Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Whether Palestine was a "territory", a State (ridiculous) or a "mandate" is absolutely irrelevant to my point. Yugoslavia was a State.It was not "the territory," it was Palestine.
Self-determination of peoples trumps territorial integrity. That's the international standard.The Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity.
How many countries are assailed by hundreds of millions of hateful subhumans claiming they have no such right?How many other countries bang on about their right to exist like they are trying to sell something?Nobody does Israel any service by proclaiming its “right to exist.” Is- rael’s right to exist, like that of the United States, Saudi Arabia and 152 other states, is axiomatic and unreserved. Israel’s legitimacy is not suspended in midair awaiting acknowledgement . . . There is certainly no other state, big or small, young or old, that would consider mere recognition of its “right to exist” a favor, or a negotiable concession.
—Abba Eban2
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/mf2017.pdf#page=9
Originally posted by Dogmaphobe
How many countries are assailed by hundreds of millions of hateful subhumans claiming they have no such right?
Link?Whether Palestine was a "territory", a State (ridiculous) or a "mandate" is absolutely irrelevant to my point. Yugoslavia was a State.It was not "the territory," it was Palestine.
Self-determination of peoples trumps territorial integrity. That's the international standard.The Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity.
Why blame to Brits? They have gone almost 80 years has been passed. It sound like that snake has gone 80 years ago, you are beating the line left on ground. Means you can not put owner of the land into camps and start calling owner yourself, it unfair and unacceptable.How much do you earn from here to spread false propaganda. Whole world knows Israel is created on the suffering of people of Holly Land with out any mandate or false mandate when UN has member from wwii coalition. Now tell me you are zombi or not.Yes it does. It began in 1947. Listen Zombie. I am Not an Islamist so I think for myself. Who was the President of Palestine in 1946? Answer that. I can name Israel’s presidents from 1947 and beyond. You zombies can never answer simple questions. And your English sucks.
You have a valid point.. The way France, England, Russia carved up the Mid East after the Ottoman Empire was a bad atrocious act.. Very arrogant. And not that smart... Sikes -- Picot had a cup of tea and a biscuit and drew 3 lines on a map and called it day... And the world is STILL PAYING for that arrogance and stupidity today...
But neither Muslims, Jews, Israelis and Palestinians had much of a say in that matter... And the ultra nationalism in Arab Mid East today is a large part of the pain and suffering of the Arab countries today... ALL BECAUSE the British FORCED nation-states with phony boundaries...
Blame THEM -- not Jews....
Would it be unfair to describe Zionism as a form of Jewish ultra-nationalism?
Way I look at it is Zionism had a different mission and structure PRIOR to 1948.. It was a global "alliance" of founders intent on creating a state as a safe harbor for Jews.. PREFERABLY in the Holy land.. It held world-wide "congresses" (i think) every year and LOBBIED heavily world-wide.
After 1948, it did became a form of nationalism.. And has a newer mission to sustain an actual nation with a heritage and a mission.. Stop short of the "ultra" part, because Israel has never had any real objection to being neighborly with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and EXTREMELY tolerant of other religions and practices..
But they live in a neighborhood that's a bit "rough" and unstable... Not their fault.. Always remember to blame the Brits... LOL...
So, foreigners with guns can prevent the people's right to declare independence.
Where is that legal?
Link?
Every word of that is wrong.
First, the Jewish people are not foreigners in their own homeland.
Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty. The guns only became necessary when hostile Arabs decided to prevent the Jewish people from exercising their inherent, inviolable right to self-determination, as confirmed and written in international law by the international community from 1920 onward. In fact, you are (again) inverting the truth. It is the Arabs who are STILL (!) attempting to use guns and violence to reverse and erase the actual, declared and recognized independence of Israel. With absolutely zero effect, except to entrench the Jewish peoples need for safety and security.
Third, no one is preventing the Arab Palestinians from declaring independence. In fact, they HAVE declared independence, in 1988. Their declaration is complete. And look! no one prevented it. In fact, Hamas can declare independence in Gaza today, tomorrow or next week. They meet the necessary criteria of: government, people, territory and treating with other states.
