View Full Version : Why should Israel have to give up their Country....
manu1959
09-22-2007, 01:32 PM
well?
if they did....
who gets it?
where do the existing peopole go?
what other countries should have to give up their land?
I know, I know, I know, Germany ;)
The muslims took the land by force and now they have lost the land. boo fricken hoo.
Gunny
09-22-2007, 03:10 PM
well?
if they did....
who gets it?
where do the existing peopole go?
what other countries should have to give up their land?
They shouldn't. The state of Palestine within the country of Transjordan was part of the Ottoman Empire and they lost it as a result of allying themselves with Germany during WWI. Iraq became a British protectorate and the subsequent Balfour Agreement partitioned Palestine to establish a Jewish homeland.
Nothing noble about it. No one wanted to open their doors to the Jews. So they were given a chunk of land nobody gave a crap about up to that point.
Regardless that, Israel has been a nation since 1949. End of story. They have a right to exist and the xenophobes who think otherwise are the ones who have to change and by force, if necessary.
5stringJeff
09-22-2007, 06:20 PM
Where's TheSage/RWA/Jason when you need him? :)
diuretic
09-22-2007, 06:59 PM
They shouldn't. The state of Palestine within the country of Transjordan was part of the Ottoman Empire and they lost it as a result of allying themselves with Germany during WWI. Iraq became a British protectorate and the subsequent Balfour Agreement partitioned Palestine to establish a Jewish homeland.
Nothing noble about it. No one wanted to open their doors to the Jews. So they were given a chunk of land nobody gave a crap about up to that point.
Regardless that, Israel has been a nation since 1949. End of story. They have a right to exist and the xenophobes who think otherwise are the ones who have to change and by force, if necessary.
Was it the case then that the Ottomans were actually occupying Palestine? I mean like the Ottomans were occupying Arabia (as in Lawrence Of).
Gunny
09-22-2007, 07:27 PM
Was it the case then that the Ottomans were actually occupying Palestine? I mean like the Ottomans were occupying Arabia (as in Lawrence Of).
Doesn't matter whether the Ottomans were occupying, or allied to Palestine. Under the rules of the day, to the victor went the spoils of war. Attempting to judge history then by today's standard is intellectually dishonest.
The land was forfeit to the UK by League of Nations mandate. Bottom line: when you choose the wrong side in a war, your ass is pwned.!:laugh2:
They shouldn't. The state of Palestine within the country of Transjordan was part of the Ottoman Empire and they lost it as a result of allying themselves with Germany during WWI. Iraq became a British protectorate and the subsequent Balfour Agreement partitioned Palestine to establish a Jewish homeland.
Nothing noble about it. No one wanted to open their doors to the Jews. So they were given a chunk of land nobody gave a crap about up to that point.
Regardless that, Israel has been a nation since 1949. End of story. They have a right to exist and the xenophobes who think otherwise are the ones who have to change and by force, if necessary.
Sir, why must you inject logic into this thread?
Where's TheSage/RWA/Jason when you need him? :)
He is not so bad, just way wrong on the jews. Then again, I bet they are brainwashing him right now, that is why we don't hear from him.
Was it the case then that the Ottomans were actually occupying Palestine? I mean like the Ottomans were occupying Arabia (as in Lawrence Of).
What are asking? Follow your question to its logic conclusion. If you "ask" palestine, then why weren't the palestines occupying the hebrew land?
IMO, nobody has a right to any land. Unless, God promises it. A Jew on a muslim site once enlightened me: (paraphrase)
Even the jews don't "own" the land. No one has a "right" to the land. It is just land after all. G-d owns the land. (jews do not spell God's name)
He is a Dr. here in the states. I am not sure he is right, then again, I am not sure he is wrong. Thus, I have been enlightened, as I am still mulling over it.
Gaffer
09-22-2007, 07:43 PM
He is not so bad, just way wrong on the jews. Then again, I bet they are brainwashing him right now, that is why we don't hear from him.
I told him they were coming to get him.
diuretic
09-22-2007, 08:23 PM
Doesn't matter whether the Ottomans were occupying, or allied to Palestine. Under the rules of the day, to the victor went the spoils of war. Attempting to judge history then by today's standard is intellectually dishonest.
The land was forfeit to the UK by League of Nations mandate. Bottom line: when you choose the wrong side in a war, your ass is pwned.!:laugh2:
It wasn't a cunning debating point :laugh2: it was a question :coffee:
One of the ironies about all this is that - from the British perspective - it was the Left in Britain after WWII which pushed for a homeland for the Jews. I have a paperback by Harold Laski (published in the 1940s) which, among other things, argues the case for a Jewish homeland from the point of view of the Left. And now the Left has for many years championed the cause of the Palestinians (well, not "the Left" as such but many on the Left).
And the good thing to come out of a bad choice by the Ottoman Empire was the impetus is gave to political reform in Turkey and allowed Mustafa Kemal - Attaturk - to form the secular republic. Silver linings and clouds I suppose.
diuretic
09-22-2007, 08:25 PM
What are asking? Follow your question to its logic conclusion. If you "ask" palestine, then why weren't the palestines occupying the hebrew land?
