Another Round Begins in The Middle East

[Sirotnikov]

As I recall:
1948 War -- Arabs are the aggressors.
~56 Suez Crisis - Egyptians grab the Suez Canal; Brits, French and Israelis counter attack.
Six-day War -- Israelis launch a pre-emptive war, when Egypt, Syria and Jordan vow to destroy Israel.
Yon Kippur War -- Arab sneak attack.
There's been Israeli incursions into Lebanon.
Gaza Conflict -- Israelis counterstrike after Hamas launches missiles into Israeli cities.

Chegitz is well known for living in a world with alternate history

Just to complete this list:
in 1978 after countless terrorist attacks by Fatah, Israel enters Lebanon, kicks their ass
in 1982, after countless terrorist attacks by Fatah, and after a cease fire is broken when a Fatah related group assassinates an Israeli ambassador in London, Israel invades Lebanon and makes Fatah leave in shame.

in 2006 after the Israeli border is crossed by Hezbullah and 2 soldiers are kidnapped, Israel responds by attacking Hezbullah for 30 days, severely hurting it, but not achieving visible results.

[TCO]

do you guys still have your little buffer zone of Christians at the Lebanon border? Is it working?

[Dr Strangelove]

It should probably be mentioned that whereas the Israelis had some input into the carving up of Palestine by the UN mandate, the Palestinians did not. Sixty percent of the territory was given to the Israelis, who comprised only 30% of the population. The fact that the settlement was drawn up in favor of a people generally regarded as European by people who were Europeans long habituated as seeing Arabs as "wogs" was certainly not lost on the Palestinians or the rest of the Arab world.

The announcement of the mandate was made at the end of November 1947 and answered by a general strrike by Palestinian workers. There were incidents of small scale violence, but by December the Irgun and the Lehi began throwing bombs, In the following months before independence the Israelis ejected 400.000 Palestinians from the territory assigned to Israel - that was virtually the entire Palestinian population in those territories. Arab League members pledged to help the Palestinians, but did not want to take on the British Army. On May 15, 1948 the last of the British forces moved out and the Arab League acted to honor their promises.

[Sirotnikov]

Wrong. In early April the UN voted on the partition plan, which the Zionist accepted and the Arabs rejected. For the next month there was some internal fighting between Palestinians, who were disorganized, and Zionist forces, which were well organized.

Luckaly for the Palestinians there were Iraqi and Syrian commando forces on mandate soil who fought the Jewish forces, and were busy training the palestina arabs.

It is durting this time that most palestinians living in those lands that were to become Israel. Then in May Israel declared independence without declaring borders, meaning that they were not accepting the borders of the partition plan. It is at this point that neighboring Arab states sent in their forces, though for the most part these forces did not venture beyond those lands that had been assigned as Arab in the partition plan.

An interesting view on history, supported mainly by bias.

Since the arabs did not agree on the partition plan there was little sense for Israel to stick to it. Israel purposefuly did not declare its borders because the actual borders mattered less than the state itself, and the leadership did not want to be tied to defending borders they didn't know they could defend.
Contrary to historic judgements made today, the Jewish leadership was not sure of its strength and over-estimated arab abilities.

The Suez Canal was in Egypt. What Nasser did was nationalize it. France and Britain then colluded with Israel to invade Egypt. This is why for example the US demanded that the UK, France, and Israel stop their action.

True, but the attack on Egypt was not unprovoked.

Egypt was the original aggressive party against Israel
(from wiki

From the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 (On 1 September 1951, the Security Council called upon Egypt: ". . . to terminate the restrictions on the passage of international commercial ships and goods through the Suez Canal wherever bound and to cease all interference with such shipping"), cargoes to and from Israel were intercepted and removed or destroyed by the Egyptians whilst attempting to pass through the canal. This interference, quite contrary to the laws of the canal (Article 1 of the 1888 Suez Canal Convention), increased further from 1953;

Preceding to the 1956 war, Egypt has closed the Straits of Tiran the only access point to the Eilat port, effectively cutting Israel's foreign trade via sea - a major casus belli.

Beyond that, Egypt has ran a large-scale intel operation in Gaza which relied on arming and training Palestinian fedayun groups who performed cross border attacks from Gaza.

This is probably the most complex of all. The general gist is that bad intellegence on all sides led the Egyptians to take several highly provocartive actions, and then the Israelis undertook a pre-emptive attack.

It is not mistaken intelligence but rather a soviet intelligence mis-information campaign, that was meant to increase war weariness in Syria and Egypt, probably with the goal of increasing reliance on the USSR.

Egypt again performed clear acts of aggression:
1) closing the straits of Tiran, disabling Israeli sea trade
2) kicking out the UN peacekeepers out of Sinai

[TCO]

Doc Strange:

See I can actually understand that. But what do you want the Jews to do? Move to New York? I mean that just makes it all the clearer that the Pals want the whole thing back. So, the Euros who like the Pals, if you really do, join the PLO. I mean it has to go one way or the other. but the whole thing of Isr giving land to people that just want it all makes no sense.

