If Syria gives up occupation so should Israel.

[hector459]

But of course, the Bush administration is for freedom and democracy everywhere except in Israeli occupied territories.

[frosted flake]

1. What is Israel occupying?

Except land that they sit on after THEY were invaded by Egypt & Syria. It is apples & oranges.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. Actually, no.

Golan Heights was taken over by force by the Israelis. As was (and is) the M.O., Israeli settlers would keep inching closer and closer to the Israeli/Syrian border, until they finally crossed it. Syria issued warnings, which were ignored, and then they took military action to remove the settlers. In response, Israel of course took responsive military action and claimed sovereignty over the Golan Heights.

And then there's that little issue of Palestine, the country that existed on that land prior to England just giving it to the Israelis.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Padraig18]

15. If you think someone is a disruptor, hit 'Alert'

Let the Mods deal with it; calling someone a freeper publicly is a personal attack.

[Lone Pawn]

22. Sir yes sir.

And my apologies to Frosted Flake.

EDIT: Although, since he's been tombstoned, my apologies don't extend *that* far.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

5. I happen to like Jews a great deal.

I happen to think ISRAELIS are extreme human rights violators, however. The two are completely separate notions.

Unfortunately, it's easier for those who are supporters of Israel to merely label people who are pro-Palestinian or Arab as anti-Semites. It's an easy way to quiet dissent. It really doesn't work on me, however.

But since you seem to think you have all the "real" information, why don't you be a darling and come forth with it?

[frosted flake]

6. So are my PARENTS in ISRAEL human rights violators also?

GOOD GRIEF! read the HISTORY of the region.

[Lone Pawn]

10. I have, and on the other hand, since you haven't stated a single fact yet,

I highly doubt you have.

Your parents are likely no worse human rights violators than the average citizen of Germany in 1937. (Ooh! Godwin'd!)

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

11. Do they support the current government?

Unless they're fighting for severe governmental reforms, yes, they are. And yes, I've read the history of the region, from both perspectives. I have also BEEN there and witnessed what goes on there.

Still, you provide me with no rebutting facts. Just hateful misplaced rhetoric.

[Lone Pawn]

7. Not to support him, but

Palestine wasn't its own country before 1948. It was a British mandate--no more its own nation than Tibet is.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

9. So country isn't a good term...

but the people were there well before 1948 and are under a rule that is not their own. That is the definition of an occupation.

[Lone Pawn]

12. That's certainly true.

I don't disagree with your message--I'm just a stickler for accuracy. It makes it harder to for them to tear apart your case by fixating on minor mistakes.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

13. I agree, and thank you.

I misspoke and needed to be called out on it.

[atreides1]

8. Tell You What

Why don't you tell all of us the correct information, then we can all look at both sides of this story.

And hopefully the information you provide are historical facts, and not because you like Jews.

Sound fair?

[MAlibdem]

14. Ok, let's talk 1967

1. Nassar's movement of troops into the Sinai and the blockade of Israel to the Red Sea forced Israel to place itself on war footing.

2. Egypt was poised to attack, which necessitated the Israeli defensive posture. Either Israel could maintain this posture, and suffer economically as a result (many units had to be called up/civilians put into military service), or israel could attack first and seize the advantage, or israel could back down and possibly be attacked and destroyed.

From the options, it's easy to see what made the most sense from a political and military standpoint. Egypt necessitated an Israeli response, which was overwhelming. Once Israel invaded Egypt, Syria and Jordan attacked from the north and east. Israel then fought and won a three front war in 6 days.

Ooooops to Egypt.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

16. Golan Heights happened in 1967.

Yom Kippur War was 1973.

[Lone Pawn]

17. It's still an occupation.

Are non-Israelis forcibly kept under Israeli rule? Yes. It is an occupation. The concept of "I get to oppress these people because a government that ruled over them 30 years ago tried to destroy the people who ruled over my father" isn't and shouldn't be valid in a remotely civilized world.

[MAlibdem]

26. the palestinians have been incapable of self-rule for most of the last...