IMO, nobody has a right to any land. Unless, God promises it. A Jew on a muslim site once enlightened me: (paraphrase)
Even the jews don't "own" the land. No one has a "right" to the land. It is just land after all. G-d owns the land. (jews do not spell God's name)
He is a Dr. here in the states. I am not sure he is right, then again, I am not sure he is wrong. Thus, I have been enlightened, as I am still mulling over it.
Stripping it back to its basics, land is yours if you can take it and hold it.
That's the human way of doing things.
Dilloduck
09-22-2007, 08:48 PM
Stripping it back to its basics, land is yours if you can take it and hold it.
That's the human way of doing things.
damn I love basics-----your exactly right !!
actsnoblemartin
09-23-2007, 12:00 AM
well?
if they did....
who gets it?
ME: terrorists such as fatah, islamic jihad, al aqsa martys brigade and himas
where do the existing peopole go?
ME: into the sea, according to the free free palestinian people at the anti war rally i was at. Or america?
what other countries should have to give up their land?
ME: what other countries should have to give up their land: all of them, since their were always wars over land.
manu1959
09-23-2007, 01:18 AM
Stripping it back to its basics, land is yours if you can take it and hold it.
That's the human way of doing things.
you win.............
actsnoblemartin
09-23-2007, 01:29 AM
was being sarcastic :coffee:
Your great manu1959, this is one of the best threads ive seen in a long time.
very thought provoking
you win.............
diuretic
09-23-2007, 03:29 AM
you win.............
I want to be wrong though. Seriously. I was just taking things back to first principles in a way. Back before we humans got ourselves organised into societies to co-operate with one another we competed. Trouble is that those first principles are still valid today I suppose. Now I'm depressed :(
actsnoblemartin
09-23-2007, 05:11 AM
dont be depressed, their are still good people out there. Even in this ugly world
I want to be wrong though. Seriously. I was just taking things back to first principles in a way. Back before we humans got ourselves organised into societies to co-operate with one another we competed. Trouble is that those first principles are still valid today I suppose. Now I'm depressed :(
diuretic
09-23-2007, 05:42 AM
Yes Martin, you're right. There are. I know some and I'm glad I do. It gives me hope.
Gunny
09-23-2007, 09:39 AM
It wasn't a cunning debating point :laugh2: it was a question :coffee:
One of the ironies about all this is that - from the British perspective - it was the Left in Britain after WWII which pushed for a homeland for the Jews. I have a paperback by Harold Laski (published in the 1940s) which, among other things, argues the case for a Jewish homeland from the point of view of the Left. And now the Left has for many years championed the cause of the Palestinians (well, not "the Left" as such but many on the Left).
And the good thing to come out of a bad choice by the Ottoman Empire was the impetus is gave to political reform in Turkey and allowed Mustafa Kemal - Attaturk - to form the secular republic. Silver linings and clouds I suppose.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. While I'm sure the bleeding hearts were behind the cause, so were the antisemites. Xenophobia had as much to do with Israel as any good will. Nobody wanted to open their doors to "dem chews."
manu1959
09-23-2007, 11:52 AM
and yet another gesture by the israelis, and it will not be enough.....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7009193.stm
The Israeli cabinet has agreed to free about 90 Palestinian prisoners in a move aimed at boosting support for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
can anyone link me up to a gesture of peace twords israel by any arab nation
gabosaurus
09-23-2007, 05:06 PM
Why should any of the Muslim states have to give up their country?
Israel is a terrorist state. It's enemies are also terrorist states. Why do we support one terrorist entity over another?
Gunny
09-23-2007, 07:14 PM
Why should any of the Muslim states have to give up their country?
Israel is a terrorist state. It's enemies are also terrorist states. Why do we support one terrorist entity over another?
Sorry, but Israel by no means fits the definition "terrorist state." Palestine however, is governed by a world-reknowned terrorist organization.
We support the former because they are in the right and we don't support the latter because they're lying murdering scumbags.
Simple enough, or you have questions?
gabosaurus
09-23-2007, 08:36 PM
If you don't feel Israel is a terrorist state, then you have been reading the news through jaundiced eyes.
And I don't believe either one of them is in the right. We should not be intervening on behalf of either. Let them destroy each other.
Gunny
09-23-2007, 09:32 PM
If you don't feel Israel is a terrorist state, then you have been reading the news through jaundiced eyes.
And I don't believe either one of them is in the right. We should not be intervening on behalf of either. Let them destroy each other.
No, I don't feel Israel is a terrorist state because it does not fit the definition of one. I don't need the news to tell me that. Palestine does, I don't need the news to tell me THAT.
We should support Israel since it is a democracy and we should condemn Palestine for being a terrorist state.
There's nothing real hard hear to understand, no can you blame it on the "news." The facts speak for themselves.
manu1959
09-23-2007, 10:15 PM
If you don't feel Israel is a terrorist state, then you have been reading the news through jaundiced eyes.
And I don't believe either one of them is in the right. We should not be intervening on behalf of either. Let them destroy each other.
israel a terrorist state....really?...based on what.....
but that was not the quetion...the question was should they give up their country?...to whom...and where should they go?....
lastly...is palestine a terrorist state?
Gunny
09-23-2007, 10:55 PM
israel a terrorist state....really?...based on what.....
but that was not the quetion...the question was should they give up their country?...to whom...and where should they go?....
lastly...is palestine a terrorist state?