[Naked Gents Rut]

It should probably be mentioned that whereas the Israelis had some input into the carving up of Palestine by the UN mandate, the Palestinians did not.

This isn't true. The Arabs had as much of an opportunity to lobby the member states of the UN as the Jews did. The fact that they failed to do so effectively reflects the incompetence and stupidity the Arabs have so often demonstrated in their attempts to combat the Jewish state.

Sixty percent of the territory was given to the Israelis, who comprised only 30% of the population.

This also isn't true. The UN partition proposal of November 1947 gave the Jews 55 percent of Palestine, the Arabs 42 percent. You might be thinking of the UNSCOP majority partition proposal of September 1947, which is different than the partition that was actually passed by the UN General Assembly.

The fact that the settlement was drawn up in favor of a people generally regarded as European by people who were Europeans long habituated as seeing Arabs as "wogs" was certainly not lost on the Palestinians or the rest of the Arab world.

The partition proposal wasn't drawn up by Europeans. The 11 UNSCOP representatives included members from India, Iran, Peru, Guatemala and Uruguay. The UN General Assembly, quite obviously, included a number of non-European member states (including many Arab and Muslim states). Your contention simply isn't true.

[Sirotnikov]

It should probably be mentioned that whereas the Israelis had some input into the carving up of Palestine by the UN mandate, the Palestinians did not.

by their own choise.

The high arab comission of the mandate boycotted the countless UN, american and british comissions that were reviewing the situation, and refused to discuss any plans.

What ever their motivation was, it is their own damn fault they were not party to the treaty.

It should be mentioned that the Brits have unilateraly carved up Palestine, and gave 75% to a Saudi-born Hashemite king, calling it Trans-Jordan. This had absolutely no precedent in international law, and against the mandate as dictated by the League of Nations.

The announcement of the mandate was made at the end of November 1947 and answered by a general strrike by Palestinian workers. There were incidents of small scale violence, but by December the Irgun and the Lehi began throwing bombs,

Very incorrect.
There were incidents of major violence, including various arab fighters from Iraq and Syria who were already present on palestine soil, who attacked Jewish towns and settlements.

In the following months before independence the Israelis ejected 400.000 Palestinians from the territory assigned to Israel - that was virtually the entire Palestinian population in those territories.

Again false.

In the months before the independence it was made clear by the arab neighbours that there will be a war, and the local residents were busy leaving, expecting to return after swift arab victory over the Jewish settlement.

The arabs who left during 1947 (As most did) did so on their own initiative.

The amount who left was around 3/4s of the arab population in these territories. A 1950 census showed some 100-150K arabs who remained in Israel. Many arab families used the period of 1949-1951 to quietly return to Israel.

If anything this crisis was of their own making.

Arab League members pledged to help the Palestinians, but did not want to take on the British Army. On May 15, 1948 the last of the British forces moved out and the Arab League acted to honor their promises.

You make their promises sound so honorable.
I suggest you read the exact text of their threats.

[Naked Gents Rut]

The arabs who left during 1947 (As most did) did so on their own initiative.

That's not true. The residents of a great number of Arab villages were either forced out by the Haganah or fled in fear of eviction or massacre like that suffered by the Arab residents of Deir Yassin at the hands of the Irgun. Some Arabs did leave on the own initiative, but they were decidedly in the minority.

[TCO]

The arabs who left during 1947 (As most did) did so on their own initiative.

That's not true. The residents of a great number of Arab villages were either forced out by the Haganah or fled in fear of eviction or massacre like that suffered by the Arab residents of Deir Yassin at the hands of the Irgun. Some Arabs did leave on the own initiative, but they were decidedly in the minority.

Good for you, Drake!

We should not defeat Palestinian myths by replacing them with Iseaili ones. But by the truth.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/5249

[Naked Gents Rut]

We should not defeat Palestinian myths by replacing them with Iseaili ones. But by the truth.

I'm nothing if not a defender of the truth.

[Nikolai]

I'm surprised how biased our news services are here in Norway. I knew those left wingers mostly in charge there have cheered for Palestine and anything non-white/non-Western since the time of Mao, so I'm not surprised that there is some bias. Unfortunately there has been massive brain wash of us from those journalists for years now, but this time they really have gone far. All of them are happily quoting a doctor who's down there, who should have next to no credibility by now. He's one of the leaders of the Palestine Comitee over here, and use all the chances he get to kick Israel, the US and anyone supporting them. After 9/11 he said he supported the bombings and would have done so himself if it was him who had been massacred and oppressed, those were his words, by the US and the West. And that guy is all over the news day after day, spitting his propaganda... I hate the news and pictures coming from Gaza, but honestly, how can the West not see that Israel had to do something?

[Dr Strangelove]

by their own choise.

