army, regardless of which side it may or may not be on. Even "liberating" armies aren't known for their discretion. However, considering that almost every single battle took place outside the Jewish allotted territory, and that most of the refugees came from the territory Israel occupied (about 1/3rd from Arab occupied Palesitine, 2/3rds from Israel) . . .

But they recieved orders to evacuate and believed that Arab armies would be near... they wasted no time.

It's absurd to think they'd wait to get caught in the fire, and then flee.

Obviously the fled from jewish controlled territory, mostly before fights broke out.

Btw, we did offer some to come back:

In 1949, Israel offered to allow families that had been separated during the war to return, to release refugee accounts frozen in Israeli banks (eventually released in 1953), to pay compensation for abandoned lands and to repatriate 100,000 refugees.48

- Joseph Schechtman, The Refugee in the World, (NY: A.S. Barnes and Co., 1963), p. 268.



Btw, our "deir yassin"

Just four days after the reports from Deir Yassin were published, an Arab force ambushed a Jewish convoy on the way to Hadassah Hospital, killing 77 Jews, including doctors, nurses, patients, and the director of the hospital. Another 23 people were injured. This massacre attracted little attention and is never mentioned by those who are quick to bring up Deir Yassin. Moreover, despite attacks such as this against the Jewish community in Palestine, in which more than 500 Jews were killed in the first four months after the partition decision alone, Jews did not flee.

[Mark_Lipovrovskiy]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Don't try and defend the indefensible.

Once, I heard the hymn of the Stern Gang... I thought it was some kind of Pal Hamasnik thing. Then I found out that it was Stern's own writing.
Stern is one Jewish casuality who I don't regret died. I hope that sentence is syntactically possible
At least the Sternists were vastly unpopular in the Jewish public opinion... Otherwise I'd frankly be extremely unable to argue with the likes of Che. Not even in my head when I'm not replying (which is what usually happens).

[Sirotnikov]

It's irrelevent. People were fleeing war, and it doesn't matter on which side the army that was approaching them was. It's still war, which is a bad thing to be around, even if you're a solider.

Which is exactly why Israel alone is not responsible for the entire refugee problem.
I agree, we did try to spook them off at occassions, and even spread rumors.
But hey, it was war. What do you expect? The decisions to spook people off were made on tactical levels, not strategic. That's my take on it.

And we're certainly not guilty of each family having 6 children and growing up to be 4+ million people.

[Alexander's Horse]

Another interesting parallel with the nazis is the tendency to dismiss sources because they are Palestinian. Hitler and Goebbels of course were very fond of dismissing any source that criticised the nazi regime as "jewish".

[KrazyHorse]

And we're certainly not guilty of each family having 6 children and growing up to be 4+ million people

Are you guilty of letting in ever Jew in the world who wanted in, thus filling up the country and presenting refugees with a fait accompli?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


So you should move, but as an Israeli you should stay? I personally wouldn't choose to make my home in either place. That doesn't change the fact that some people on both sides are attached enough to their homes to stay.

As an Israeli, presumably I'd either be born there, hence have a bit of a problem to emigrate elsewhere, depending on my circumstances, or else I'd have moved there, presumably from someplace lovely that made moving to Israel look like an improvement.

And you suggested that it was okay to do this by dispossessing an entire nation.

I did? I suggested that I understand the point of view of people who will do just about anything to stop the attacks. If a fence works, build a fence. If it takes a kilometer wide no-man's land, do it. If it takes a buffer zone that is wider than the range of a Katyusha, do that. If nothing short of expulsion works, then do that. If the Palestinians start dealing with the problem and trying to work back to the Oslo accords, and they actively handle their radicals and prevent further attacks, then that works too.

Once you push people hard enough, they get more interested in results than methods. If things escalate to that point, and they're damned close, the Palestinians will do a lot worse under the results column.

[Mark_Lipovrovskiy]

MtG, you know what the problem is?
I'm not sure that Israel would be so willing to return to the Olso accords... Not now. You must realize that since the beginning of the latest Intifada, the "left" in Israel is virtually dead.

That's why I'm quite desperate right now.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Soooooo, people fighting back to protect their town from attack justify a massacre? Dier Yassin happened after the collapse of Palestinian resistence to the partition (except in Jerusalem, where the Arabs were still trying to hold on). The town had a peace agreement with it's neighboring Jewish villages. All of a sudden the Irgun and Sternists show up with a loudspeaker on a truck, which rolls into a ditch too far from town to be heard, and assault the town. There's resistence, and because the Arabs dared to fight back, the Israeli forces took the men of the town and executed them.

Don't try and defend the indefensible.

Executed them?

The battle was ferocious and took several hours. The Irgun suffered 41 casualties, including four dead.

Notice - battle - people shot and were shot back at.
That's war. Not massacare.

Surprisingly, after the “massacre,” the Irgun escorted a representative of the Red Cross through the town and held a press conference. The New York Times' subsequent description of the battle was essentially the same as Begin's. The Times said more than 200 Arabs were killed, 40 captured and 70 women and children were released. No hint of a massacre appeared in the report.

