Comments on: Breaking the Myths About the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict

By: The Cultural Conflict | Babeled

The Cultural Conflict | Babeled — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:04:02 +0000

[...] and cultures, we could gain a new approach for solving many old conflicts. Although I provide the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as an example, this model/theory could apply to other international disputes as [...]

By: The Jews Fought Hard for Israel » Babeled

The Jews Fought Hard for Israel » Babeled — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:23:46 +0000

[...] couple of days ago, Oren Gulasa babeled about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from which an interesting discussion followed suit. Although the question of who is right and wrong [...]

By: Oren Gulasa

Oren Gulasa — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 04:04:45 +0000

Jason, I am very touched by your passion to the truth. Unfortantly, you are just not right about the Britian offer.
Please refer to Balfour Declaration from 1917. There were four options;
1. Give all the land to a new Arab state.
2. Give all land to the Jews
3. Turn all land to Syria
4. Divide the land fairly between the Arabs and the Jews so each could create a home-land based on Slef-Declaration.

Although option #4 was officiely chosen; The Arabs always refer to Palestine as part of Syria. They wanted it all and demand elmination of Jewsih presence from Palestine. They rejected the offer; twice.
As per the land we took in 1967, some of Israeli leaders already agreed to give it back. I personally think that it is a mistake; But if you grant me absolute Peace and normalizaion with all the Arab world, i would have to agree. Can you?

By: Jason Morgan

Jason Morgan — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:28:42 +0000

Oren – thanks for the response. The population estimate I quoted listed Christians separately, and there were almost as many Christians as Jews at the time I may point out, but the Druz and Bedoins may very well be included in the ‘Muslim’ category.

To address the “two-state partition” point you make: I agree, the Arabs lack of an identity was at the core of the matter. But the part you are choosing not to acknowledge is that a Western nation, Britain, OFFERED to assist them build an identity and betrayed the Arabs on this promise TWICE. And instead of giving the Arabs what was promised, they instead gave the land to the Jews.

Are you seriously going to say that you can’t understand why the Arabs are angry at Jews for having possession of land that was once theirs’ and was taken away from them by a country that promised to help them? I just can’t believe that a person can’t empathize with that at all, which the entire population of Israel and most of the Western world can’t seem to get their heads around.

By: Greg Molyneux

Greg Molyneux — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:45:56 +0000

I agree that our presence does not promote peace. But if we ceased support of Israel (financially and politically) we lose a strategic ally, and practically ensure mass chaos and war in the Middle East. Sure the region is a mess with us there, but the power vacuum left my a complete withdrawal and abandonment of Israel would be very ugly. At which point the blood would still be on our hands.

By: Andrew Blanco

Andrew Blanco — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:40:33 +0000

I understand that the situation is ridiculously complex and that there are more factors than just Western financial support…I just can’t see how any major association with the US could help Israel establish peace with its Arab neighbors – especially considering the anti-American attitude resulting from the Iraqi war, the Afghan war, and the escalating Iranian situation.

By: Greg Molyneux

Greg Molyneux — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 19:30:36 +0000

Andrew, that completely oversimplifies the situation. Things are far more deep-seeded and less superficial than that.

By: Andrew Blanco

Andrew Blanco — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:54:05 +0000

Its unfortunate that Israel is such prime real estate for Western countries invested in Arab resources…

Until Israel eases its dependence on U.S. financial support (bribes), it will never be taken seriously by the Arab community. It is their association with Western countries that undermines every effort to achieve peaceful relations with their neighbors.

The fact is that the U.S. is continually fighting a war that it continually helps to maintain. It’s a vicious cycle all fueled by dependence on oil.

We pay for war.

By: Gregory Rineberg

Gregory Rineberg — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 03:42:30 +0000

Unfortunately this debate has never had a resolution to it and thats why there will always be conflict in the region. All parties involved are too stubborn to dissolve their beliefs and will to ensure a better life. Make no mistake though that the Jewish Zionists in Israel fought hard to establish a Jewish State.

By: Oren Gulasa

Oren Gulasa — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:37:10 +0000

thanks Jason, good comments. The realty is that the Jews were substantial majority in those areas of Palestine partitioned by the United Nations for a Jewsih state.
Pepole sometimes mistakenbly include the population of whhat is now Jordan, as well as what is now Gaza and the West Bank in estimating the Arab population of that time. Aslo, the number you cam up with most probably contain Druz, Bediuns, Christians and others.
Most of the land originated to the Jeswsih state by the UN was a desert, that later was made fertile by the Jewsih settlement.
Most important, the Arab at this time were lack of national identity. If the Arab had accpeted the UN partition, there would have been large Palestinian state alongside a Jewish state. The two states solution, whats now is a concensus would be achieved without bloodshed. Instead, in 1947 and once again in 2000 (in Camp David talks) Arab nation’s leaders and Palestinian leaders reject the offer and chose the way of war to reach the vast land dream.
And all of this is without mentioning the steps we made to “nationize” the Palestinians problem as none of the Arab firendly state never did. In that sense, we recognize them as people.