I'm just wondering how a liberal justifies making such statements about Israel, when if it was black person moving into a white neighborhood and being attacked for it in THIS country she'd be screaming discrimination at the top of her lungs.
Israel was created by the west (Britain specifically) and filled with mass emmirgrating EURO jews who expelled the palestinian population who had lived there for thousands of years.
I dont have a problem with a jewish state, but I do have a problem with victimizing a whole group of people to do it...thats genocide. Wiping out an entire group of people and destroying their community to replace them and take their land over as your own is genocide and certainly is terrorism.
If there are any people out there who should have given up land to make a jewish homeland possible it should have been Germany (due to the crimes against jews they committed, ie the genocide), Britain (because it supported the move materially so if they REALLY support it they should only have the right to give up what really belongs to them to do so) and the US (for the same reasons given for Britain).
I also suspect that the west was soooo willing to do it in the middle east because it was a great way to get rid of the jews and it was also a great way to gain a foothold in the middle east and used the jews as the cannon fodder to accomplish it.
I'm just wondering how a liberal justifies making such statements about Israel, when if it was black person moving into a white neighborhood and being attacked for it in THIS country she'd be screaming discrimination at the top of her lungs.
Not an accurate analogy. If you are to be accurate you would have to say MASS immigration supported by a powerful foreign entity and have the blacks state the goal that... they are going to create a BLACK HOMELAND where we currently reside which means that the WHITES will have to be killed or driven off...but they will not be able to remain there. I do think it would be within our right to resist that sort of INVASION which clearly spells out its hostile intent to destroy the existing community in which we live.
The zionist movement was clear that there was no room for the current residents and were not coming to JOIN the community, they were coming to DESTROY it and replace it with their own. A very important distinction.
Not an accurate analogy. If you are to be accurate you would have to say MASS immigration supported by a powerful foreign entity and have the blacks state the goal that... they are going to create a BLACK HOMELAND where we currently reside which means that the WHITES will have to be killed or driven off...but they will not be able to remain there. I do think it would be within our right to resist that sort of INVASION which clearly spells out its hostile intent to destroy the existing community in which we live.
The zionist movement was clear that there was no room for the current residents and were not coming to JOIN the community, they were coming to DESTROY it and replace it with their own. A very important distinction.
I hear there is a chocolate city down in Louisana...
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/B/k/nagin_chocolatecity.jpg
Israel was created by the west (Britain specifically) and filled with mass emmirgrating EURO jews who expelled the palestinian population who had lived there for thousands of years.
I dont have a problem with a jewish state, but I do have a problem with victimizing a whole group of people to do it...thats genocide. Wiping out an entire group of people and destroying their community to replace them and take their land over as your own is genocide and certainly is terrorism.
If there are any people out there who should have given up land to make a jewish homeland possible it should have been Germany (due to the crimes against jews they committed, ie the genocide), Britain (because it supported the move materially so if they REALLY support it they should only have the right to give up what really belongs to them to do so) and the US (for the same reasons given for Britain).
I also suspect that the west was soooo willing to do it in the middle east because it was a great way to get rid of the jews and it was also a great way to gain a foothold in the middle east and used the jews as the cannon fodder to accomplish it.
And who do you think expelled the jews? You think it was just the romans? You think the muslims did not kick anyone out? Let us get you some education padewan, Moohamdead first prayed to Jerusalem, know why? Because it is the JEWISH holy land/city. When jews said he was not their prophet he turned his back and prayed to Mecca. Then the muslims stole the land by force and then centuries later the jews BOUGHT the land back. Yes, read history before the balfour declaration and you will find that jews had already legally and freely purchased the land from the so-called palestinians.
funny that you woudl support their right to it, yet not the jews when also you fail to realize the land was lost in war because the ottoman empire sided with the losers.
diuretic
09-24-2007, 10:41 PM
Politics makes strange bedfellows. While I'm sure the bleeding hearts were behind the cause, so were the antisemites. Xenophobia had as much to do with Israel as any good will. Nobody wanted to open their doors to "dem chews."
I suppose you could argue the English were a bit more cunning than back when Edward I expelled all Jews from his kingdom. But I think the British Left were actually driven by a sense of humanity rather than prejudice. I don't think they were arguing for the Jews to be booted out. Laski was a Jew (non-observant), I don't think he was trying to get himself deported.
Remember it was the British aristocracy pre-WWII that thought Hitler was a jolly fine fellow and poor old Moseley was badly put-upon.
No, I think the Left were acting out of what they thought was right for the Jewish diaspora. However, the Law of Unintended Consequences kicked in later.
manu1959
09-24-2007, 11:12 PM
Israel was created by the west (Britain specifically) and filled with mass emmirgrating EURO jews who expelled the palestinian population who had lived there for thousands of years.
I dont have a problem with a jewish state, but I do have a problem with victimizing a whole group of people to do it...thats genocide. Wiping out an entire group of people and destroying their community to replace them and take their land over as your own is genocide and certainly is terrorism.
If there are any people out there who should have given up land to make a jewish homeland possible it should have been Germany (due to the crimes against jews they committed, ie the genocide), Britain (because it supported the move materially so if they REALLY support it they should only have the right to give up what really belongs to them to do so) and the US (for the same reasons given for Britain).
