IF tommorow the Palestinian people peacably protested in the street+did so for month

[Viking Berserk]

Che, I can find you some quotes, but the UN commander's final report in '67 noted increased terrorist attacks from Gaza and the WB, IIRC, by the PLO. Arafat was responsible for these attacks.

SO???

The Israelian goverment is resposible for the murder of kids!

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Viking Berserk
The Israelian goverment is resposible for the murder of kids!

So are Palestinian terrorists. Both sides are equally reprehensible and both have legitimate concerns. It's not as simple as the Jews are baby killers.

[gsmoove23]

I wasn't sure but I had thought in 67 that Arafat wasn't a major player. I found this in a history of the PLO from http://www.terrorism.com/terrorism/PLO.shtml

By 1967 the PLO had decided that their primary goal was the destruction of the state of Israel. For the next ten years, this goal was the primary focus of the massive terrorist campaign by which their reputation was formed. This war cost untold hundreds of casualties on both sides with very little to show in return. Therefore, in 1974 the PLO made a conscious decision to alter its focus from the purely terrorist to one that would include political elements, necessary for any meaningful dialogue. This created more unhappiness amongst some followers who felt that the PLO, while striking blows, was not truly finding its mark. This led to the creation of yet another splinter group called the Rejectionist Front. It was at this time that Yassir Arafat and his group al-Fatah took over the leadership role.

[Az]

Do you know what happened within days of Israel's conquest of the West Bank? They demolished ten thousand homes. Isreal wasn't even waiting for peaces talks before they began clearing out Palestinians and moving in settlers

Israel did NOT move settlers instead of arabs on the west bank.

And your story that Israel has supposedly has attacked in 67' is ****ing tiresome. There is an Israeli govt. memorandum of the early 60s that calls for peace in exchange to the territorries captured in 67', still in the days of Eschol, and that proposition was rejected as state in the Khartum declaration.

You should also remember that is during the periods when the PLO honored a ceasefire with Israel that Israel launched the bloodiest war in its history, the invasion of Lebanon, which killed upwards of twenty thousand people in Sidon and Tyre alone. The war was soley to evict the PLO from Lebanon, even though (or rather because) the PLO had honored an 18 month truce.

that bolded comment is ****ing strange. so if the PLO wouldn't honored the truce, Israel wouldn't attack?

The reason that Israel entered there was by far not only to expel the PLO from there, but also to install a friendly regime, against the syrians that tried to do the same thing, And all of this on the background of a civil war that started much before it all.

[gsmoove23]

Originally posted by Azazel
And your story that Israel has supposedly has attacked in 67' is ****ing tiresome. There is an Israeli govt. memorandum of the early 60s that calls for peace in exchange to the territorries captured in 67', still in the days of Eschol, and that proposition was rejected as state in the Khartum declaration.

Could you please expand on this, offer references. Government memorandum? That doesn't sound like it carried much weight. Did it also include the annexed parts of Jerusalem?

[Az]

gsmoove: it was a proposition of the Israeli government. One could go to archives and dig it up. ( and no it probably doesn't include east jerusalem )

And che, that map thing: The cute map in electronicintifada is just that: a map on a pro-arab website. I haven't seen any maps of this, though the left and the right in Israel used to talk alot about what Barak promised. So, I wouldn't jump to conclusion.

[gsmoove23]

A proposition that wasn't followed through. Plus, I'm sure there were a few more qualifications?

We could argue forever about the 'generous' offer made by Barak. The fact is that Israeli and Palestinian ideas of a generous or just peace differ substantially.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
It's irrelevent. The PLO had nothing to do with the Six-Day War. Israel was after much bigger fish. The Sinai, Golan, and West Bank were long-standing goals of Israeli military policy. ***-for-tat attacks from the PLO (and Israel was just as guilty of launching raids across the border, raids which often killed many more non-combatants than the Palestinians ever did).

Che, if Israel was the aggressor in the 67 war, why was it that the U. A. R. asked that the U.N. peacekeepers be removed?

[Ned]

As to Arafat's role in the '67 war, here is a bit from is bio. Certainly he was behind the terrorism coming from Gaza and Lebanon (I believe) in '67. But then he was only head of Fatah, not the PLO. When he took over the PLO in '68, the PLO promptly turned to terrorism. I wonder why?

"After the war[ '48], Arafat studied civil engineering at the University of Cairo. He headed the Palestinian Students League and, by the time he graduated, was committed to forming a group that would free Palestine from Israeli occupation. In 1956 he founded Al Fatah, an underground terrorist organization. At first Al Fatah was ignored by larger Arab nations such as Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, which had formed their own group — the Palestine Liberation Organization. It wasn’t until the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, when the Arabs lost the Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and West Bank, that Arab nations turned to Arafat. In 1968 he became the leader of the PLO."

[Ned]

Originally posted by Viking Berserk


SO???

The Israelian goverment is resposible for the murder of kids!

We're talking 1967. Israel had yet to conquer the West Bank and Gaza.

The question is whether a Palestinian state could have been created in the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. At that time, there was no question of Israeli occupation. Israel was not murdering kids. They were trying to peacefully coexist with the Arabs.

