Why does Israel keep putting settlers in the occupied territories?

[MrBaggins]

Yeah, paik... they'd have been annihilated in 48 or 67 or 73 or 82... that would have solved the problem, right?

[Bereta_Eder]

you see things in black and white.

[Carver]

Originally posted by MrBaggins
Yeah, paik... they'd have been annihilated in 48 or 67 or 73 or 82... that would have solved the problem, right?

It would have solved the problem of ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the racsist state.

[Kropotkin]

Originally posted by Chris 62
The difference is, I'm only going by the record, YOUR not.
Denying history on your part changes nothing. The truth is not "pathetic", in fact, your attitude is what has kept this problem from being solved.

So there's a record? Denying what and whos history? Oh I don't feel for giving a crack cource in historical metodhology...

So, those people deserve rights to land they never lived on? You yourself just said they wern't EVER here in 48.

I have only spoken about the west bank and the Gaza strip, people (pals) live there you know...

That indicates narrow-mindedness on YOUR part, not mine.
Untill the "blame Israel" nonsense stops, this will NEVER end.

Again you're confusing things. The conflicts are the result of both sides. Of course sometimes one side is more guilty than the other, but overall no.

Governments ARE people, you foolish man.
Do you truly believe a government exisits of itseldf, as a living thing?

A interesting theoretical problem. But you clearly must see that there's a difference in assesing a goverments policies and a entire people. If i start to blaim all americans for a action by Bush people here get nuts. And probably rightly so.

Israel is a democracy, it's government is it's people.
Palestine's government is Arafat, an admitted terrorist and murderer, and his people support him, just ask them, as many journalists have.

Yes Israel has a democratic system. That's nice. That I like democracy doesn't mean that I must like the people that are chosen to rule in a democracy (that's kind of a democratic right). Arafat is a ****er and the palestinian support for him is possibly understandable but nothing I like. Just as I don't like Sharon (or Le Pen). That i don't like Sharon and Arafat doesn't per definition means that I hate Israelis and Pals.

[Sirotnikov]

Dier Yassin happened in April of 1948, after fighting everywhere outside of Jeruslame had ceased.

Incorrect.
Dier Yassin was part of the fighting of Jerusalem, as it was a village outlooking on a supply route to Jerusalem, that was necessary for Israel to keep control of, lest Jerusalem surrendered.

The Pals had no central authority nor any viable military force to do this. The Pals did not have a monopoly on massacres.

Sure they did.

1922.
1929.
1930s.

The Israelis massacred dozesn of Arab villages, the worst being Dier Yassin and the Lyddah Death March.

Again, there was a massacare in Dier Yassin, but it followed a tough fight.

And I haven't found Israeli references to Lyddah, or any refernces to it infact.

In any event, you are taking what happened during the Civil War, and moving it over into the wars of conquest.

Civil war??

Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt. Lebabnon attacked one Jewish settlement (which may or may not have been abandoned), then occupied Arab West Galilee. In December, after breaking the forth truce, Israel attacked them and annexed the West Galiliee. Syria tried to take territory it considered theirs based on French maps from the mandate (Britain and France never settleed the disposition of the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee. Their attack was stopped early by Moshe Dyan and an old howitzer, and Syria sat out the rest of the war, until attacked by Israel later. Syria did attack an abandoned settlement. Iraq and Jordan occupied the West Bank, as per the agreement between Israel and Jordan, and only fought the Israelis where they were attacked. Egypt sent half its forces to try and thwart Jordanian annexation and the other half north towards Ashdod. This is the one country that did actually attack the Israelis. They were soundly defeated. After that, there were a series of truces, each one Israel broke (for tactical reasons as Eli likes to keep pointing out, i.e., the tactic of destroyng your opposition one by one and grabbing as much land as possible).

A) I'll look for my own version of things tommorow. The attacks were (very poorly) coordinated.

B) We only broke the last 2 truces.

C) When the strategical fighting is over your life, you're allowed to use tactical measures.

[Chris 62]

Hamas defines the transition to the stage of Jihad "for the liberation of all of Palestine" as a personal religious duty incumbent upon every Muslim. At the same time, it utterly rejects any political arrangement that would entail the relinquishment of any part of Palestine, which for it is tantamount to a surrender of part of Islam. These positions are reflected in the Covenant, and of course in its activities.