30 years. and when the moment has come for them to make an agreement, Arafat fucked it up every time.

I personally like disengagment...build a wall, let the palestinians figure it out. help them when possible, supplies etc, even reparations for seized land.

But look at this little gem. you said "The concept of "I get to oppress these people because a government that ruled over them 30 years ago tried to destroy the people who ruled over my father" isn't and shouldn't be valid in a remotely civilized world." Then neither should the concept of "your grandfather took my grandfather's house when he was shooting at your grandfather - give it back." I think reparations for the purposes of getting a Palestinian state on its feet is fine and good. But no right of return. No withdrawl from strategic sites. Hell, id throw in east jerusalem (except for the jewish quarter...tho fundies wouldn't like that).

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

30. Actually, no.

When the "moment has come for them to make an agreement", Israelis killed Rabin. Then a new deal, which would turn the proposed Palestine into swiss cheese and create checkpoints on every major road, was put on the table. Arafat could never have accepted that deal and get the other Palestinian factions to agree with it.

[Lone Pawn]

31. Incapable of self rule?

Smacks of racism. Seriously. No people are incapable of self-rule--especially not because their unelected leader is a zealot. And it certainly doesn't help that the Israelis have been actively preventing the Palestinians from being 'ready' for self-rule.

And if I continue to live in your grandfather's house, and instead keep you in a tent and make you do yardwork in your grandfather's old backyard, I don't get to keep doing that regardless of what our grandfathers did. I'm keeping you in a tent with a gun pointed at you. That's not acceptable, regardless of history.

[Padraig18]

19. Facts are inconvenient things to some people here.

You are absolutely correct regarding what occurred.

[Lone Pawn]

21. Well, since by admission it was factually untrue,

that's an interesting interpretation.

[Padraig18]

23. Show me the admission that it was factually untrue.

I'll be damned if I can see where he admits that.

[Lone Pawn]

24. What the message was edited to at the moment I came in.

"1 second. Wrong war."

The message has changed to better reflect truth since you responded.

[MAlibdem]

28. my facts weren't wrong

i accurately described the yom kippur war. I was mistaken as to which war was being discussed. i apologize for the confusion.

http://lexicorient.com/e.o/yomkipwr.htm

http://www.nmhschool.org/tthornton/mehistorydatabase/1967_third_arab.htm

[Finding Rawls]

32. WOW

the Northfield Mount Hermon School is now the authority on the conflict. I feel cheated, I never knew.

[Lone Pawn]

33. You were correct in general,

but your specific claim was incorrect, if only on a technicality.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

20. Here's a quote for you:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v18/v18n5p36_Golan.html

Actually, Israel's seizure and occupation of this territory is based on a historical lie. This was frankly acknowledged by Israel General and cabinet minister Moshe Dayan in an interview given in 1976, but which was not made public until April 1997. Dayan, who died in 1981, was a key organizer of Israel's victory in the June 1967 Israel-Arab war.

"I made a mistake in allowing the conquest of the Golan Heights," he said, "As defense minister I should have stopped it because the Syrians were not threatening us at the time." The seizure went ahead, he added, not because Israel was threatened, but in response to pressure from Jews who coveted Syrian land, and from army commanders in northern Israel. "Of course was not necessary. You can say the Syrians are bastards and attack when you want. But this is not policy. You don't open aggression against an enemy because he's a bastard but because he's a threat."

[Lone Pawn]

25. I fail to see how the war necessitated forty years of illegal occupation.

We're already all aware of what happened in which war. We're asking why the war justifies Israeli oppression of non-Israelis.

[MAlibdem]

29. it doesn't

it does justify keeping the golan heights.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

34. I see you're not responding to post 20:

Here, I'll make it easy for you... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x87689#87718

[Lone Pawn]

35. And the 170000 IDP?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

27. See post 20

[durutti]

18. How dare you suggest...

That Israel be held to the same standards as every other state? ;-)

[Lithos]

36. Locking per I/P guidelines

Threads must be based on a recent news or op-ed article.

Lithos
I/P Forum Moderator
Democratic Underground