This is too much to bear anymore!!!

[StrawDog]

Geoffp

Er, hardly

Nope. The population ratio between indigenous Jews and Palestinians in the late 19th Century was about 15 to 1. They were living together without conflict or persecution as well as in Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres. Persecution of the Jews was an European Christian phenomena.

With roots shaped from these persecutions, Theodore Herzl`s Zionist movement formalized at the end of the 19th Century is what first created the Jewish-Arab conflict. And from there it all went pear shaped.

And your response does raise the question: if US policy of dominance in the ME is so heinous, what is one to make of Arabization?

Sadly, the same heinousness applies. Human nature is the damnedest thing.

 

[GeoffP]

Nope. The population ratio between indigenous Jews and Palestinians in the late 19th Century was about 15 to 1.

Good lord - you're not actually basing indices of happiness or tolerance on population ratios, are you? Further: where is this cited? In what area?

They were living together without conflict or persecution as well as in Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres.

I regret to say that this is simply not so.

By medieval standards, conditions for Jews under Islam was generally more formalized and better than those of Jews in Christian lands, in part due to the sharing of minority status with Christians in these lands. We can find evidence for this claim in that the status of Jews in lands with no Christian minority was usually worse than their status in lands with one. For example, there were numerous incidents of massacres and ethnic cleansing of Jews in North Africa,[6] especially in Morocco, Libya and Algeria where eventually Jews were forced to live in ghettos.[7] Decrees ordering the destruction of synagogues were enacted in the Middle Ages in Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.[8] At certain times in Yemen, Morocco and Baghdad, Jews were forced to convert to Islam or face death.[9]

7. Maurice Roumani, The Case of the Jews from Arab Countries: A Neglected Issue, 1977, pp. 26-27.
8. The Treatment of Jews in Arab/Islamic Countries
9. Bat Ye'or, The Dhimmi, 1985, p.61

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabs_and_antisemitism

Persecution of the Jews was an European Christian phenomena.

No, not at all excusively. I suggest you investigate the usage of the term dhimmi - but not excusively from islamic sources, if you please. The usual pleasant picture of the life of religious minorities is not quite correct, I'm afraid.

Sadly, the same heinousness applies. Human nature is the damnedest thing.

If so, then Buff's argument about Arabization also stands. Imperialism is imperialism. Shall we not damn all imperialism, then?

 

[StrawDog]

Good lord - you're not actually basing indices of happiness or tolerance on population ratios, are you? Further: where is this cited? In what area?

No. I am indicating that the majority of the population in Palestine was Arab, and that the small percentage of Jews who were indigenous were generally living in peace with the Arabs. They were all Semites.

StrawDog
They were living together without conflict or persecution as well as in Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres.

I regret to say that this is simply not so.

See below.

No people on earth have been less "anti-Semitic" than the Arabs. The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West. Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession. With very minor exceptions, Jews have lived for many centuries in the Middle East, in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours.

Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres have always contained large and prosperous Jewish colonies. Until the Zionist invasion of Palestine began, these Jews received the most generous treatment—far, far better than in Christian Europe.

(from=His Majesty King Abdullah, The American Magazine, November, 1947- kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html)

No, not at all excusively. I suggest you investigate the usage of the term dhimmi - but not excusively from islamic sources, if you please. The usual pleasant picture of the life of religious minorities is not quite correct, I'm afraid.

Dhimmi is a broad term for non Muslims living in Muslim states under Muslim law. (Sharia) It carries many subjective nuances and is tricky to define exactly. Historically, all in all there was way less persecution of Jews under Islam.

If so, then Buff's argument about Arabization also stands. Imperialism is imperialism. Shall we not damn all imperialism, then?

Most assuredly yes.

 

[Michael]

There no such thing as freestyle jazz either, that just a title we made up for a social situation and a particular set of sound patterns, same case for race. Now if you can't accept abstract concepts like race exist, be it mentally, then you got some serious problems: you can start denying the existence any category: colors, feelings, etc.

OK then, I think "race" is an antiquated term that really holds no meaning in a multicultural modern world.

