The First Nakba Map...in Hebrew

[georgephillip]

Ten (10) percent of their fighting males and their biggest leader, gone, George?

What about the other ninety (90%) percent, finding new leaders, to help them make their stand, when it came time to defend their homes?

Confiscated equipment in the 1930s, attributable to the Arab Uprising of 1936-1937?

Maybe they should not have chosen poorly (again!) and revolted in the first place against the mighty British Empire under the circumstances, in such a tight, confined, accessible area, with no prospect of winning, eh?

And even so, why didn't the Palestinians smuggle-in NEW equipment on an even grander scale than that smuggled-in by the Jews, to replace what they'd lost?

And, didn't the British leave most of their equipment and rolling-stock and bases and forts to the Arabs, as the British were leaving Palestine?

Your excuse-making for the Palestinians not fielding a larger force in defense of their own homes is wearing rather thin.

Why Palestinians didn't field a larger force doesn't change the fact that 650,000 Jews inflicted their nation by force of arms on twice as many non-Jews in 1948 Palestine, does it?

"Of the 1,358,000 Palestinian Arab 9itizens of Palestine in 1948, approximately 873;600 resided within what. would become the Israeli borders, 485,000 without. The Israelis recorded 156,000 non-Jews in 1948, a number that included perhaps 1,000 non-Arabs, leaving 155,000 Palestinians in Israel. This means that 718,000 Palestinians either were refugees or died during the war."

Your amateurish attempts to divert an inquiry into Jewish ethnic cleansing in 1948 Palestine by changing the subject to why didn't the victims do a better job of organizing their defense is also becoming thin.

Palestine Population: During The Ottoman And The British Mandate Periods - Palestine Remembered

Copycat.

As a non-stakeholder, I, for one, do not bother to try to avoid the idea that 650,000 Jews imposed their newly-reborn State upon 1,300,000 Arab Palestinians.

Whatever in the world led you to believe that I was trying to distract such a focus?

Hell, I'll agree with you in-public, 100 times out of 100.

The difference being that you think that's a disgrace to the Jews...

Whereas I think that's a disgrace to the Palestinians, and say so, often...

Whatever in the world leads you to believe that I was trying to distract attention away from Jewish intentions to Evict the Palestinians from their lands and Expel them to Jordan and Lebanon?

Hell, I'll agree with you in-public, 100 times out of 100.

The difference being that you think that's a disgrace to the Jews...

Whereas I think it's their only chance for long-term survival, by expelling the Enemy in their Midst...

You must have me confused with some other poster who tries to dodge those issues...

I meet them head-on, and celebrate them, to varying degrees...

But none of that excuses the unpreparedness and incompetence and cowardice and Big Skeddadle of your beloved Palestinians in 1948...

Although it's clear that you've exhausted your short list of excuses for their cowardice and have resorted to other tactics...

My goodness... 718,000 is, indeed, a Big Skeddadle...

How much different might their fate have been, had they (1) had the brains to adequately prepare for what was clearly coming in a few years, like the Jews did, and (2) had the courage to collectively stand their ground and fight for their land, for themselves and their descendants, relying upon their own mettle, like the Jews did, rather than running like women, and leaving it to mercenaries...

Never mind the fine job that Israeli women did in support and combat roles during their 1948 bid for a homeland, unlike most of the Palestinian men-folk who skeddadled... more shame on them...

No guts, no glory...

"A coward dies a thousand deaths - in a refugee camp for 65 years after running - a brave man dies but one..."

Big Skeddadle, indeed...

Similar to the "cowardice" displayed by hundreds of thousands (millions) of European Jews who, with families in tow, marched off meekly to Hitler's gas chambers. What guts/glory do you find in those who turned their children into soap instead of engaging in manly resistance against the Nazis? Possibly that sad example of Jewish self-esteem explains today's Spartan Jew's persecution of the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine (along with billions of $ in US taxpayer blood money, of course,)

"However, the Holocaust was a deeply traumatic experience which shocked the Western Jews who survived the genocide. As a result, the extreme and the fringe in Jewish politics became the mainstream, and the 'Never Again' slogan was born.

"For the average Westerner, this slogan may not sound harsh; after all European Jews suffered European anti-Semitism for centuries. On the other hand, to us, the Palestinian people, this slogan implies 'Never Again' regardless of the price; 'Never Again' even if others become the victim, 'Never Again' period.