The high arab comission of the mandate boycotted the countless UN, american and british comissions that were reviewing the situation, and refused to discuss any plans.

What ever their motivation was, it is their own damn fault they were not party to the treaty.

Was the Arab High Commission Palestinian?

It should be mentioned that the Brits have unilateraly carved up Palestine, and gave 75% to a Saudi-born Hashemite king, calling it Trans-Jordan. This had absolutely no precedent in international law, and against the mandate as dictated by the League of Nations.

That took place over a quarter century before.

Very incorrect.
There were incidents of major violence, including various arab fighters from Iraq and Syria who were already present on palestine soil, who attacked Jewish towns and settlements.

After November 30?

Again false.

In the months before the independence it was made clear by the arab neighbours that there will be a war, and the local residents were busy leaving, expecting to return after swift arab victory over the Jewish settlement.

The arabs who left during 1947 (As most did) did so on their own initiative.

Yes, they jumped into Israeli owned trucks, they even seperated themselves into the men and the rest of the population. You'd think they would have at least shown a little gratitude towardss the Israelis who supplied the trucks.

The amount who left was around 3/4s of the arab population in these territories. A 1950 census showed some 100-150K arabs who remained in Israel. Many arab families used the period of 1949-1951 to quietly return to Israel.

The Palestinian population of those areas before 1947 was around 450,000.

If anything this crisis was of their own making.


You make their promises sound so honorable.
I suggest you read the exact text of their threats.

Well, there was very little honor to go around, was there?

[Sirotnikov]

The arabs who left during 1947 (As most did) did so on their own initiative.

That's not true. The residents of a great number of Arab villages were either forced out by the Haganah or fled in fear of eviction or massacre like that suffered by the Arab residents of Deir Yassin at the hands of the Irgun. Some Arabs did leave on the own initiative, but they were decidedly in the minority.

You're welcome to continue arguing about Dier Yassin (April 1948) having anything to do about why Arab population left in 1947, which was my original argument.

The discussion was specifically about the immigration that started ,uch before the Israeli independence war. I brought the example knowing what I am talking about.

[Naked Gents Rut]

The Arab immigration before the civil war was minuscule in comparison to that which took place after the war started. What's the point of limiting yourself to explaining an irrelevant prelude while ignoring the more consequential main event that followed?

[Sirotnikov]

Was the Arab High Commission Palestinian?

it was of local population, and local important families and elites. i don't know what nationality they defined themselves.

That took place over a quarter century before.

that happenned in 1923.
Things that happened 80 years ago are as relevant to todays discussion, as are things that happened 60 years ago. There's very little difference, and the creation of Transjordan (that was never questioned by any factor btw, even though it was totally unrelated to local population or politics), had a huge influence on the possible solutions of the land in "Israel".

After November 30?

Had I more time I would actually spend an evening seeking out quotes to post.
As far as I am aware, there has been a constant presence of Iraqi commando that trained local and even participated in attacks.
After the declaration of the partition plan violent attacks increased, and wiki states that up to 200 people were killed per month.
Another Israeli historian I bumped into says that around 1200 jewish civilians were killed in armed attacks between the partition plan announcement and the declaration of independence in 1948.

Yes, they jumped into Israeli owned trucks, they even seperated themselves into the men and the rest of the population. You'd think they would have at least shown a little gratitude towardss the Israelis who supplied the trucks.

You're welcome to show concrete examples or even accusations of Israeli deportation attempts in the period of Jan 1947-Dec 1947.

I'll quote TCO's excellent link:

Most serious students of the history of Palestine would accept that the number of Arab refugees from Israel during and after 1948 claimed by Arab and UN sources—some 600,000 to 750,000—was exaggerated. It is very easy to refute that estimate and many have already done it. Very few historians would accept the claim that all of the refugees, or even most of them, were deliberately expelled by the Israelis any more than they would accept the Israeli counterclaim that all left of their own accord.

[...]

As historians of the 1948 war know well, the Haganah prepared in March 1948 a strategic plan (the Dalet or "fourth" plan) to deal with the imminent invasion of Palestine by the Arab countries. A major aim of the plan was to form a continuous territory joining the lands held by the Jewish settlements. The plan clearly states that if Arab villages violently opposed the Jewish attempt to gain control, their populations would be expelled.

The Palestinian population of those areas before 1947 was around 450,000.

Which sits very well with my claim.
I actually was taught about higher population numbers - some 500-600K in 1948 borders.
If after the war 150K remained (and 20K more allowed to return) then it goes well with my 3/4 - 1/4 number stands.
If I go by your numbers - I have a 1/3 - 2/3 division.

That's a lot of refugees, but hardly [b]virtually the entire Palestinian population in those territories.[/q] as you put it.

Well, there was very little honor to go around, was there?

Can't find the quote right now, but there was one juicy one promising to massacre all jews or something of that sort. I can tell you that Israeli leaders have never expressed or hinted at similar attitude.

So there's a wee bit difference there.