Is the following sentence acceptable to you: Arab Jews used to live in, what is today, the modern state of KSA.


Is it logical to say: Arab Jew?


What of an atheist Jew? Is that logical?


Are Japanese a race? Are Chinese are race? Are Asians a race? Suppose there was an earth quake and there were two dead bodies, one was a Japanese and the other a Chinese - would you be able to tell which is which, definitively? Scientifically?


Suppose there was a Muslim "Arab" and a "Jew". They were brothers. Are they the same race?


MII

 

[Michael]

I think the very notion of "race" is fundamentally flawed. In the 1950s French, Spanish, Italians, Germans, Polish, English and Russians all belongs to separate races. Europeans do not think like this anymore. And I think not thinking like this helps their integration.

But, meh, IMO many people indigenous to the ME are living at the societal level of around 800-1200 CE. They seem to be stuck there. The more religious the lower their social development.

 

[Michael]

So what would Dubi look like with a Wahabi as top dog?

I'd also note, Dubai is filthy rich and their rulers set out to modernize the country, which is synonymous with the words: "westernize" the country.

There is nothing wrong with living with so-called Arab rulers. There are people with family from Arabia who live in the USA and, Oh my Oh my, hold public office and effectively "rule" (at the pleasure of the Citizenry) over their fellow American Citizens. It may even be that some people here are unknownly living under the "rule" of people whose parents were from KSA or Yemen or even Dubai.

So the point is culture. Many here would want not like to live in a State with ME culture mainly because they are autocratic and theocratic. We normally do not like to live under hereditary rulers not do we want religion to play a large rule in government or the penal code. It simply goes against our sensibility. (which is why I am dismayed they Bush JR was elected but, with introspection, very happy Clinton was not).

MII

 

[spidergoat]

Wahabi isn't synonymous with Arab. Dubai under a Wahabism would resemble Saudi Arabia.

 

[Michael]

Nope. The population ratio between indigenous Jews and Palestinians in the late 19th Century was about 15 to 1. They were living together without conflict or persecution ...

One could say the same of Native Americans as well as Native Australians etc.... I also think the argument could be made that it's still not all that fair and MAYBE, just MAYBE, if those peoples had the opportunity to own and rule over themselves WE may be in a similar position. IMM it wasn't fair they lost their land, it wasn't right the Jews lost theirs and it isn't right the Palestinians lost theirs. For indigenous people the hand of friendship and citizenry and equality has at least tried to be extended. The acceptance of wrongs committed long ago. The idea we are the same - equal.

I can not see how this can happen in the ME. Muslims and Jews almost think they are separated by blood. As if there is some sort of DNA they walls one off from the other. As if a Muslim can not become a Jew? The religion of one is in conflict with the other. The one says we are the chosen people and the other says no, WE, are the chosen people.

Anyway....


Here's a first step solution. Muslims return the Temple Mount to Jews and allow them to recreate their Temple there. That's a big ask, but not really. It was the Jews holiest site, really, if Palestinian Muslims wanted to make that gesture I think it would go a LONG way. But they are never going to do that. So it goes back to what I said: Religion and Race. IMM insurmountable.

 

[Michael]

Wahabi isn't synonymous with Arab. Dubai under a Wahabism would resemble Saudi Arabia.

I agree. Arab, what does the word mean? Americans, are they a culture? A race? I once heard an Aussie girl tell me, I half Aussie and half American. My dad's American. I said, I'm American and to me, you're Aussie.

Dubai is getting to the point, where I think it's safe to say, it a culture. Almost equal to the word cultural word: Arab. And cultures evolve every day, lets not forget that.

 

[fedr808]

Sure, you don't have too. You are so biased, you can't answer hypothetical questions because it "desecrates" divine nature of your chosen object of worship. As a true believer you cannot tolerate ambiguity.



Nationalism is EUROPEAN trend born in Germany at the end of 18th century. There was no unified Germany back then. There were dozens of German principalities with quite different customs, language, governance. Nationalism became ideological base for their unification. Jews, being European in their culture, embraced nationalism way before Arabs. It was easy though, Jewish identity is built around modified tribalism. You show severe lack of knowledge pointing at "1700 year old" Arab nationalism.