I also suspect that the west was soooo willing to do it in the middle east because it was a great way to get rid of the jews and it was also a great way to gain a foothold in the middle east and used the jews as the cannon fodder to accomplish it.
really?....can you link me to some historical data indicating the nation of palestine existed for thousands of years?
Gunny
09-25-2007, 06:18 AM
really?....can you link me to some historical data indicating the nation of palestine existed for thousands of years?
Simply put .. no she can't. Just her usual taking the bad guy's side, relativist bullshit.
TheyLive
09-25-2007, 04:51 PM
well?
if they did....
who gets it?
where do the existing peopole go?
what other countries should have to give up their land?
I'm not aware of anyone making this argument; if they are, it's not taken seriously. So it seems somewhat a distraction to spend time arguing over it, though obviously one is free to do so...
There's been an international consensus (minus the US and Israel) on what needs to happen to resolve the conflict for forty years; namely, a two-state arrangement along the '67 borders. On can argue over whether they like it or not (and both sides have plenty to say about it); the fact remains it is the closest thing to a realistic solution presently available.
Gaffer
09-25-2007, 05:15 PM
I'm not aware of anyone making this argument; if they are, it's not taken seriously. So it seems somewhat a distraction to spend time arguing over it, though obviously one is free to do so...
There's been an international consensus (minus the US and Israel) on what needs to happen to resolve the conflict for forty years; namely, a two-state arrangement along the '67 borders. On can argue over whether they like it or not (and both sides have plenty to say about it); the fact remains it is the closest thing to a realistic solution presently available.
This as been discussed and haggled over for the last 20 years. There has always been one problems. The pals won't except anything except the total annihilation of Israel. The libs here want the same thing.
TheyLive
09-25-2007, 06:12 PM
This as been discussed and haggled over for the last 20 years. There has always been one problems. The pals won't except anything except the total annihilation of Israel. The libs here want the same thing.
Haven't heard of any liberals advocating the end of Israel. In fact, that would be rather odd since American Jews are themselves liberal as a group. If American liberalism advocated this I doubt Jews would continue to count themselves a part of it.
Also not aware of any Palestinian overtures to destroying Israel any time recent, either. This would also be odd, since they have zero means to accomplish it, rendering the issue irrelevant, anyway. No one in the region can hold a candle to Israel's military superiority, nuclear capabilities, etc. I mostly read the "we can't negotiate because they are going to destroy us" as a disinterest in negotiating at all, precisely because they enjoy a huge power advantage. Remember that last summer we were told that "Israel cannot afford to lose a single war" -- and when they lost the war the country was not meaningfully weakened except in their own expectations.
I think Israel can afford to make concessions, especially if that means adhering to the agreement that the rest of the world endorses. I also think it would make them much safer, if the safety of their citizens is of concern to their leaders, an open question in my mind.
Dilloduck
09-25-2007, 06:33 PM
Haven't heard of any liberals advocating the end of Israel. In fact, that would be rather odd since American Jews are themselves liberal as a group. If American liberalism advocated this I doubt Jews would continue to count themselves a part of it.
Also not aware of any Palestinian overtures to destroying Israel any time recent, either. This would also be odd, since they have zero means to accomplish it, rendering the issue irrelevant, anyway. No one in the region can hold a candle to Israel's military superiority, nuclear capabilities, etc. I mostly read the "we can't negotiate because they are going to destroy us" as a disinterest in negotiating at all, precisely because they enjoy a huge power advantage. Remember that last summer we were told that "Israel cannot afford to lose a single war" -- and when they lost the war the country was not meaningfully weakened except in their own expectations.
I think Israel can afford to make concessions, especially if that means adhering to the agreement that the rest of the world endorses. I also think it would make them much safer, if the safety of their citizens is of concern to their leaders, an open question in my mind.
Sure the US can "afford" to have Israel make concessions but why? Arabs and Ruby would still hate them.
TheyLive
09-25-2007, 07:04 PM
Sure the US can "afford" to have Israel make concessions but why? Arabs and Ruby would still hate them.
Arabs main contention with Israel is over the Palestinian question. Settle that, and I believe Israel would be much safer.
Dilloduck
09-25-2007, 07:14 PM
Arabs main contention with Israel is over the Palestinian question. Settle that, and I believe Israel would be much safer.
IMHO that is the big Arab lie (or should i say Muslim). They will make SURE that the Palestinian issue is never resolved. They thrive on it. Much like they thrive on their hatred for America.
manu1959
09-26-2007, 06:53 PM
Arabs main contention with Israel is over the Palestinian question. Settle that, and I believe Israel would be much safer.
why don't the arabs solve the palestine question themsleves....
Psychoblues
09-27-2007, 11:51 PM
Israel.
why don't the arabs solve the palestine question themsleves....
You just don't get it, do you, m'59? No surprise. You don't ever "get it".
manu1959
09-27-2007, 11:54 PM
Israel.
You just don't get it, do you, m'59? No surprise. You don't ever "get it".
explain it to me then.....tell me why the arabs don't solve it....why should israel and the west have to solve it.....
israel won the war...they have their land .....they defend it and hold it....why should they have to give it up....