The problem clearly was that the Arabs in 1967 were not trying to live peacefully with Israel -- despite the revisionist history spewed forth by Che. Instead of trying to live peacefully with Israel, the Arabs publicly announced their intention of destroying Israel, dismissed the UN peacekeepers separating them from Israel, blockaded Israeli shipping and moved large armies towards Israel's borders.

Clearly, this was all provoked by Israel. Jewish presence in the Middle East in the form of an independent state is sufficient cause for war, is it not?

[Sirotnikov]

Che - it's intersting to note, that I've not seen even one arab site support several of your versions of history.

Even arab sites acknowledge that the 1948 war involved Israel against the Arab neighbours, and not a "free for all" brawl. Neither have I seen a battle between Egypt and Jordan anywhere.

I've read on an american site about your notion about Israel's intentions to attack Syria as the pre-text for the Egyptians to threaten Israel. The site said that it was actually a soviet mis-information given to Egypt. I don't recall exactly what site was it, but it was something of high status, like the CIA factbook or something.

[Sirotnikov]

The Six Day War was an aggressive war on Israel's part. Syrian shelling (it's not as if Israel didn't provoke Syria either) and Egyptian closure of the Straits of Tiran were excuses, not reasons. Israel's goal was not self-preservation but expansion, Eretz Yisrael,Greater Israel.

That is f**cking hilarious.

You must have no idea of who was Levi Eshkol and what were his political goals and views.

[CyberGnu]

Siro, you are progressing! I don't recall exactly what site was it, but it was something of high status, like the CIA factbook or something.

By this rate could we expect you to actually quote a real source within the next 50 years?

Ned, and others who aren't violently opposed to real sources, check out "E. Hammel, Six Days in June (1992)" for an account of the Six Day War, and the events leading up to it.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Che, if Israel was the aggressor in the 67 war, why was it that the U. A. R. asked that the U.N. peacekeepers be removed?

Israel never allowed peacekeepers on its side of the border, and Egypt was tired of being the only ones with peacekeepers. Also, they hoped that it would worry Israel (which was threating to attack Syria, with whom Egypt had a defense treaty). Egypt did move a few divisions up to the border, but no one seriously considered Egypt a threat (as they had just spent the previous four years loosing to Yemeni tribesman). That the Egyptians weren't seriously considering war can be seen in the ease in which they were overrun (compared to Syria, who was expecting to be attacked).

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Israel never allowed peacekeepers on its side of the border, and Egypt was tired of being the only ones with peacekeepers. Also, they hoped that it would worry Israel (which was threating to attack Syria, with whom Egypt had a defense treaty). Egypt did move a few divisions up to the border, but no one seriously considered Egypt a threat (as they had just spent the previous four years loosing to Yemeni tribesman). That the Egyptians weren't seriously considering war can be seen in the ease in which they were overrun (compared to Syria, who was expecting to be attacked).

CyberGnu and Che, I remember the Six Day War and the events leading up to it. The history below accurately describes the situation just prior to war as I remember it.

XI. THE SIX-DAY WAR

INTRODUCTION


On 15 May 1967, Israel celebrated its 19th Day of Independence. The celebrations were attuned to a minor key. The economy had not yet recovered from a recession that had afflicted it the year before. Tension on the border with Syria had risen incessantly, sabotage was being committed in Israel's territory by terrorists from across the lines, settlements were being shelled by Syrian guns entrenched on the Golan Heights. The Soviet press waged a propaganda campaign against Israel, accusing it of aggressive designs against Syria.

During the Independence Day parade in Jerusalem, Israel's Government heard from the Chief of Staff the first news of large Egyptian troop movements, begun the previous day, in the direction of the Suez Canal and the Sinai peninsula (Document 1). There was, at first, an inclination to believe that the movements were no more than a propagandistic show. Egypt's fortunes at that time were at a low ebb. It was still entangled in the Yemen war, with little success, and consequently suffered from loss of prestige. Its relations with some of its Arab sister-States had deteriorated, those with Saudi Arabia were near the breaking point, those with Tunisia and Morocco strained, Jordan was considered an enemy (in a speech on 1 May Nasser had called King Hussein an 'agent and slave of the imperialists'). Syria indicted Egypt as not living up to its obligations as an ally. The Israelis did not yet know that the Soviet Union was urging Egypt to take an active stand alongside Syria against what was described as an impending Israeli aggression against Syria. On 13 May a Soviet parliamentary delegation visited Cairo and informed the Egyptian leaders that Israel had concentrated eleven to thirteen brigades along the Syrian border in preparation for an assault within a few days, with the intention of overthrowing the revolutionary Syrian Government. Similar information may have been given to Egypt by the Soviets somewhat earlier. There was, of course, not a grain of truth in the story, as the Soviets knew very well. The Egyptians were in a position to know it, too, in view of the authoritative denial issued by Secretary-General U Thant a few days afterwards. Later, U Thant reported that UNTSO observers "have verified the absence of troop concentrations and absence of noteworthy military movements on both sides of the [Syrian] line". But Nasser probably understood the Soviet information as a hint that the Soviet Union was persuaded that timing and circumstances were propitious for an assault on Israel, and obviously felt obliged to abandon the cautious policy that he had till then pursued and assume the leadership of the Arab campaign.