[quote[ And now we come to the crux of the situation, jealousy, pure unadulterated bigoted jealousy, the typical KKK red neck, I have heard it all before from the Aryan Nation to the KKK, to the Nazis, to the Muslims----it's the Jews, always the Jews who are at fault.

You are a weasel, natural born weasel. What does your beaten zillion times over standard verbal diarrhea prove/explain? What the hell, what it's about? I don't discuss responsibility of Jews for all world's problems. However, they are 100% responsible for Palestinian ghettos. Having control over most of world's economy, Jewish magnates and their bitch USA could squeeze a few hundreds of billions to resettle willing Palestinians and grab, finally, that fucking strip of land.




It seems you are enamored with Jews and Israel up to the point of losing most of the marbles of critical thinking, which points at these possibilities

You are:

1) Orthodox Jews
2) Zionist Jew
3) Christian Fundamentalist
4) Bleeding heart Liberal (you using quite liberal rhetoric on this matter) with a solid pinch of a rightwing nut.
5) All of the above.

You are not a typical brainwashed American Joe though. You are fixated on the subject.



You have not read freaking Old Testament tonight, have you? Strange. Hitler did NOTHING that ancient Jews did not sanctify and glorify in their Holy Books. Why such an obvious fact is hard to admit? Before throwing stone in Hitler, a boulder should be thrown in those Holy books. Or genocide is only bad if Germans do it? Stupid Adolf should have ordered inspired creation of German sacred scribes before going to war. Can you be sure that Jehovah did not reveal itself to Adolf, can you?

Besides, Jews are not the only people Adolf decided to exterminate. Jews are not the one who suffered the greatest casualties. Yet, ask an average Joe about WWII and all he knows is holocaust. It took some serious brainwashing to reach that point.




You are so right, corruption is just Arabs problem. That's what human pecking pyramid about - those on top fleecing those at the bottom, USA, Russia, Israel or Palestine. Infrastructure you say? It's quite pointless. Palestinian state is stillborn, economically, politically, anyhow. There is no point for infrastructure, there is a point for fight.



There is no China and SE Asia attached to Palestine. No drugs too.



You can't be serious. You expect surrounding states to do everything possible to make life of the foreign state body, inserted in their midst, easier? That's not what is life about. They use Palestinians as a weapon, why not? However, there is Germany, there is generous beacon of freedom USA, which is built around import of cheap labor, 1 million of souls/year (legally) to be exact. If USA is in such love with Israel why not to admit Palestinians? Why expect Israel's enemies to do so?

Okay ill play ur game dixon. If so many Jews are wealthy and so many arabs are poor. Does that not reflect how pathetically useless your arab economies are?

The onloy reason we are having issues with the arabs is oil, and in 50 years there will be none left and we can put our energies into matters that dont include fighting uneducated, poor, pathetic, lazy, dumb, arab terorists.

Dixon, the only reason you and your arab croonies have issues with this invasion is not cause you find it in your deepest of what i assume is a heart to help palestinians, you just hate Israel so much. Your kind disgust me because when it comes between helping a friend, and throwing spitballs at an innocent person, youll throw spitballs. And that is why youre unfriendly kind (by "kind i mean terorists) lose everytime.

 

[fedr808]

Man, i still dont get why the arabs still bitch about one of the smallest countries in the world.
Probably something about the fact that every time Israel was surrounded by the arabs, it beat the living crap out of them and sent them running home. Hell the arab armies were so pathetic, they lost a war against Israel, one day after it's independance, Israel did not even have an army and the arabs were so pathetic they lost.

They even cowardly attacked on a religious holiday and in the end were still obliterated.

They feel that they have to get revenge for the world wide humiliation they constantly endure.

 

[pjdude1219]

Israel did not even have an army

well if by no army you meant having a larger, better equipped, and better trained army than yes you would be correct. Israel has always had the advantage in military strength.

 

[Buffalo Roam]

well if by no army you meant having a larger, better equipped, and better trained army than yes you would be correct. Israel has always had the advantage in military strength.