And to answer your question about legality: the accepted legal standard in the world where different, distinct ethnic/cultural groups within a territory are each vying for self-determination and sovereignty is to partition the territory. In other words, the accepted legal standard is that self-determination trumps territorial integrity. Witness former Ottoman Empire, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Sudan, etc, etc, etc. Its only the Arab Palestinians who insist on special treatment. Why is that, do you think?Yes they did. They moved in under the gun of the British military.Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty.
Nobody has the "right" to violate the rights of others. The Zionists moved in from Europe, under the gun, and violated the rights of the Palestinians. That is an act of aggression.
When you're under occupation by the BRITISH --- you follow their rules. There's a reason Britain was assigned that job to administer that part of the Ottoman Empire.. "The gun of the British military" seems to imply they had rightful title to the land and NOT the Palestinians or the Jews.. Their disposition of land took into account BOTH those interests when they left...Not so. The Mandates had a non annexation policy. The land was ceded to the respective new states."The gun of the British military" seems to imply they had rightful title to the land and NOT the Palestinians or the Jews..
Like israel is not a legitimate country. It was given mandate/status when there was only few WII Coalition country were UN member and Israelis accepted that UN order immediately.Throwing accusation is not the same as proving them.Read all yours posts base on lies. And it is your country under discussion not mien.While yours posts expressed, division, prolong palestine issue, scared of from your own existence. Are you people psycho? Why don't you follow the UN resolution and solved the issue? Or if scared of from the lion will come and eat you all if this the case then one day it will come and its called paranoid-ism.Actually I promote a wide regional cooperation, and open dialogue with honest and respectful leaders of the Muslim community.
What posts?
I'm not sure You understand the words You use, what makes You think that UN resolutions are obligatory, does You country follow them?
I didn't see You manage to prove anything I've said was incorrect.
Now explain one thing, You expect Israel to follow resolutions that neither Your country
nor the rest of the UN member states obliged to follow?
Syria used to pepper Israel with artillery from the Golan Heights and many lost their lives taking it. You still see the impacts of the war and the histories. Jews don’t war with one another. Moslems continue to fight due to their tribal nature.Why blame to Brits? They have gone almost 80 years has been passed. It sound like that snake has gone 80 years ago, you are beating the line left on ground. Means you can not put owner of the land into camps and start calling owner yourself, it unfair and unacceptable.How much do you earn from here to spread false propaganda. Whole world knows Israel is created on the suffering of people of Holly Land with out any mandate or false mandate when UN has member from wwii coalition. Now tell me you are zombi or not.
You have a valid point.. The way France, England, Russia carved up the Mid East after the Ottoman Empire was a bad atrocious act.. Very arrogant. And not that smart... Sikes -- Picot had a cup of tea and a biscuit and drew 3 lines on a map and called it day... And the world is STILL PAYING for that arrogance and stupidity today...
But neither Muslims, Jews, Israelis and Palestinians had much of a say in that matter... And the ultra nationalism in Arab Mid East today is a large part of the pain and suffering of the Arab countries today... ALL BECAUSE the British FORCED nation-states with phony boundaries...
Blame THEM -- not Jews....
Would it be unfair to describe Zionism as a form of Jewish ultra-nationalism?
Way I look at it is Zionism had a different mission and structure PRIOR to 1948.. It was a global "alliance" of founders intent on creating a state as a safe harbor for Jews.. PREFERABLY in the Holy land.. It held world-wide "congresses" (i think) every year and LOBBIED heavily world-wide.
After 1948, it did became a form of nationalism.. And has a newer mission to sustain an actual nation with a heritage and a mission.. Stop short of the "ultra" part, because Israel has never had any real objection to being neighborly with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and EXTREMELY tolerant of other religions and practices..
But they live in a neighborhood that's a bit "rough" and unstable... Not their fault.. Always remember to blame the Brits... LOL...
This is a thread about the History of the region.. And YOU know the Arabs got screwed by the imperialism that drew phony lines on the ground and decided WHO GETS TO RULE... Are you denying that now when you've already said the same thing in your posts??
The history of Israel and Palestine is one long CHAIN of imperial rule... Even when the Brit partition occurred, the section given exclusively to Arabs living there was eventually mandated by JORDAN -- not the Israelis.. Where's your blame on Jordan?