Psychoblues
09-28-2007, 12:01 AM
When it's WAR that you have on your mind it's hard to deal with other realities.
explain it to me then.....tell me why the arabs don't solve it....why should israel and the west have to solve it.....
israel won the war...they have their land .....they defend it and hold it....why should they have to give it up....
Arab/Israeli WAR. Is it one of ours or just one we select as important?
manu1959
09-28-2007, 12:03 AM
When it's WAR that you have on your mind it's hard to deal with other realities.
Arab/Israeli WAR. Is it one of ours or just one we select as important?
so you don't have an answer ......
Psychoblues
09-28-2007, 12:12 AM
Not at all, m'59. You don't have an answer or even understand your own question.
so you don't have an answer ......
Israel. Really think about it.
really?....can you link me to some historical data indicating the nation of palestine existed for thousands of years?
Palestinians have lived there since the 7th century. They are a cohesive community and have been for a long time.
Here you go, here is a list of their towns and villages, (all destroyed to create Israel in its place).
http://www.doublestandards.org/villages.html
District of al-Quds (Jerusalem): 37 localities
Al-Jura (420) - [Ora]
Al-Maliha (1940) - [Manahat]
Al-Qabu (260)
Al-Qastal (90)
Al-Walaja (1650) - [Amminadav]
Allar (x)
Aqqur (40)
Artuf (350) - [Naham/Har Tuv]
Beit Itab (540)
Beit Mahsir (2400) - [Beit Me'ir]
Beit Naqquba (240) - [Beit Neqofa]
Beit Thul (260)
Beit Umm al-Meis (70)
Bureij (720)
Deir al-Hawa (60)
Deir ash-Sheikh (220)
Deir Rafat (430)
Deir Yasin (610) - [Kefar Shaul]
Deiraban (2100) - [Mahseya]
Ein Karim (3180) - [Ein Kerem]
Ishwa (620) - [Eshta'ol]
Islin (260)
Jarash (190)
Kasla (280) - [Kesalon]
Khirbet al-Lauz (450)
Khirbet al-Umur (270)
Khirbet Deir Amr (10) - [Etanim]
Khirbet Ismallah (20)
Khirbet Nataf (40)
Lifta (2550) - [Me-Neftoah]
Qaluniya (910)
- [Mevassert Jerushal.]
Ras Abu Ammar (620)
Sar'a (340)
Saris (560) - [Shoresh]
Sataf (450)
Suba (620) - [Zova]
Sufla (60)
District of al-Khalil (Hebron): 15 localities
Ajjur (3730)
Al-Qubeiba (1060) - [Lakhish]
Barqusiya (330)
Beit Jibrin (2430) - [Beit Guvrin]
Beit Nattif (2150) - [Netiv B"L]
Deir ad-Dubban (730)
Deir Nakhkhas (600)
Kidna (450)
Mughallis (540)
Ra'na (190)
Tall as-Safi (1290)
Zakariya (1180) - [Kefar Zekharya]
Zeita (330)
Zikrin (960)
Ad-Dawayima (3710) - [Amazya]
District of Gaza: 45 localities
Al-Faluja (4670)
Al-Jiya (1230) - [Ge'a]
Al-Jura (2420) - [Ashkelon]
Al-Masmiya al-Kabira (2510)
- [Mashmia' Shalom]
Al-Masmiya al-Saghira (530)
- [Kefar Ha-Rif]
Al-Muharraqa (580)
As-Sawafir al-Gharbiya (1030)
- [Merkaz Shapira]
As-Sawafir ash-Shamaliya (680)
As-Sawafir ash-Sharquiya (960)
- [En Zurim]
Barbara (2410) - [Mavqi'im]
Barqa (890) - [Gan Yavne]
Batani al-Gharbi (980) - [Azriqam]
Batani ash-Sharqi (650)
Beit Affa (700) - [Yad Natan]
Beit Daras (2750)
Beit Jirya (940)
Beit Tima (1060)
Bi'lin (180)
Bureir (2740)
Deir Suneid (730)
Dimra (520) - [Erez]
Haj (810)
Hamama (5010) - [Ashqelon-Barnea]
Hatta (970) - [Rewaha]
Hirbiya (2240) - [Karmiya]
Huleiqat (420)
Ibdis (540)
Iraq al-Manshiya (2010)
Iraq Suweidan (660)
Isdud (4630)
Jaladiya (360) - [Zeharya]
Julis (1030) - [Hodiya]
Juseir (1180) - [Menuha]
Karatiya (1370)
Kaufakha (500)
Kaukaba (680) - [Kokhav]
Khirbet al-Khisas (150)
Najd (620)
Ni'iliya (1310)
Qastina (890)
Summeil (950) - [Nahala]
Sumsum (1290)
Tall al-Turmus (760) - [Arugot]
Yasur (1070)
District of Tulkarm: 10 localities
Kafr Saba (1270) - [Kefar Saba]
Kh. al-Jalama (70) - [Lahavot Haviva]
Kh. al-Manshiya (260) -[Giv'at Hayyim]
Khirbet Beit Lid (460) - [Nordiya]