Have you ever really read the history of the 1948 war? or the rest of the wars?

Israel had squat for equipment, in 1948, no tanks, no planes, no artillery, just small arms and guts to start with.

In point of fact in the 1967 war Israel was still using tanks and armored personnel carriers from WWII.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/sherman.htm

The first Sherman tanks were bought during the 1948 War of Independence, from an Italian junkyard where they were awaiting their selling for scrap. The IDF eventually bought 35 of these, but only 14 were operational by the end of the war. Since these tanks had sabotaged guns, some were regunned with the Krup 75mm field gun.

In 1967, Sherman brigades were still the mainstay of the Israeli armored forces, though more modern MBT's were in service at the time. In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Sherman tanks fought, as always, in the front lines. Fighting against Syrian and Egyptian T-55 and T-62 MBT's with a WW2 vintage weapon, the Sherman crewmen made true the motto of the IDF's armor corps: "Man is the steel".

 

[ElectricFetus]

I think the very notion of "race" is fundamentally flawed. In the 1950s French, Spanish, Italians, Germans, Polish, English and Russians all belongs to separate races. Europeans do not think like this anymore. And I think not thinking like this helps their integration.

But, meh, IMO many people indigenous to the ME are living at the societal level of around 800-1200 CE. They seem to be stuck there. The more religious the lower their social development.

Well I think most of us here are egalitarian enough to agree, it convincing the world that race does not exist that problematic.

 

[GeoffP]

No. I am indicating that the majority of the population in Palestine was Arab, and that the small percentage of Jews who were indigenous were generally living in peace with the Arabs. They were all Semites.

Semites or not, other religions have always been subject to repressive religious laws in dar-al-islam. The enforcement of the dhimmi laws has been subject to some variation at the whim of the ruler, but these harsh and vicious laws remain, everpresent, to be instituted.

(from=His Majesty King Abdullah, The American Magazine, November, 1947- kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html)

Not exactly the most unbiased, source, you understand.

Dhimmi is a broad term for non Muslims living in Muslim states under Muslim law. (Sharia) It carries many subjective nuances and is tricky to define exactly. Historically, all in all there was way less persecution of Jews under Islam.

Yes, I'm very familiar with the term. "Way less" does not translate to "treated them as human beings". I recommend looking up the events of the annual Nebi Musa marches in Jerusalem for an impression of one of the ways in which religious minorities, including Jews, were regularly under the thumb of the dominant religious authority. There were others, of course; the upshot is that without that political-religious outlook, there would never have been such military pressure on the early immigrant Jews, and no need for Haganah, Irgun, Stern or any of the rest.

Most assuredly yes.

Excellent.

 

[GeoffP]

well if by no army you meant having a larger, better equipped, and better trained army than yes you would be correct. Israel has always had the advantage in military strength.

Not for artillery, aircraft, tanks or any other hardware in the 1948 war, and your argument about the manpower estimates is not proven.

 

[Buffalo Roam]

Semites or not, other religions have always been subject to repressive religious laws in dar-al-islam. The enforcement of the dhimmi laws has been subject to some variation at the whim of the ruler, but these harsh and vicious laws remain, everpresent, to be instituted.



Not exactly the most unbiased, source, you understand.



Yes, I'm very familiar with the term. "Way less" does not translate to "treated them as human beings". I recommend looking up the events of the annual Nebi Musa marches in Jerusalem for an impression of one of the ways in which religious minorities, including Jews, were regularly under the thumb of the dominant religious authority. There were others, of course; the upshot is that without that political-religious outlook, there would never have been such military pressure on the early immigrant Jews, and no need for Haganah, Irgun, Stern or any of the rest.



Excellent.

The Palestinians have been picking this fight for a long time haven't they.

 

[GeoffP]

I wish it weren't, but it kind of seems to be.

 

[Mr.Spock]

children of Gaza

 

[pjdude1219]

Not for artillery, aircraft, tanks or any other hardware in the 1948 war, and your argument about the manpower estimates is not proven.

I proved my contention just because you didn't like it doesn't mean I didn't do it.