Originally Posted by
Loss Leader
What the hell are you talking about? I didn't say anything even remotely like this. I said that Israel's desire to keep the Golan Heights has a tactical component because they've been attacked from that border before.
Your argument is that, having stolen the coastal lands, Israel is justified in stealing more land to secure the proceeds. Where's the limit to that?
Quote:
To my knowledge, Israel was not the aggressor in any war ever.
Which is to say a clique of Europen Jews
defended themselves from 1890's Europe into possession of the lands and property of so many native Palestinians in 1949, said natives mostly being expelled, living in strange lands amongst strangers, penniless and dependent on the UN for shelter and food.
In fact the Yishuv launched a long-planned war of conquest and ethnic cleansing in which they had some success, particularly against unarmed civilians, but ultimately failed to complete on the first attempt, despite outnumbering and out-gunning what armed opposition there was. Hence the second and more successful effort in 1967.
Out of interest, how do
you imagine it happened?
Quote:
In any case, it's historically wrong to say that Jews took possession of Palestinian land. Palestine was an absolute wasteland when both Jews and Arabs starting building a presence at the turn of the 20th century.
Rubbish. Palestine was one of the most prosperous districts of the Ottoman Empire for centuries. It was also the most urbanised and most literate. You have fallen for Zionist propaganda.