"This slogan carries behind it deep negative emotions, which is rarely analyzed or debated; it is a taboo to discuss. Many Western Jews felt betrayed by their respective nations who persecuted them for centuries, and many of these nations openly collaborated with Nazi Germany, who often handed their Jewish citizens to the SS.

"This was deeply a traumatic and a very humiliating experience not only to European Jews, but also to the European nations (no exception) who witnessed the genocide and at minimum turned their heads the other way. Those who survived the Holocaust found in the Zionist ideology their salvation. Zionism gave them the feeling of empowerment where Jews and Jews alone (no gentile or Goyim) must be the masters of their own future, and they promised themselves never to be the victim again.

"Consequently, I believe this is the moment when the Spartan Jew was born and the 'Never Again' slogan became its moral facade.

"When Israelis strikes at Palestinians; they are not only sending messages to Palestinians, they are not only retaliating against Palestinian violence, they're also sending messages to their deprived self-esteem (for lack of a better term) and to the rest of the world that the Jew will not be the victim again.

"From my experience, rarely you rationally can discuss the conflict with neither a Jew nor a Westerner without the memories of the Holocaust being so close behind; I always felt those memories even when not a word of the Holocaust was mentioned; simply it is there, simply it cannot be discussed.

"That is the primary reason why discussing this conflict with many Jews and Westerners is very frustrating; you want to discuss the real issues (dispossession, ethnic cleansing, & colonization), but you can't. Sadly, the emotional barriers are so great to overcome, especially when those emotional barriers cannot be discussed.

"Often in such discussions, the Palestinian is painted as the anti-Semitic, and Palestinian resistance to Israeli war crimes becomes 'terrorism'.

"Sometimes I wonder why the West is scared of confronting this emotional barrier?

"Could it because this barrier masks the way Westerners treated their Jewish citizens for centuries?

"Could it be that discussing this particular problem will open a Pandora's Box?

"I don't know if I am right or wrong, however, I am certain that this emotional barrier should be studied further; I believe this taboo contains few of the important keys that are essential to resolving this conflict.

The Spartan Jew - Palestine Remembered

 

[Kondor3]

"...Similar to the "cowardice" displayed by hundreds of thousands (millions) of European Jews..."

Absolutely correct.

Oddly enough, I commented upon that earlier today, at...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/middle-east-general/327148-report-israel-amnesty-international-condemns-barak-s-rejection-of-syrian-refugees-5.html#post8238583

There are vast differences between the European Jews and the Arabs, in connection with with their (1) advance knowledge that the need to fight was coming, (2) their ability to amass weapons and to undertake training and to make military alliances with neighbors to help them and (3) control over the places where both resided, prior to The Troubles, but, yes...

There is no escaping charges of European Jewish cowadice; at least until the time of the Warsaw Uprising of 1943, and large-scale Jewish participation in the Soviet-Russian and other Slavik partisan operations of the post 1949 timeframe.

The Jews fixed their problem and moved on.

The Palestinians are still suffering the consequences of their problem 65 years later.

 

[georgephillip]

"...Similar to the "cowardice" displayed by hundreds of thousands (millions) of European Jews..."

Absolutely correct.

Oddly enough, I commented upon that earlier today, at...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/middle-east-general/327148-report-israel-amnesty-international-condemns-barak-s-rejection-of-syrian-refugees-5.html#post8238583

There are vast differences between the European Jews and the Arabs, in connection with with their (1) advance knowledge that the need to fight was coming, (2) their ability to amass weapons and to undertake training and to make military alliances with neighbors to help them and (3) control over the places where both resided, prior to The Troubles, but, yes...

There is no escaping charges of European Jewish cowadice; at least until the time of the Warsaw Uprising of 1943, and large-scale Jewish participation in the Soviet-Russian and other Slavik partisan operations of the post 1949 timeframe.

The Jews fixed their problem and moved on.

The Palestinians are still suffering the consequences of their problem 65 years later.

Only because they haven't been receiving 8 million US dollars a day since 1967.
The Jews fixed their problem by selling out to the highest bidder.
Not exactly heroic.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Only because they haven't been receiving 8 million US dollars a day since 1967. The Jews fixed their problem by selling out to the highest bidder. Not exactly heroic."