If Israel's leaders still told themselves on 15 May that there was no imminent danger of war, they were soon to be undeceived. On 16 May Radio Cairo declared: "The existence of Israel has continued too long. We welcome the Israeli aggression we welcome the battle we have long awaited. The peak hour has come. The battle has come in which we shall destroy Israel." On that day, Egypt asked for the withdrawal of the UN Emergency Force from Sinai and the Gaza Strip. U Thant acquiesced on the night of 18-19 May in what many considered unwarranted haste. Israel asserted that his precipitate compliance ran contrary to an express undertaking by his predecessor in 1957 (see Section IX, Document 35). UNEF ceased its functions on 19 May (Document 2). On the same day, Israel decided on partial mobilization, but was still hopeful that a dangerous escalation could be averted by stepped-up diplomatic efforts. It was indicative of this state of mind that, also the same day, President Zalman Shazar flew to Canada for a long-planned State visit, and that on 21 May Finland's Premier, Kustun Passio, was welcomed on a State visit to Israel. At the opening of the summer session of the Knesset on 22 May Prime Minister Eshkol emphasized Syrian aggression and incitement and called for a lessening of tension and the preservation of peace (Document 3).

In the meantime, unprecedented military escalation had taken place on the Egyptian border. By 20 May Nasser had massed over 80,000 men and about 900 tanks in Sinai, facing Israel. In the early morning hours of 23 May while U Thant was on his way to Cairo as a peace-maker, the world learned that Nasser had proclaimed the closure of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli and Israel-bound shipping some hours before. He was fully aware that Israel regarded the closure as an act of aggression justifying Israel's invocation of the right of self-defence. It was his declared aim to force Israel into action that would trigger off full-scale war. Speaking to Egyptian trade unionists on 26 May, he declared: "The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel" (Document 7). With the UNEF departed, Egypt planned to resume fidayun operations from the Gaza Strip against and into Israel. After more than ten years of repose, Israel's villages in the vicinity of the Egyptian border had, once more, to suffer shelling and mines. War frenzy swept Egypt and almost the entire Arab world. Nasser was at the zenith of his popularity, the hero of battle who would lead the Arabs to victory. On 29 May he delivered a speech proclaiming that he would erase the Arab defeat of 1948 (Document 8). On 30 May, King Hussein of Jordan visited Cairo unexpectedly, committed himself to take part in the war that loomed and placed his forces Under an Egyptian commander, General Riad. Iraq followed suit. During a visit to Moscow, Egypt's War Minister was assured of Soviet support by Prime Minister Kosygin.

On 24 May, the Security Council met, at the insistence of Canada and Denmark, to discuss the situation in the Middle East. The representatives of the Soviet Union and Bulgaria maintained that there was no reason for a discussion. After fruitless talks, the Council adjourned on 3 June; it had reached no decision (Document 10).

Foreign Minister Eban left Jerusalem on 24 May for Paris, London and Washington, to alert the Western leaders to the critical situation and seek of them action in accordance with their declarations ten years earlier, when Israel withdrew its forces from Sharm el-Sheikh and the Gaza Strip. In Paris, Eban found a completely changed situation. President de Gaulle suggested that the Big Four should work together for a de-escalation of the tension and decide on a solution to the questions of navigation through the Straits, the problem of the Arab refugees and the "conditions of proximity of the interested States". He urged that Israel should not be the first to open fire. Eban's protestations that Egypt had already started aggression were in vain. A statement in similar terms to the utterances of de Gaulle was issued on 2 June by the Council of Ministers of France (Document 11), and, on the following day, by the French representative in the Security Council (Document 10). It became apparent that France, which only three years earlier had hailed Israel as "friend and ally", had switched sides. On 3 June, it imposed an arms embargo on the Middle East, but in reality only Israel was affected.

President Lyndon Johnson and Prime Minister Harold Wilson assured the Israeli Foreign Minister of their support for free passage through the Straits of Tiran and the Gulf of Aqaba, but added that they needed some time to enlist the participation of other States and to assure the necessary approval by Congress and Parliament. The Foreign Minister returned to Jerusalem on the evening of 27 May. After a long and anxious session, the Government decided to give further chances to diplomatic efforts to prevent war. But, within a few more days, it was considered that there were no chances of resolving the crisis by international action. While a sympathetic but passive world watched Israel in its most perilous hour, Israel finished mobilization and prepared for the worst eventuality. On I June, the two major opposition parties, Gahal and Rafi, joined the Government coalition in a Government of National Unity. Lieutenant-General Moshe. Dayan (Rafi), Chief of Staff during the Sinai campaign, replaced Levi Eshkol as Minister of Defence, and Gahal leaders Menachem Begin and Yosef Sapir became Ministers without portfolio. On 4 June, the Cabinet authorized the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence to decide on appropriate steps to defend the State (Document 12).