The central goal of Hamas is the establishment of an Islamic state in all of Palestine. The immediate means to achieve this goal is the escalation of the armed struggle, and ultimately all-out Jihad, with the participation not only of Palestinian Muslims but of the entire Islamic world.

http://www.ict.org.il/inter_ter/orgdet.cfm?orgid=13

There's your "peaceful" Palestinains.

Again Che, you really must get your nose out of leftist propaganda, Israel was born in battle, a battle they won vs overwhelming odds.

I despise the Islamic world for their race hatered and aversion to murder as a solution to EVERYTHING.

Che, you crack me up, your trying to make it seem like Israel stated the war in 48! HA HA HA HA

Did they also pay for the Arab states to stage an attack for thier "land grab"?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by paiktis22
They would be willing to compromise.

They tried to compromise and thier efforts were answered with a suicide bombing campaign.

[Eli]

Egypt sent half its forces to try and thwart Jordanian annexation and the other half north towards Ashdod. This ... They were soundly defeated.

@ Egypt.
According to the UN partition plan i'm an evil evil land grabbing settler. Whoopee!

[Az]

It would have solved the problem of ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the racsist state.

truth comes to light.
we obviously need to be annihilated , so that we will clear from our sins of self-defence.
like the witches that had to sink to be exhonerated.

[Chris 62]

Here is more fun, the "Hamas" charter:

http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/isreport/hamas.html

Let's see any of you strike a deal with them.

There avowed purpose is to destroy Israel, they SAY so.

[Carver]

Originally posted by Chris 62

http://www.ict.org.il/inter_ter/orgdet.cfm?orgid=13

There's your "peaceful" Palestinains.

Again Che, you really must get your nose out of leftist propaganda, Israel was born in battle, a battle they won vs overwhelming odds.

I despise the Islamic world for their race hatered and aversion to murder as a solution to EVERYTHING.

Che, you crack me up, your trying to make it seem like Israel stated the war in 48! HA HA HA HA

Israel did start the war by seizing the Pals' land and declaring a Jewish nation. Would you expect the Pals to sit back and allow their country to be stolen? And sorry to upset your David v. Goliath mythology but the odds weren't that overwhelming with help from France, the UK and later the US.

I bet you think Charles de Gaulle liberated France also.

[Sirotnikov]

It would have solved the problem of ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the racsist state.

Please cite examples

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Hmm..
In Deir Yassin, the "massacre" involved mostly armed Iraqi troops.

Since the Iraqis didn't enter Palestine 'till later, not true. It was a neutral village, that had a non-agression agreement with neighboring Jewish villages. It's crime was to sit along the Tel Aviv, Jerusalem corridor. Men women and children were murdered there. Stop trying to justify it or pretend it wasn't that bad. It was a war crime. Deal with it.

In the massacare of the jewish medical convoy, days later, only doctors and nurses were slain.

And that was horrible, and there is no justification for that.

And of course, you ignore that fact that Egypt was also fighting Jordan.

Ok, please please please give me a source. I haven't met it.

Get Flapan's, The Birth of Israel. Egypt sent two brigades to Palestine, one towards Ashdod, the other towards the West Bank (where there should have been no Israelis to fight). Later, when Israel attacked these troops, Jordan refused to resupply them and let them get destroyed. 'Fighting' was the wrong word to use, but it captured the hostility better than saying they blocked each other and tried to cut each other's supply and let the Israelis finish them off (Egypt did this to Jordan, and vice versa).

Israeli troops outnumbered Arab troops at all points during the '48 wars.

Source?

Various sources. Flapan, the US government, Bayliss Thomas.

May 48
General forces: Israel 32,000 Arab 32,500

You've got your 3 and 2 transposed. It was 23,500. Ben-Gurion estimated Israeli strenght at 30,500, but it may have been much higher.

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by paiktis22
you see things in black and white.

And you don't?

look at your thread title again sir.

[DinoDoc]

The sad thing about Hamas is that if Arafat used some of his money to provide social services, as Hamas does, he would be better able to counter thier popularity among his people and blunt a rising threat to his continued rule.