No, George, the Jews fixed their problem in 1948, by winning a home for themselves, long before 1967.

 

[georgephillip]

"...Only because they haven't been receiving 8 million US dollars a day since 1967. The Jews fixed their problem by selling out to the highest bidder. Not exactly heroic."

No, George, the Jews fixed their problem in 1948, by winning a home for themselves, long before 1967.

Not exactly, Kondor3.
The Jews won in '48 because for the preceding half a century the British bestowed 90% of investment monies upon Jewish capital in order to create their "little, loyal, Jewish Ulster..."

 

[Kondor3]

"...Only because they haven't been receiving 8 million US dollars a day since 1967. The Jews fixed their problem by selling out to the highest bidder. Not exactly heroic."

No, George, the Jews fixed their problem in 1948, by winning a home for themselves, long before 1967.

Not exactly, Kondor3.
The Jews won in '48 because for the preceding half a century the British bestowed 90% of investment monies upon Jewish capital in order to create their "little, loyal, Jewish Ulster..."

Yes, you've said such things in the past, however, that doesn't seem to square with historical perceptions that the British left most of their armaments and all of their bases and fortresses to the Arabs, rather than the Jews, as they were exiting Palestine.

 

[georgephillip]

No, George, the Jews fixed their problem in 1948, by winning a home for themselves, long before 1967.

Not exactly, Kondor3.
The Jews won in '48 because for the preceding half a century the British bestowed 90% of investment monies upon Jewish capital in order to create their "little, loyal, Jewish Ulster..."

Yes, you've said such things in the past, however, that doesn't seem to square with historical perceptions that the British left most of their armaments and all of their bases and fortresses to the Arabs, rather than the Jews, as they were exiting Palestine.

Where did you get the idea the British left most of their arms, bases, and forts to the Arabs?

 

[Kondor3]

Not exactly, Kondor3.
The Jews won in '48 because for the preceding half a century the British bestowed 90% of investment monies upon Jewish capital in order to create their "little, loyal, Jewish Ulster..."

Yes, you've said such things in the past, however, that doesn't seem to square with historical perceptions that the British left most of their armaments and all of their bases and fortresses to the Arabs, rather than the Jews, as they were exiting Palestine.

Where did you get the idea the British left most of their arms, bases, and forts to the Arabs?

On Israeli Statehood / Independence Day - 15-May-1948 - the Arab rank-and-file of the old Palestine Police Force and the Arab Liberation Army and the Arab Legion were in possession of most of the old Police Forts, and utilizing newly-uncrated British arms, weren't they?

 

[georgephillip]

Yes, you've said such things in the past, however, that doesn't seem to square with historical perceptions that the British left most of their armaments and all of their bases and fortresses to the Arabs, rather than the Jews, as they were exiting Palestine.

Where did you get the idea the British left most of their arms, bases, and forts to the Arabs?

On Israeli Statehood / Independence Day - 15-May-1948 - the Arab rank-and-file of the old Palestine Police Force and the Arab Liberation Army and the Arab Legion were in possession of most of the old Police Forts, and utilizing newly-uncrated British arms, weren't they?

Possibly so.

"The equipment of the Palestinian forces was very poor. The British confiscated most of their arsenal during the 1936–39 rebellion and World War II.[103] A report of 1942 by the Haganah intelligence service assessed the number of firearms at the disposal of the Palestinians at 50,000 [but] this was probably an overestimate[104] or even 'highly exaggerated"'.

1948 Arab?Israeli War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Kondor3]

Maybe the Brits turned-over all those Police Forts and bases and all those small arms as a way of making-up for prior confiscations and as a way of leveling the playing field a bit on the way out the door? Just a hunch. I don't know if there's underlying data to be had in support of such reasonable speculation, though.

 

[RoccoR]

Kondor3; georgephillip; et al,

Remembering that the Arabs declined to participate in the implementation process:

The representative designated by the Government of the United Kingdom was Sir Alexander Cadogan. The representative designated by the Jewish Agency for Palestine was Mr. Moshe Shertok. As regards the Arab Higher Committee, the following telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January:

“ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”​

No further communication has been addressed to or received from the Arab Higher Committee by the Commission. The Commission will, at the appropriate time, set forth in a separate document its views with regard to the implementations of this refusal by the Arab Higher Committee.