Khirbet Zalafa (210) - [Giv'at Hayyim]
Miska (880)
Qaqun (1970) - [Yikkon]
Tabsar (x) - [Ra'anana]
Kafr Saba (1270) ' [Kefar Sava]
Umm Khalid (970) - [Netanya]
District of Ramleh: 54 ocalities
A.. Fadl as-Sautariya (x)
- [Talme Menashe]
Abu Shusha (870)
Al-Barriya (510) - [Azarya]
Al-Burj (480)
Al-Haditha (760) - [Hadid]
Al-Kheima (190)
Al-Kuneisiya (40)
Al-Latrun (390)
Al-Mansura (90)
Al-Mughar (1740)
Al-Mukheizin (200) - [Yad Binyamin]
Al-Muzeiri'a - [Mazor]
Al-Qubab (1980) - [Kefar Bin Nun]
Al-Qubeiba (1720) - [Kefar Gebirol]
Al-Tira (1290) - [Bareqet]
Aqir (2480) - [Qiryat Eqron]
At-Tina (750)
Bashshit (1620) - [Aseret]
Beit Jiz (550) - [Har'el]
Beit Nabala (2310) - [Beit Nehemya]
Beit Shanna (210)
Beit Susin (210) - [Ta'oz]
Bir Ma'in (510)
Bir Salim (x) - [Nezer Sereni]
Burfiliya (730)
Daniyal (410) - [Kefar Daniel]
Deir Abu Salama (60)
Deir Aiyub (320)
Deir Muheisin (460)
Deir Tarif (1750) - [Beit Arif]
Idhnibba (490)
Innaba (1420)
Jilya (330)
Jimzu (1510) - [Gimzo]
Jindas (x) - [Ginnaton]
Kharruba (170)
Khirbet adh-Dhuheiriya (100)
Khirbet al-Buweira (190)
Khulda (280) - [Mishmar David]
Majdal Yaba (1520) - [Rosh Ha-Ayin]
N... (1470)
Nabi Rubin (1420)
Qatra (1210) - [Gedera]
Qazaza (940)
Qula (1010)
Sajad (370)
Salbit (510) - [Shal'avim]
Sarafand al-Amar (1950)
Sarafand al-Kharab (1040) - [Nes Ziona]
Seidun (210)
Shahma (280) - [Qidron]
Shilta (100)
Yibna (5420) - [Yavne]
Zarnuqa (2380)
District of Jaffa: 19 localities
Al-Haram (520) - [Reshef]
Al-Kheiriya (1420)
Al-Mirr (170) - [Kefar Ha-Baptistim]
Al-Yahudiya (5650) - [Yehud]
As-Safiriya (3070)
Beit Dajan (3840) - [Beit Dagan]
Biyar Adas (300) - [Ganne Am]
Fajja (1200) - [Petah Tikva]
Jalil (470) - [Gelilot]
Jammasin (1810) - [Tel Aviv]
Kafr Ana (2800) - [Neve Efrayim]
Rantiya (590) - [Nofekh]
Salama (6670) - [Kefar Shalem]
Saqiya (1100) - [Or Yehuda]
Sheikh Muwannis (1930) - [Ramat Aviv]
Yazur (4030) - [Azor]
District of Haifa: 45 localities
? Ein Ghazal (2170) - [Ofer]
Abu Shusha (720) - [Mishmar Ha'Emeq]
Abu Zureiq (550) - [Nahala'ot]
Al-Buteimat (110) - [Regavim]
Al-Kafrin (920)
Al-Khureiba (x)
Al-Mansi (1200) - [Midrakh Oz]
Al-Mazar (210)
Al-Tira (5270)
Al-Waraqani (x) - [Kefar Barukh]
An-Naghnaghiya
Ar-Rihaniya (240) - [Ein Ha-Emeq]
As-Sarafand (290) - [Zerufa]
As-Sindiyana (1250) - [Ammiqam]
Balad ash-Sheikh (1420) - [Tel Hanan]
Bureika (29) - [Zikhron Ya'akov]
Daliyat ar-Ruha (280)
- [Ramot Menashe]
Ein Haud (650) - [En Hod]
Ghubaiya at-Tahta (1130)
- [Mishmar Ha'Emeq]
Ijzim (2970) - [Kerem Maharal]
Jaba (1140)
Jalama (x)
Kafr Lam (340) - [Ha-Bonim]
Khirbet ad-Damun (340)
Khirbet al-Burj (x)
Khirbet al-Majdal (x) - [Sede Yitzhaq]
Khirbet al-Manshiya (260)
Khirbet al-Mansura
Khirbet Qumbaza (x)
Khirbet Umm ad-Daraj (x)
Khubbeiza (290) - [Even Yitzhaq]
Lidd (Al-Awwadim) (640)
Qannir (750)
Qira wa Qamun (410) - [Yoqne'am]
Qisariya (960) - [(Caesarea)]
Sabbarin (1700) - [Ammiqam]
Tantura (1490) - [Dor / Nahsholim]
Umm ash-Sha'uf (480) - [Giv'at Nili]
Umm az-Zinat (1470)
Wadi Ara (230) - [Barqai]
Yajur (610) - [Nesher]
District of Akka (Acre): 25 localities
Ad-Damun (1310)
Al-Bassa (2950) - [Shelomi]
Al-Birwa (1460) - [Ahihud]
Al-Ghabisiya (690)
Al-Kabri (1530) - [Kabri]
Al-Mansura (360)
Amqa (1240) - [Amqa]
An-Nahr (610)
Ar-Ruweis (330)
As-Sumeiriya (760) - [Regba]
At-Tall
Az-Zib (1910) - [Gesher Ha-Ziv]
Deir al-Qasi (1250) - [Elqosh]
Iqrit (490)
Kafr I'nan (360)
Khirbet Ja'atun (x)
Khirbet Samah (360)
Kuweikat (1050) - [Beit Ha-Emeq]
Manshiya (1080)
Mi'ar (770)
Nabi Rubin (1420) - [Even Menachem]
Suhmata (1130) - [Zuri'el]
Suruh (x)
Tarbikha (1000) - [Shomera]
Umm al-Faraj (800) - [Ben Ammi]