The 1967 war found Israel in the control of West Bank, the ENTIRE Sinai, the Golan Heights and the Lebanese border. Peace treaties RETURNED the West and Sinai to those countries.. And the king of Jordan eventually decided to withdraw any claims to the West Bank..
From the Romans to the British, never did the indigenous Arabs of the Holy land succeed in creating a nation state. I told you WHY that is so... There was a never a NATIONALIST MOVEMENT to do anything like that because Arab history and tradition is tribal, family rule NOT federations or nations...
Syria used to pepper Israel with artillery from the Golan Heights and many lost their lives taking it. You still see the impacts of the war and the histories. Jews don’t war with one another. Moslems continue to fight due to their tribal nature.Why blame to Brits? They have gone almost 80 years has been passed. It sound like that snake has gone 80 years ago, you are beating the line left on ground. Means you can not put owner of the land into camps and start calling owner yourself, it unfair and unacceptable.You have a valid point.. The way France, England, Russia carved up the Mid East after the Ottoman Empire was a bad atrocious act.. Very arrogant. And not that smart... Sikes -- Picot had a cup of tea and a biscuit and drew 3 lines on a map and called it day... And the world is STILL PAYING for that arrogance and stupidity today...
But neither Muslims, Jews, Israelis and Palestinians had much of a say in that matter... And the ultra nationalism in Arab Mid East today is a large part of the pain and suffering of the Arab countries today... ALL BECAUSE the British FORCED nation-states with phony boundaries...
Blame THEM -- not Jews....
Would it be unfair to describe Zionism as a form of Jewish ultra-nationalism?
Way I look at it is Zionism had a different mission and structure PRIOR to 1948.. It was a global "alliance" of founders intent on creating a state as a safe harbor for Jews.. PREFERABLY in the Holy land.. It held world-wide "congresses" (i think) every year and LOBBIED heavily world-wide.
After 1948, it did became a form of nationalism.. And has a newer mission to sustain an actual nation with a heritage and a mission.. Stop short of the "ultra" part, because Israel has never had any real objection to being neighborly with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and EXTREMELY tolerant of other religions and practices..
But they live in a neighborhood that's a bit "rough" and unstable... Not their fault.. Always remember to blame the Brits... LOL...
This is a thread about the History of the region.. And YOU know the Arabs got screwed by the imperialism that drew phony lines on the ground and decided WHO GETS TO RULE... Are you denying that now when you've already said the same thing in your posts??
The history of Israel and Palestine is one long CHAIN of imperial rule... Even when the Brit partition occurred, the section given exclusively to Arabs living there was eventually mandated by JORDAN -- not the Israelis.. Where's your blame on Jordan?
The 1967 war found Israel in the control of West Bank, the ENTIRE Sinai, the Golan Heights and the Lebanese border. Peace treaties RETURNED the West and Sinai to those countries.. And the king of Jordan eventually decided to withdraw any claims to the West Bank..
From the Romans to the British, never did the indigenous Arabs of the Holy land succeed in creating a nation state. I told you WHY that is so... There was a never a NATIONALIST MOVEMENT to do anything like that because Arab history and tradition is tribal, family rule NOT federations or nations...
Link?Whether Palestine was a "territory", a State (ridiculous) or a "mandate" is absolutely irrelevant to my point. Yugoslavia was a State.It was not "the territory," it was Palestine.
Self-determination of peoples trumps territorial integrity. That's the international standard.The Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity.
Link?Whether Palestine was a "territory", a State (ridiculous) or a "mandate" is absolutely irrelevant to my point. Yugoslavia was a State.It was not "the territory," it was Palestine.
Self-determination of peoples trumps territorial integrity. That's the international standard.The Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity.
Link?Whether Palestine was a "territory", a State (ridiculous) or a "mandate" is absolutely irrelevant to my point. Yugoslavia was a State.It was not "the territory," it was Palestine.
Self-determination of peoples trumps territorial integrity. That's the international standard.The Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity.
Um. You want a link to what, exactly? All the countries in the world which were partitioned to permit self-determination at the expense of territorial integrity?
Ottoman Empire
Yugoslavia
Czechoslovakia
Soviet Union
India
Sudan
Korea
Palestine
That help? Territorial integrity is not an impediment to self-determination. Self-determination is the norm, at the expense of territorial integrity. Your own precious "Palestine" proves the rule.
