Just because you don't understand the historical record doesn't make your point of view correct.
Jewish peoples began moving back into the region now known as Israel during the Ottoman Empire in the late 19th century. They purchased land, as anyone always has, from Arabs and the Ottomans. More and more continued to do this to escape persecution throughout the world. After the end of the war and the creation of the British Mandate, the Brits disallowed further Jewish immigration in favor of only Arab immigration. After sometime the Arab and Jewish populations came into conflict. Following World War II, with the British Mandate expiring in 1948 they attempted to create a plan to settle the region following the end of the mandate. As the Jewish population was centered in one main area and the Arabs in another, the majority proposal was to split the region into a majority Jewish state and majority Arab state. Another proposal at the time was also to create one state with both populations. (Which resembles modern Israel) The United Nations settled on creating the states, the Arabs refused all proposals. The Mandate was split into Israel and Jordan, Jordan and Syria both refused to accept any Arabs from "Palestine" as they didn't want the "trash" in their new countries. In response to the creation of Israel all the Arab nations attacked Israel and were soundly defeated, thus Israel won what was effectively the "civil war" and therefore was a legitimate state in all respects.
It is absolutely foolhearted and moronic to claim that if Israel didn't exist there wouldn't be terrorists. After all Hezbollah isn't even an anti-Israeli terrorist group and doesn't give a shit about "Palestine" or anything similar. It's an arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.
Hell, there wouldn't be any terrorism towards Israel if the elites of the Arab world didn't use Israel as a distraction to their tyrannical states. It's a lot easier to just blame the Jews instead of focusing on your own problems. Then they fire up the upper middle class kids and get them to blow up Sbarro's instead of dying their hair and cutting themselves.
Even al Qaeda isn't an Israeli related terrorist group. Both Hezbollah and al Qaeda are openly "fighting the West", they just use Israel as a dual-propaganda point, as Israel is also considered part of the "West" what with it being an advanced democratic state in the swamp of backwater fascist states.
Technically the only terrorist groups that resulted from Israel you could argue are Hamas and Palestianian Islamic Jihad, and they didn't form until 40 and 35 years after the creation of Israel respectively. Both are also funded by Iran and Syria.
Here's the truth of the situation. From 1948-1973, the Arab elites waged conventional war on Israel and failed. In 1979, Egypt realized the foolishness and the peace treaty was signed. It wasn't until the Arab nations were soundly defeated in conventional warfare and they started to drop out (Egypt and Jordan, though the later not officially until 1994) that the terrorist war began. By using proxy groups, the states could wage unending war on Israel (and others...like say the United States) without the consequences that would have naturally followed.
It was this shift in warfare style that led to the situation today. The PLO was hiding in Lebanon and Israel invaded to push them out and end the Lebanese Civil War. Then they
withdrew.
"Peace" talks were setup numerous times. Israel offered 98% of what the Arabs wanted and Arafat responded by launching the Intifadah. Despite this Israel still
withdrew from the West Bank and Gaza. Don't forget they
withdrew from Golan inbetween these two historical markers.
True, Israel was to be created as a Jewish state, but it is not one. It is simply a state where a majority population follows one religion, it has immigrants and populations of all colors, creeds, religions, etc.
Speaking of history...I found this, found it prudent to one's thoughts.
Once, there was a small nation created by international consensus from the ashes of a world war. It included two main nationalities and it was the only free nation in the region, surrounded by larger neighbors who resented it and coveted its land, which they felt rightfully belonged to them. In spite of that, it was a prosperous and free republic, and its citizens enjoyed one of the highest living standards in that part of the world.
As a result of the hostile attitude of its neighbor countries, this tiny country had developed a well trained and superbly equipped military, with advanced weapons and its own arms industry. It was also allied with the Western democracies both by its values and by strategic and practical necessity.
One of this small country`s warlike neighbors had a number of its former natives in a part of the tiny nation and began orchestrating riots and other terrorist activity among them in an effort to subvert and conquer their neighbor. When the government of the small country attempted to restore order, the larger nation accused it of violating its former nationals' human rights and committing an "occupation."
A propaganda campaign was begun, claiming that the small country had committed "war crimes" and violated international law. Huge, violent demonstrations were organized by leaders of the larger nation to agitate for the "independence" of their former countrymen.
The larger nation claimed that it could not control the popular anger in the "street" and that it would be forced to go to war and plunge the region into chaos. The case was frequently made that the small country was "racist" and should never have been created at all.
A quartet of nations, including the Western democracies the small nation was allied with, came together to find a solution and a peace plan was created -- without the input or agreement of anyone from the small country.
The peace plan involved a trade of land for peace, with the former nationals of the larger nation to have an independent state on a large part of the small country`s land.
No one in the Quartet would have considered repatriating the natives of the larger nation back to their original home country, or giving them some of the larger nation`s territory to live on.
When the leaders and diplomats of the small nation protested at this one-sided settlement, they were bullied into acceptance with threats of withdrawal of all aid and military assistance by the very western allies they had counted on for support in preserving their freedom. Instead, they were offered guarantees for the security of their remaining territory.
They were likewise abandoned by the international body that had brought them into existence in the first place. They reluctantly accepted the Quartet`s diktat, counting on the guarantees they were given for their security and territorial integrity. Certain politicians in the small country were even happy at the settlement, since the "occupation" was ended and peace preserved. And the international community congratulated them on making sacrifices and bold moves for peace.