6. The Secretary-General has been informed by the Arab Higher Committee that is determined to persist in its rejection of the partition plan and in its refusal to recognize the resolution of the Assembly and “anything deriving therefrom”.

SOURCE: A/AC.21/9 S/676 16 February 1948

SOURCE: A/AC.21/7 29 January 1948

"The equipment of the Palestinian forces was very poor. The British confiscated most of their arsenal during the 1936–39 rebellion and World War II.[103] A report of 1942 by the Haganah intelligence service assessed the number of firearms at the disposal of the Palestinians at 50,000 [but] this was probably an overestimate[104] or even 'highly exaggerated"'.

Maybe the Brits turned-over all those Police Forts and bases and all those small arms as a way of making-up for prior confiscations and as a way of leveling the playing field a bit on the way out the door? Just a hunch. I don't know if there's underlying data to be had in support of such reasonable speculation, though.

(IMPLEMENTATION DECLINED by ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE)

The Provisional Council of Government of each State shall, within the shortest time possible, recruit an armed militia from the residents of that State, sufficient in number to maintain internal order and to prevent frontier clashes.

This armed militia in each State shall, for operational purposes, be under the command of Jewish or Arab officers resident in that State, but general political and military control, including the choice of the militia's High Command, shall be exercised by the Commission.

SOURCE: General Assembly Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

(COMMENT)

It seems to me that the Arab Higher Committee "rejected" the resolution and "anything derived therefrom." That would include the establishment of an "armed militia" for the Arab State coordinated through the UNPC Implementation Process.

Are the Hostile Arab Palestinians now claiming that it is the UN's fault, or the Jewish Agency's fault, that they did not get to participate in the establishment of an Armed Militia for the Arab State; IAW the Steps Preparatory to Independence (which was declined more than once)?

Who's fault is it that they did not get to address this in early 1948, before the establishment of the Jewish State?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Kondor3]

"..."

Certainly another in a seeming never-ending series of Missed Opportunities...

 

[Statistikhengst]

I posted this about a year ago.

It's nice to see someone else noticed.

Sorry.
I missed your post and just found this site today.
Imagine how US public opinion would shift if Zochot was featured regularly in the corporate press?

The Arabs, in trying to drive the Jews into the sea, got the Bejesus whupped out of their sorry asses, held a bunch of victory parades and started an eternal whining.

[MENTION=15726]Hossfly[/MENTION] -

The best and shortest (31 words) description of the last 65 years in the ME. Thanks!

 

[freedombecki]

A PALESTINIAN MYTH - The so said NAKBA - YouTube

So Arab leaders built a house of cards which caused the Palestinian abandonment, and when they got back to burnt homes and villages, they all blamed the Jews for what the Egyptian invasion did.

Now all the Arabs feel guilty to the Palestinians whom they lied to, cheated of house and home, and failure to incorporate them into their lands after the fall, leaving them after decimating them and conveniently just passing the blame to the Jews, who learned from WWII to defend themselves against liars and cheaters.

You'd think as wealthy as their oil had made them they would give the Palestinians home within their borders, jobs, and inclusion. What a sorry thing to do to somebody else they claimed to defend, but actually just got them out of the way because they inconvenienced their political agenda that was out of control.

 

[freedombecki]

Sorry.
I missed your post and just found this site today.
Imagine how US public opinion would shift if Zochot was featured regularly in the corporate press?

The Arabs, in trying to drive the Jews into the sea, got the Bejesus whupped out of their sorry asses, held a bunch of victory parades and started an eternal whining.

@Hossfly -

The best and shortest (31 words) description of the last 65 years in the ME. Thanks!

No smarm confuses Hossfly from what I've seen of his posts.

 

[freedombecki]

Kondor3; georgephillip; et al,

Remembering that the Arabs declined to participate in the implementation process:

The representative designated by the Government of the United Kingdom was Sir Alexander Cadogan. The representative designated by the Jewish Agency for Palestine was Mr. Moshe Shertok. As regards the Arab Higher Committee, the following telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January:

“ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”​

No further communication has been addressed to or received from the Arab Higher Committee by the Commission. The Commission will, at the appropriate time, set forth in a separate document its views with regard to the implementations of this refusal by the Arab Higher Committee.