Link?Whether Palestine was a "territory", a State (ridiculous) or a "mandate" is absolutely irrelevant to my point. Yugoslavia was a State.It was not "the territory," it was Palestine.
Self-determination of peoples trumps territorial integrity. That's the international standard.The Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity.
Um. You want a link to what, exactly? All the countries in the world which were partitioned to permit self-determination at the expense of territorial integrity?
Ottoman Empire
Yugoslavia
Czechoslovakia
Soviet Union
India
Sudan
Korea
Palestine
That help? Territorial integrity is not an impediment to self-determination. Self-determination is the norm, at the expense of territorial integrity. Your own precious "Palestine" proves the rule.
I would also kind of put Cyprus on that list, even though most of the world doesn't recognize the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus.
Link?Whether Palestine was a "territory", a State (ridiculous) or a "mandate" is absolutely irrelevant to my point. Yugoslavia was a State.It was not "the territory," it was Palestine.
Self-determination of peoples trumps territorial integrity. That's the international standard.The Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity.
Um. You want a link to what, exactly? All the countries in the world which were partitioned to permit self-determination at the expense of territorial integrity?
Ottoman Empire
Yugoslavia
Czechoslovakia
Soviet Union
India
Sudan
Korea
Palestine
That help? Territorial integrity is not an impediment to self-determination. Self-determination is the norm, at the expense of territorial integrity. Your own precious "Palestine" proves the rule.
I would also kind of put Cyprus on that list, even though most of the world doesn't recognize the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus.
There are a bunch of African countries which could probably be added as well. And places like East Timor declaring independence from Indonesia and Portugal. There are also a bunch of potentials: Tibet, Catalonia, Kurdistan, etc.
I'm hard pressed, actually, to think of a national liberation movement specifically prevented from self-determination because of territorial integrity.
They are legally two incompatible, mutually exclusive legal concepts but the NORM is for self-determination to take precedence.
RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
OK, let's backup here, and understand who the players are:
✪ The Principal (or Major- or Entente) Allied Powers in The Great War (WWI) were:
✪ The Allied Powers in The Great War (WWI) included:
✪ The United States was "technically speaking" an "Associate Power."
- Armenia,
- Belgium,
- Greece,
- Hejaz,
- Poland,
- Portugal,
- Romania,
- Serb-Croat-Slovene,
- Czechoslovakia.
[LINK]
View attachment 251925
• Allied powers •
International Alliance
Written By:
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica
(COMMENT)It was not British land. The Mandates were trustees.
Who the players are is a very important distinction. The "Mandate for Palestine" starts with the opening phrase:
"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed,"
Let there be no mistake... The Mandate represented an agreement between the "PRINCIPAL" Allied Powers. It was the PRINCIPAL Allied Powers that set the conditions as to the appearance of the Mandate and the Mandatories.
✪ In the case of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be fixed by the PRINCIPAL Allied Powers selected Great Britain as the Mandatory.
✪ The responsibility for implementing the Balfour Declaration was a decision by the Principal Allied Powers.
(COMMENT)It was not "the territory," it was Palestine. The Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity.
Wrong again:
In 1920 (during the San Remo Convention) → up and until August 1922 [during the final formulation of the terms submitted to the Council of the League of Nations (LoN)] such boundaries had not yet been fixed.
Under the description, pursuant to the Palestine Order in Council (August 1922) → "the limits of this Order are the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine."
AND: as cited in the Preamble: And whereas, by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance and other lawful means, His Majesty has power and jurisdiction within Palestine.
◈ Great Britain had the power and jurisdiction within "Palestine" (no matter what you want to call it).
(COMMENT)Not so. The Mandates had a non annexation policy. The land was ceded to the respective new states.
Wrong again. The word "Annex" or "Annexation" was not used even once in the entirety of the Mandate.
Don't confuse Article 5 with a prohibition relative to Annexation. What it says (as agreed to by the Principal Allied Powers) that NO "territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of, the Government of any foreign Power."
This is a circular order, in which the Principal Allied Power is telling itself, a Principal Allied Power, there is a limit. Remembering that the "Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation and of administration, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate."