“Paradoxically, the Jews say about 250 out of 400 village inhabitants [were killed], while Arab survivors say only 110 of 1,000.”[38] A study by Bir Zeit University, based on discussions with each family from the village, arrived at a figure of 107 Arab civilians dead and 12 wounded, in addition to 13 "fighters," evidence that the number of dead was smaller than claimed and that the village did have troops based there.[39] Other Arab sources have subsequently suggested the number may have been even lower.[40]

38 - Dan Kurzman, Genesis 1948, (OH: New American Library, Inc., 1970), p. 148.
39 - Sharif Kanaana and Nihad Zitawi, "Deir Yassin," Monograph No. 4, Destroyed Palestinian Villages Documentation Project, (Bir Zeit: Documentation Center of Bir Zeit University, 1987), p. 55.
40 - Sharif Kanaana, "Reinterpreting Deir Yassin," Bir Zeit University, (April 1998).

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

Which is exactly why Israel alone is not responsible for the entire refugee problem.
I agree, we did try to spook them off at occassions, and even spread rumors.
But hey, it was war. What do you expect? The decisions to spook people off were made on tactical levels, not strategic. That's my take on it.

And we're certainly not guilty of each family having 6 children and growing up to be 4+ million people.

Thanks for the admission but tell me about today. Do these millions of Palestinian refugees have a right of return to Israel? Can they reclaim their homes and property?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

It's irrelevent. People were fleeing war, and it doesn't matter on which side the army that was approaching them was. It's still war, which is a bad thing to be around, even if you're a solider.

Which is exactly why Israel alone is not responsible for the entire refugee problem.

No, but you are repsonsible for letting those refugees and their decendents from Israel return, if that's what they choose. It's their right to return home, and Israel has no right under international law to keep them out. It does have the power to do so, but we are arguing about morality.

I agree, we did try to spook them off at occassions, and even spread rumors.
But hey, it was war. What do you expect? The decisions to spook people off were made on tactical levels, not strategic. That's my take on it.

I do believe it was made at a strategic level. There is no way that the Jewish Authority wanted to have a large population of Arabs in its borders. Frankly, if the ARabs hadn't fled of their own accord, it would have been necessary to expell them, since after all the land that Israel took, it would have had a minority Jewish population. The JA didn't go through all those years of fighting only to be a minority in their new country.

And we're certainly not guilty of each family having 6 children and growing up to be 4+ million people.

It is unreasonable to expect people to stop having children just because they live in a refugee camp.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Are you guilty of letting in ever Jew in the world who wanted in, thus filling up the country and presenting refugees with a fait accompli?

We can't settle population which hates us amongst us...

the Refugee Conference at Homs, Syria, passed a resolution stating:

Any discussion aimed at a solution of the Palestine problem which will not be based on ensuring the refugees' right to annihilate Israel will be regarded as a desecration of the Arab people and an act of treason (Beirut al Massa, July 15, 1957).

Even the UN acknowledges that:

that refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so

- Resolution 194 on December 11, 1948

And housni Mubaral

“The Palestinian demand for the 'right of return' is totally unrealistic and would have to be solved by means of financial compensation and resettlement in Arab countries.”
— Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Jerusalem Post, (January 26, 1989).

Not to speak of NY Times

No nation, regardless of past rights and wrongs, could contemplate taking in a fifth-column of such a size. And fifth-column it would be — people nurtured for 20 years [in 1967] in hatred of and totally dedicated to its destruction. The readmission of the refugees would be the equivalent to the admission to the U.S. of nearly 70,000,000 sworn enemies of the nation

New York Times editorial, (May 14, 1967).

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

Executed them?

Yes, executed. Like at Song My (My Lai). First there was a battle, then afterwards, there was a massacre. And while you are so quick to talk about the Red Cross being escorted through, it is that very Red Cross observer who is the one who told the world about the massacre.

[Mark_Lipovrovskiy]

AH: Well, all I can say on the subject that it's Israel's duty to help establish a Palestinian state that would be able to accept those refugees, as well as to compensate the refugees themselves. Unfortunately, this will definitely not come to pass as long as things are exploding left and right. Here or in the Territories - but I can guarantee that things will stop exploding in the Territories as soon as they stop exploding here. Yes, yes. I know. Vicious cycle. Doom, death and despair.

[KrazyHorse]

We can't settle population which hates us amongst us...

You have an obligation to do so. You morally committed yourselves to the welfare of all refugees when you declared sovereignty over the territory they inhabited in 1948.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Even the UN acknowledges that:

that refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so

- Resolution 194 on December 11, 1948

Yes, and if Israel hadn't dragged its feet for 50+ years, maybe they would be able to live at peace with their neighbors. After 50 years of squalid living, not to mention having no rights and being under threat of Israeli terrorism and oppression, I'd be less inclined to live peacefully. It is a problem of Israel's own making.