6. The Secretary-General has been informed by the Arab Higher Committee that is determined to persist in its rejection of the partition plan and in its refusal to recognize the resolution of the Assembly and “anything deriving therefrom”.

SOURCE: A/AC.21/9 S/676 16 February 1948

SOURCE: A/AC.21/7 29 January 1948

Maybe the Brits turned-over all those Police Forts and bases and all those small arms as a way of making-up for prior confiscations and as a way of leveling the playing field a bit on the way out the door? Just a hunch. I don't know if there's underlying data to be had in support of such reasonable speculation, though.

(IMPLEMENTATION DECLINED by ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE)

The Provisional Council of Government of each State shall, within the shortest time possible, recruit an armed militia from the residents of that State, sufficient in number to maintain internal order and to prevent frontier clashes.

This armed militia in each State shall, for operational purposes, be under the command of Jewish or Arab officers resident in that State, but general political and military control, including the choice of the militia's High Command, shall be exercised by the Commission.

SOURCE: General Assembly Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

(COMMENT)

It seems to me that the Arab Higher Committee "rejected" the resolution and "anything derived therefrom." That would include the establishment of an "armed militia" for the Arab State coordinated through the UNPC Implementation Process.

Are the Hostile Arab Palestinians now claiming that it is the UN's fault, or the Jewish Agency's fault, that they did not get to participate in the establishment of an Armed Militia for the Arab State; IAW the Steps Preparatory to Independence (which was declined more than once)?

Who's fault is it that they did not get to address this in early 1948, before the establishment of the Jewish State?

Most Respectfully,
R

Are the Hostile Arab Palestinians now claiming that it is the UN's fault, or the Jewish Agency's fault, that they did not get to participate in the establishment of an Armed Militia for the Arab State; IAW the Steps Preparatory to Independence (which was declined more than once)?

Not only are they blaming Israel, they lob missiles into Israeli territory quite often from inhabited areas causing terror and mayhem based on a history of false accusations, as evidenced by the video delivered by Toastman's showing printed Arab documentation of the malice and intentions.

 

[georgephillip]

Maybe the Brits turned-over all those Police Forts and bases and all those small arms as a way of making-up for prior confiscations and as a way of leveling the playing field a bit on the way out the door? Just a hunch. I don't know if there's underlying data to be had in support of such reasonable speculation, though.

"British forces began retreating from Palestine in the months prior to Israel's declaration of independence. As the British retreated, they withdrew from successive areas of Palestine without transferring administrative authority to anyone, creating an effective power vacuum, and causing widespread chaos in many of the areas they abandoned.

"On 13 May 1948, the British blockade of Palestine was lifted. On 14 May 1948 - day Israel declared independence, almost all British forces still in Palestine had withdrawn into a small enclave in Haifa, at its port, which was established to ensure the withdrawal of the remaining British personnel and equipment in Palestine.

"There was also a small garrison in Jerusalem protecting High Commissioner Alan Cunningham, and RAF Ramat David, a Royal Air Force base near Haifa, was still in British hands. All RAF elements still in Palestine were stationed there to cover the retreat of British forces from Palestine.

"On the same day Israeli independence was declared, the British garrison in Jerusalem was evacuated, and High Commissioner Cunningham flew from Kalandia Airport near Jerusalem to Haifa, and departed Palestine in a Royal Navy warship sailing from Haifa's port.[124][125]

"British forces in the Haifa enclave were gradually withdrawn through the city's port throughout the following weeks.

"On 22 May 1948, the Royal Egyptian Air Force attacked RAF Ramat David, mistaking the airfield for one occupied by the Israeli Air Force. Egyptian warplanes mounted a total of three attacks on the airbase, destroying three aircraft and a hangar, damaging some other aircraft, and killing four airmen.

"By the second attack, the RAF had mounted a standing patrol over the airfield, and five Egyptian Spitfires were shot down – four in aerial combat and one by ground fire.

"On the following day, the RAF withdrew all elements still stationed at RAF Ramat David to Cyprus and the Suez Canal zone, and the base was handed over to the Israelis.[126][127]"

1948 Arab?Israeli War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Would you say the British picked a Jewish dog in this fight?

 

[MHunterB]

NO. I'd say the British picked the side who were willing to abide by the UN's ruling on the partition of the Mandate, over the side who refused to en send a delegation to the negotiations.