What limits there are in the Mandate and in the Orders in Council are in place at the discretion of the Principal Allied Powers and no other. And what is put in place by the Principal Allied Powers, can be lifted by the Allied Powers.
Most Respectfully,
R
Indeed, and by 1924, Palestine, and the other new states, were territories defined by international borders. The people were the nationals of their respective states.✪ In the case of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be fixed by the PRINCIPAL Allied Powers selected Great Britain as the Mandatory.
But its not mean all people around the world invade USA or Canada or Europe because they have bought land as Jew did to people of Holly Land.Syria used to pepper Israel with artillery from the Golan Heights and many lost their lives taking it. You still see the impacts of the war and the histories. Jews don’t war with one another. Moslems continue to fight due to their tribal nature.Why blame to Brits? They have gone almost 80 years has been passed. It sound like that snake has gone 80 years ago, you are beating the line left on ground. Means you can not put owner of the land into camps and start calling owner yourself, it unfair and unacceptable.Would it be unfair to describe Zionism as a form of Jewish ultra-nationalism?
Way I look at it is Zionism had a different mission and structure PRIOR to 1948.. It was a global "alliance" of founders intent on creating a state as a safe harbor for Jews.. PREFERABLY in the Holy land.. It held world-wide "congresses" (i think) every year and LOBBIED heavily world-wide.
After 1948, it did became a form of nationalism.. And has a newer mission to sustain an actual nation with a heritage and a mission.. Stop short of the "ultra" part, because Israel has never had any real objection to being neighborly with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and EXTREMELY tolerant of other religions and practices..
But they live in a neighborhood that's a bit "rough" and unstable... Not their fault.. Always remember to blame the Brits... LOL...
This is a thread about the History of the region.. And YOU know the Arabs got screwed by the imperialism that drew phony lines on the ground and decided WHO GETS TO RULE... Are you denying that now when you've already said the same thing in your posts??
The history of Israel and Palestine is one long CHAIN of imperial rule... Even when the Brit partition occurred, the section given exclusively to Arabs living there was eventually mandated by JORDAN -- not the Israelis.. Where's your blame on Jordan?
The 1967 war found Israel in the control of West Bank, the ENTIRE Sinai, the Golan Heights and the Lebanese border. Peace treaties RETURNED the West and Sinai to those countries.. And the king of Jordan eventually decided to withdraw any claims to the West Bank..
From the Romans to the British, never did the indigenous Arabs of the Holy land succeed in creating a nation state. I told you WHY that is so... There was a never a NATIONALIST MOVEMENT to do anything like that because Arab history and tradition is tribal, family rule NOT federations or nations...
There's land belonging to the Jewish nation,
one such example is purchase by the charitable baron, consists of 100,000 dun. of land in Huran.
But its not make Israel Legitimate.Syria used to pepper Israel with artillery from the Golan Heights and many lost their lives taking it. You still see the impacts of the war and the histories. Jews don’t war with one another. Moslems continue to fight due to their tribal nature.Why blame to Brits? They have gone almost 80 years has been passed. It sound like that snake has gone 80 years ago, you are beating the line left on ground. Means you can not put owner of the land into camps and start calling owner yourself, it unfair and unacceptable.You have a valid point.. The way France, England, Russia carved up the Mid East after the Ottoman Empire was a bad atrocious act.. Very arrogant. And not that smart... Sikes -- Picot had a cup of tea and a biscuit and drew 3 lines on a map and called it day... And the world is STILL PAYING for that arrogance and stupidity today...
But neither Muslims, Jews, Israelis and Palestinians had much of a say in that matter... And the ultra nationalism in Arab Mid East today is a large part of the pain and suffering of the Arab countries today... ALL BECAUSE the British FORCED nation-states with phony boundaries...
Blame THEM -- not Jews....
Would it be unfair to describe Zionism as a form of Jewish ultra-nationalism?
Way I look at it is Zionism had a different mission and structure PRIOR to 1948.. It was a global "alliance" of founders intent on creating a state as a safe harbor for Jews.. PREFERABLY in the Holy land.. It held world-wide "congresses" (i think) every year and LOBBIED heavily world-wide.
After 1948, it did became a form of nationalism.. And has a newer mission to sustain an actual nation with a heritage and a mission.. Stop short of the "ultra" part, because Israel has never had any real objection to being neighborly with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and EXTREMELY tolerant of other religions and practices..
But they live in a neighborhood that's a bit "rough" and unstable... Not their fault.. Always remember to blame the Brits... LOL...
This is a thread about the History of the region.. And YOU know the Arabs got screwed by the imperialism that drew phony lines on the ground and decided WHO GETS TO RULE... Are you denying that now when you've already said the same thing in your posts??
The history of Israel and Palestine is one long CHAIN of imperial rule... Even when the Brit partition occurred, the section given exclusively to Arabs living there was eventually mandated by JORDAN -- not the Israelis.. Where's your blame on Jordan?
The 1967 war found Israel in the control of West Bank, the ENTIRE Sinai, the Golan Heights and the Lebanese border. Peace treaties RETURNED the West and Sinai to those countries.. And the king of Jordan eventually decided to withdraw any claims to the West Bank..
From the Romans to the British, never did the indigenous Arabs of the Holy land succeed in creating a nation state. I told you WHY that is so... There was a never a NATIONALIST MOVEMENT to do anything like that because Arab history and tradition is tribal, family rule NOT federations or nations...
But israel is not a legitimate nation.Like israel is not a legitimate country. It was given mandate/status when there was only few WII Coalition country were UN member and Israelis accepted that UN order immediately.Throwing accusation is not the same as proving them.Read all yours posts base on lies. And it is your country under discussion not mien.While yours posts expressed, division, prolong palestine issue, scared of from your own existence. Are you people psycho? Why don't you follow the UN resolution and solved the issue? Or if scared of from the lion will come and eat you all if this the case then one day it will come and its called paranoid-ism.
What posts?
I'm not sure You understand the words You use, what makes You think that UN resolutions are obligatory, does You country follow them?
I didn't see You manage to prove anything I've said was incorrect.
Now explain one thing, You expect Israel to follow resolutions that neither Your country
nor the rest of the UN member states obliged to follow?
International law is not a popular vote,
a contract between sovereign nations is it?
But its not make Israel Legitimate.Syria used to pepper Israel with artillery from the Golan Heights and many lost their lives taking it. You still see the impacts of the war and the histories. Jews don’t war with one another. Moslems continue to fight due to their tribal nature.Why blame to Brits? They have gone almost 80 years has been passed. It sound like that snake has gone 80 years ago, you are beating the line left on ground. Means you can not put owner of the land into camps and start calling owner yourself, it unfair and unacceptable.Would it be unfair to describe Zionism as a form of Jewish ultra-nationalism?
Way I look at it is Zionism had a different mission and structure PRIOR to 1948.. It was a global "alliance" of founders intent on creating a state as a safe harbor for Jews.. PREFERABLY in the Holy land.. It held world-wide "congresses" (i think) every year and LOBBIED heavily world-wide.
After 1948, it did became a form of nationalism.. And has a newer mission to sustain an actual nation with a heritage and a mission.. Stop short of the "ultra" part, because Israel has never had any real objection to being neighborly with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and EXTREMELY tolerant of other religions and practices..
But they live in a neighborhood that's a bit "rough" and unstable... Not their fault.. Always remember to blame the Brits... LOL...
This is a thread about the History of the region.. And YOU know the Arabs got screwed by the imperialism that drew phony lines on the ground and decided WHO GETS TO RULE... Are you denying that now when you've already said the same thing in your posts??
The history of Israel and Palestine is one long CHAIN of imperial rule... Even when the Brit partition occurred, the section given exclusively to Arabs living there was eventually mandated by JORDAN -- not the Israelis.. Where's your blame on Jordan?
The 1967 war found Israel in the control of West Bank, the ENTIRE Sinai, the Golan Heights and the Lebanese border. Peace treaties RETURNED the West and Sinai to those countries.. And the king of Jordan eventually decided to withdraw any claims to the West Bank..
From the Romans to the British, never did the indigenous Arabs of the Holy land succeed in creating a nation state. I told you WHY that is so... There was a never a NATIONALIST MOVEMENT to do anything like that because Arab history and tradition is tribal, family rule NOT federations or nations...