After Munich, Czechoslovakia was forced to withdraw to indefensible borders, leaving a large part of its superb defenses and arms works in the hands of "Slovakia," a German satellite.
Less than a year later Slovakia became Germany`s bridge for invasion, and the tiny country was crushed between Hitler`s Germany and Pilsudski`s Poland. The international community did nothing to honor its guarantees, nothing whatever...and alone, without a single voice being raised in protest, the Czechs were crushed.
When the Western democracies threw Czechoslovakia to the wolves they eliminated Hitler`s worry about a strong adversary on his eastern border, paved the way for the Comintern Pact with Russia and virtually guaranteed World War Two. Had the West stood by Czechoslovakia, Hitler would never have dared to move.
Those who favor bullying Israel into a so-called peace settlement would do well to remember the last time the West betrayed a strong ally to preserve "peace in our time." They might want to consider what a victory of this kind for the forces of Islamic fascism might mean to the West and preserving its freedom.
And the Israelis would do well to remember that all the security guarantees in the world are no substitute for defensible borders and a strong military. And that `security' is not something that can be left to others.
History bites back, especially to those who forget its lessons.
I'm saying they're not better than Nazis because they are using the same "expansionism (or whatever you call it in English)" theory Hitler and Mussolini used back in the 30's and the 40's.
Which proves how stupid you must be. Apparently withdrawing from regions you temporarily held after responding to attacks is equivalent to Hitler's annexation of most of Europe. (You're probably forgetting that Hitler was never attacked before his expansion.)
The opposition to Israel is the stupidest thing ever. We have a democratic nation that's open to everyone and people would rather it be destroyed by fascists.
Hitler attacked others because it was "German" land, the Arabs do the same thing and everybody's onboard with them.
Israel has civil rights, human rights, liberal freedoms. The other states in the Middle East are some of the most totalitarian in the entire world. They slaughter gays and women, things everybody loves and wants to protect. They butcher their own and everyone elses citizens. They have no liberal freedoms, womens and civil rights erotica for the Left don't exist in these countries.
Do you really want to align yourself with them? Just because they lost a sliver of land that was borderline unsuitable to life before Israel turned it into their thriving society?
One side features a state, that yes was created from a UN mandate, that is democratic, has a liberal society, has a legal system, is economically dynamic. The other side is a bunch of fascist states that attempt to conquer their neighbors, butcher anyone and everyone, run by "crime family" style (or in the case of Hussein and Assad, actual true families and not just style) governments.
Maybe I just can't fathom supporting the latest in a long line of fascists against liberals. It's the reason I despise the Left so. They've been on the side of murderers for years. They supported Hitler and Mussolini. They supported and still do support the Communists who've killed a hundred million. They support the Islamic fascists even as they kill their own, kill others (in Africa, Israel, Europe, Asia) with no regard for the "international law" they so dearly love. (Which the 30's fascists and Communists did as well.)
It's truly baffeling. They whine about gay and women rights in the West, while turning a blind eye to the treatment of those and others in the Middle East, let alone other parts of the world. They threaten with the boogyman of a "theocratic" state at home, while supporting states where those who don't practice the right religion are murdered. They worship at the altar of the UN, while it rapes girls in Africa, plunders billions in scandals, places the worst human rights violators and thugs on the Human Rights Council, allows a state like Syria to chair the Security Council while refusing to allow Israel to ever chair any council, and refuses to enforce it's own policies.
Infact, it's disgusting. When an Israel or United States or Australia takes initiative to solve a problem, they're decried. They're the bad guy for defending themselves, or saving a people. The fascists who butcher civilians daily are the victims.
These threads always get me. It's disheartning to see what people believe and support. They'd rather join in with murderers and thugs. (Which probably explains the love for rap...I kid, I kid.) They'd prefer to defend those murderers and thugs to the grave than ever say one good thing about those who want to make things better.
I think they could have a better solution like making allies with the Lebanese goverment and figuring some kind of plan out to capture all or most of the Hezbollah members.
You mean, like the ones who are in the Lebanese government?
Are you saying they are the one's attacking all the other countries? Get it through your head, the only Arabs that are involved in these wars are terrorist groups that were established because of the Jews taking Palestine's land.
Name a conflict in the world. Discounting African warlords killing each other (and a lot of those even count). Nearly all of them involve Islamic fascists attacking someone else. Sudan. Madrid. Beslan. Areas around Indonesia including Bali and the Phillipines. London. India. The Danish Cartoon debacle. Israel. 9/11. Theo Van Gogh. The French riots. Even going back a decade or so, major conflicts have included Iraq-Iran, The Gulf War, Algeria, Nigeria, Various Wars against Israel.
If it's not Islamic fascists it's others like the Serbian fascists.
I guess it's a lot easier to just call the liberal side "fascists" than to actually deal with people who will kill you and everyone else. Though I think it's just a wacked out state of mind.
It's like if a gang attacked someone, violently mugging and raping them. A cop shoots a couple of them and accidently hits a bystander. So you respond by calling the cop a fascist, trying him and savaging him for hitting the bystander. Meanwhile you give medals to the gang, take the survivors to dinner and give them a seat on the city council and school board. And you start holding protests against the existance of the police.
Oh wait. They already do that.
I'm depressed now. Enough of this depressing place for now.