District of Nazareth: 4 localities
? Indur (620)
Al-Mujeidil (1900) -[Migdal Ha-Emeq]
Ma'lul (690)
Saffuriya (4330) - [Zippori]
District of Jenin: 6 localities
Al-Lajjun (1103) - [Megiddo]
Al-Mazar (270)
Ein al-Mansi (90)
Khirbet al-Jaufa (x)
Nuris (580) - [Nurit]
Zir'in (1420) - [Yizre'el]
District of Beisan (Beth Shean): 22 localities
Al-Ashrafiya (230) - [Sheluhot]
Al-Bira (260)
Al-Hamidiya (220) - [Hamadya]
Al-Murassas (460)
As-Samiriya (x) - [Sede Terumot]
At-Taqa (x)
At-Tira (150) - [Gazit]
Danna (190)
Farwana (330)
Hakimiya (520)
Jabbul (250)
Kafra (430)
Kaukab al-Hawa (300) - [(Belvoir)]
Khirbet al-Mazar (x)
Khirbet az-Zawiya (x)
Khirbet Umm Sabuna (x)
Khirbet Umm Sarhan (x)
Khirbet Zab'a (1931:143) - [Doshen]
Qumiya (440) - [Ein Harod]
Sirin (810)
Tall ash-Shauk (120) - [Nir David]
Yubla (210)
District of Taburiya (Tiberias): 24 localities
Al-Hadatha (520)
Al-Hamma (290) - [Hammat Gader]
Al-Manara (x) - [Menora Hospital]
Al-Manshiya (1938:362)
Al-Mansura (x)
Al-Ubeidiya (870) - [Beit Zera']
An-Nuqeib (320)
As-Samakiya (380) - [(Cafarnaum)]
As-Samra (290) - [Ha-On]
Ash-Shajara (770) - [Ilaniya]
At-Tabigha (330) - [(Heptapegon)]
Ghuweir Abu Shusha (1240) - [Ginossar]
Hittin (1190) - [Kefar Zeitim]
Kafr Sabt (480) - [Sede Ilan]
Khirbet al-Wa'ra as-Sauda (x)
Lubiya (2350) - [Lavi]
Ma'dhar (480)
Majdal (360)
Nimrin (320)
Samakh (3460) - [Ma'agan]
Ulam (720)
Yaquq (210) - [Huqoq]
District of Safed (Zefat): 76 localities
Abil al-Qamh (330) - [Yuval]
Ad-Darbashiya (310)
Adh-Dhahiriya at-Tahta (350)
Al-Abbisiya (830) - [Kefar Szold]
Al-Amir (x) - [Amir]
Al-Buweiziya (510)
Al-Ghabbatiya (60)
Al-Ghuraba (200) - [Gonen]
Al-Hamra (730) - [Lehavot Habashan]
Al-Huseiniya (340)
Al-Khalisa (1840) - [Kiryat Shemona]
Al-Khisas (530) - [Ha-Gosherim]
Al-Madahil (1931:100) - [Kefar Szold]
Al-Malikiya (360) - [Malkiya ]
Al-Manara (490) - [Menara]
Al-Manshiya (1938: 362)
Al-Mansura (360) - [She'ar Yashuv]
Al-Muftakhira (350)
Al-Qeitiya (940) - [Beit Hilel]
Al-Ulmaniya (260)
Al-Waiziya (x)
Alma (950) - [Alma]
Ammuqa (140) - [Ammuqa]
An-Na'ima (1030) - [Kefar Blum]
Ar-Ras al-Ahmar (620)
- [Keren Ben Zimra]
Arab az-Zubeib
As-Salihiya (1520) - [Kefar Blum]
As-Sanbariya (130) - [Ma'ayan Barukh]
Ash-Shuna (170)
At-Tuleil - [Hulata]
Az-Zawiya (760) - [Ne'ot Mordekhai]
Az-Zuq al-Fauqani (160) - [Yuval]
Beisamun (20)
Biriya (240)
Dallata (360) - [Dalton]
Dawwara (700) - [Amir]
Deishum (590) - [Dishon]
Ein az-Zeitun (820) - [Ein Zeitim]
Fara (320)
Farradiya (670) - [Parod]
Fir'in (740) - [Hazor Ha-Gelilit]
Harrawi (x) - [Qeren]
Hunin (1620) - [Margaliyot]
Ja'una (1150) - [Rosh Pina]
Jahula (420)
Jubb Yusuf (170)
Kafr Bir'im (710)
Khan ad-Duweir (1938:150) - [Senir]
Khirbet al-Hiqab/Uqeiba (x)
Khirbet al-Muntar (x)
Khirbet as-Samman - [Shamir]
Khirbet Kharraza (x)
Khirbet Khati (x)
Khiyam al-Walid (280)
- [Lehavot Habashan]
Kirad al-Baqqara (360)
Kirad al-Ghannama (350)
- [Ayyelet Ha-Shahar]
Lazzaza (230) - [Beit Hilel]
Mallaha (890)
Mansurat al-Kheit (200)
- [Kefar Ha-Nasi]
Marus (80)
Meirun (290) - [Meron]
Mughr al-Kheit (940)
- [Hazor Ha-Gelilit]
Nabi Yusha' (70) - [Ramot Naftali]
Qabba'a (460)
Qadas (290)
Qaddita (240)
Safsaf (910) - [Sifsufa]
Saliha (1070) - [Yir'on]
Sammu'i (310) - [Kefar Shamma'i]
Sasa (1130) - [Sasa]
Shauqa at-Tahta (200) - [Dafna]
Teitaba (530) - [Dalton]
Yarda (20) - [Mishmar Ha-Yarden]
Zangharriya (840)
Zuq at-Tahtani (1050) - [Beit Hilel]
The fact that they had been colonized by the ottoman empire dosent change their rights as a group and community/culture who lived there together for thousands of years and is the basis for any legitimate claim to being a "nation".
And who do you think expelled the jews? You think it was just the romans? You think the muslims did not kick anyone out? Let us get you some education padewan, Moohamdead first prayed to Jerusalem, know why? Because it is the JEWISH holy land/city. When jews said he was not their prophet he turned his back and prayed to Mecca. Then the muslims stole the land by force and then centuries later the jews BOUGHT the land back. Yes, read history before the balfour declaration and you will find that jews had already legally and freely purchased the land from the so-called palestinians.
funny that you woudl support their right to it, yet not the jews when also you fail to realize the land was lost in war because the ottoman empire sided with the losers.
You are talking of ancient conflicts and the truth of all that would be hard to verify. According to our lore of the times, the jews actually came after and also did conquering of that same land and then were later conquered themselves. It makes no difference though, no one gets to commit genocide based on ANCIENT claims against "groups of people" who have been dead THOUSANDS of years.
This as been discussed and haggled over for the last 20 years. There has always been one problems. The pals won't except anything except the total annihilation of Israel. The libs here want the same thing.
Actually the REVERSE is true. It is Israel who continues to EXPAND settlements and eat up more land making a 2 state solution impossible. They continue to develop very permanant settlements and are investing quite a bit of money and involves thousands and thousands of residents....to dismantle them would mean you would have to treat them as the zionists did the palestinians...drive them out by force and destroy them with violence. I doubt they will do this to their own jewish citizens.
It is Isreal who controls all the water, the movements of palestinians, even control much of palestinian tax revenues which they with-hold often (same with water), they bulldoze the homes and buildings of palestinians...all the while building more settlements.
why don't the arabs solve the palestine question themsleves....
No, what you really asking is for the rest of the arab states to HELP Isreal by just absorbing the palestinian people and thereby completing the genocide. Palestinian life and culture will cease to exist, palestinians will cease to exist as a nation and as a political entity, they will be destroyed completely.
You want the arab states to solve it by completing Isreals genocide for it and leaving the rest of the west bank and gaza for Israel.
IMHO that is the big Arab lie (or should i say Muslim). They will make SURE that the Palestinian issue is never resolved. They thrive on it. Much like they thrive on their hatred for America.
Not true, they dont have any real power in the situation. It is Israel who wont allow it to end and they have a very specific goal in mind. They dont want the conflict end until they have taken it all...and they are quite close to that goal.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/728a69d4-12b1-11dc-a475-000b5df10621,dwp_uuid=fc3334c0-2f7a-11da-8b51-00000e2511c8.html
A new map of the West Bank (see below), 40 years after its conquest by Israel in the Six Day War, gives the most definitive picture so far of a territory in which 2.5m Palestinians are confined to dozens of enclaves separated by Israeli roads, settlements, fences and military zones.
Israel controls the water, it can easily relinquish control over palestinian water of which it really has no right to control. Israel has promised for decades to rectify the situation, yet it has only gotten WORSE.
Israel could stop expanding settlements, but it keeps building them...
Israel could stop taking more palestinian land for their wall, they could stop cutting farmers off from their own farms, they could stop destroying farms and olive trees (which are must of what palestinians live on), they could stop stealing olive trees and replanting them inside Israel etc..
Those are the things that really keep the conflict going...but as long as the conflict continues, it gives Israel the oppurtunity to TAKE MORE until they reach the day when they HAVE IT ALL. It is Israel who is willing to risk and endanger the generations it takes to pull this off.
The US also aids the power Israel has and helps them remain in a posiition in where they dont HAVE to compromise or cooperate, a position in where they DESIRE to continue conflict because there will be a PROFIT result from continuing the conflict.
The palestinians have no choice, they must fight back to save themselves. Their only other option is to submit to the genocide.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.