 

[georgephillip]

Kondor3; georgephillip; et al,

Remembering that the Arabs declined to participate in the implementation process:

The representative designated by the Government of the United Kingdom was Sir Alexander Cadogan. The representative designated by the Jewish Agency for Palestine was Mr. Moshe Shertok. As regards the Arab Higher Committee, the following telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January:

“ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”​

No further communication has been addressed to or received from the Arab Higher Committee by the Commission. The Commission will, at the appropriate time, set forth in a separate document its views with regard to the implementations of this refusal by the Arab Higher Committee.

6. The Secretary-General has been informed by the Arab Higher Committee that is determined to persist in its rejection of the partition plan and in its refusal to recognize the resolution of the Assembly and “anything deriving therefrom”.

SOURCE: A/AC.21/9 S/676 16 February 1948

SOURCE: A/AC.21/7 29 January 1948

Maybe the Brits turned-over all those Police Forts and bases and all those small arms as a way of making-up for prior confiscations and as a way of leveling the playing field a bit on the way out the door? Just a hunch. I don't know if there's underlying data to be had in support of such reasonable speculation, though.

(IMPLEMENTATION DECLINED by ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE)

The Provisional Council of Government of each State shall, within the shortest time possible, recruit an armed militia from the residents of that State, sufficient in number to maintain internal order and to prevent frontier clashes.

This armed militia in each State shall, for operational purposes, be under the command of Jewish or Arab officers resident in that State, but general political and military control, including the choice of the militia's High Command, shall be exercised by the Commission.

SOURCE: General Assembly Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

(COMMENT)

It seems to me that the Arab Higher Committee "rejected" the resolution and "anything derived therefrom." That would include the establishment of an "armed militia" for the Arab State coordinated through the UNPC Implementation Process.

Are the Hostile Arab Palestinians now claiming that it is the UN's fault, or the Jewish Agency's fault, that they did not get to participate in the establishment of an Armed Militia for the Arab State; IAW the Steps Preparatory to Independence (which was declined more than once)?

Who's fault is it that they did not get to address this in early 1948, before the establishment of the Jewish State?

Most Respectfully,
R

Those who refused ALL Palestinians the right of self-determination in 1947.

"On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution recommending the adoption and implementation of a plan to partition Palestine into two states, one Arab and one Jewish, and the City of Jerusalem.[13]

"Each state would comprise three major sections, linked by extraterritorial crossroads. The Arab state would also have an enclave at Jaffa.

"The territory of the proposed Jewish state was to include the fertile eastern Galilee and coastal plain, where most of the Jewish population lived, as well as most of the Negev desert.

"The Arab state was to have the central Galilee, the mountainous area later known as the West Bank, and part of the southern coastal area, extending into the Negev, where 5% of the Arab population lived.[14]

"The Jews, roughly 33% of the population and owning approximately 7% of the land,[15] were to get 55% of the Mandatory territory. The Palestinian Arabs, about 67% of the population and owning roughly 47% of land, would be allotted 43% of the territory.[16][17][18][19] The bulk of the proposed Jewish State's territory, however, consisted of the Negev Desert..."

"The Jewish leadership accepted the partition plan as "the indispensable minimum",[23] glad to gain international recognition but sorry that they did not receive more.[24] Nevertheless, Menahem Begin, leader of the Irgun (IZL) rejected this, considering nothing was more sacred than the integrity of the whole territory of 'Eretz Israel'[25]

"Arguing that the partition plan was unfair to the Arabs with regard to the population balance at that time, the representatives of the Palestinian Arabs firmly opposed the UN action and rejected its authority to involve itself in the matter at all.[26][27]"

1948 Arab?Israeli War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm a little confused by the UN authority to deny Palestinians the right to vote on their own future, Rocco; however, I suspect it's related to the UN's similar action in Korea about the same time.

 

[georgephillip]

NO. I'd say the British picked the side who were willing to abide by the UN's ruling on the partition of the Mandate, over the side who refused to en send a delegation to the negotiations.

So the British imperialists picked their own "little, loyal, Jewish Ulster" over twice as many Palestinians who preferred self-determination?

"Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a 'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'

"Storrs’ analogy was no accident. Ireland was where the English invented the tactic of divide and conquer, and where the devastating effectiveness of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between the colonial rulers and the colonized made it a template for worldwide imperial rule."

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF