What Would the Palestinians Do...?

[DogOnPorch]

does the collaboration of this single person mean that palestinians were nazis?

majority of palestinians and the arab world ignored the call on jihad by the mufti. palestinians had an incentive to help the allies, as they were promised restrictions on jewish immigration and a promise of full independence.

the peoples and governments of many countries in europe collaborated openly with the nazis. tragically, many of these peoples and governments happily pointed out their jewish citizens to the gestapo. so it's unfair, if not outright criminal, to exploit the grand mufti's conduct in order to eternally condemn the palestinian people as nazis, while ignoring the choices made by most european peoples and governments who openly collaborated with the nazis.

lets not forget the zionists who supported and collaborated with the nazis and the axis. the jewish stern gang received weapons from the italian fascists to use against the british.

here is a scanned copy of a letter sent by the stern gang to nazi germany, asking for an alliance. you can read all about it in joseph heller's book: The Stern Gang: Ideology, Politics and Terror, 1940-1949

then of course, one of the fathers of the modern day zionism ideology, zeev jabotinsky wrote this before his death:

"The world has become accustomed to the idea of mass migrations and has become fond of them." He later added, "Hitler--- as odious as he is to us---has given this idea a good name in the world."

that's from jewish historian tom segev's book.

i'm sure your simple, one tracked brain will not allow this information to process and we'll continue to see you post how palestinians are nazis.

The Stern Gang and Irgun are long since defunct. The fascist terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah exist today and still give their dear Mufti's Nazi salute while calling for the death of all Jews. European nations tried their Nazis while the Arabs hid them from the hangman's noose.

[bud]

The Stern Gang and Irgun are long since defunct.

israel was created with the help of those terrorist groups. one of israel's prime ministers was from the terrorist groups.

why deny this?

The fascist terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah exist today and still give their dear Mufti's Nazi salute

lols

give it up already. all palestinian factions have distanced themselves from the nazis and none deny the holocaust. the stiff arm out is used by many groups around the world like in taiwan, china, japan, malaysia... etc. etc.

look at these nazi malays!

you're a conspiracy theorist and revisionist.

[DogOnPorch]

why deny this?

I didn't...

lols

give it up already. all palestinian factions have distanced themselves from the nazis and none deny the holocaust. the stiff arm out is used by many groups around the world like in taiwan, china, japan, malaysia... etc. etc.

look at these nazi malays!

you're a conspiracy theorist and revisionist.

...you throw out a lot of BS for a Jew baiter Holocaust denier.

[jbg]

Bottom line is... both sides were willing to fight for control of the water. Both sides thought they could win. Only one side did. And before Israel had even trashed the Egyptian airforce they had already moved their Water Works under control of the IDF, who were given the order to immediately take control of strategic water resources. It was very much like the Americans locking down the oil wells as they invaded Iraq.

Israels plan to secure that water was in place well before the war broke out.

Your take on this as a water dispute is interesting and original.

That being said, if it was a water dispute, why wasn't the infrastructure for the use of water always in place? It would seem to me that the prior Arab inhabitants were not making much use of the water, but when the Zionist settlers arrived they promptly went to work to make the land arable and the Holy Land inhabitable. In other words, they put a largely fallow resource to use.

The fact that the British and French chopped up the Holy Land pretty much at random, based on their own imperial interests and later to appease Arab rioters should not be held against those productively using a resource.

That being said, the opening post is about the question of what the Palestinians would be, on a productive basis, to make a go of prospective nationhood. Obviously I'm skeptical. A thread about the history of Mideast water, or lack thereof may be very interesting, but it assumes that the only economic activity of the region is agricultural. As Israel has shown, the area can support high tech industries that are not water-intensive. Can't the Palestinians find some activity that doesn't depend upon drenching semi-arid land?

Edited October 13, 2010 by jbg

[bloodyminded]

Again...you do not know my family's connection to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Your family's connection has precisely zero to do with being correct or not.

Anyway, since you support terrorism elsewhere, your moral relativism rather undermines your grand sanctimony, doesn't it?

[DogOnPorch]

Your family's connection has precisely zero to do with being correct or not.

Didn't say it did.

Anyway, since you support terrorism elsewhere, your moral relativism rather undermines your grand sanctimony, doesn't it?

Wouldn't know.

[GostHacked]

...you throw out a lot of BS for a Jew baiter Holocaust denier.

No, he speaks the truth in the fact that many countries do the 'nazi salute'. When someone throws out the 'jew baiter', it means they have little else to actually talk about. It's a trend with you dear Doggy.

JBG

That being said, if it was a water dispute, why wasn't the infrastructure for the use of water always in place? It would seem to me that the prior Arab inhabitants were not making much use of the water, but when the Zionist settlers arrived they promptly went to work to make the land arable and the Holy Land inhabitable. In other words, they put a largely fallow resource to use.

Is it possible that there was no infrastructure in place for water when Israel was created? And if so, why? And during the time the Brits oversaw the Mandate, there might not have been any plan to get an infrastructure built for water delivery.

Maybe before the mass immigration of Jews, there was no need to make all the land suitable for land. And with the barrier wall now in place , severely restricting how the Palestinians live, they have little to no hope of building any kind of infrastructure that would not be considered a target by Israel. It's possible that the land Palestinians used for agriculture before the inception of modern Israel, now belongs to Israel. So the only option is to make other land suitable for farming that was not good for farming previously.

Can't the Palestinians find some activity that doesn't depend upon drenching semi-arid land?

When lack of food is an issue due to a blockade and other restrictions, it would be vital to prep more land for agriculture. If you are not getting the aid from abroad, you need to do it yourself. Why would they concentrate on other types of commerce when they can barely feed themselves? Farming would be a top priority I would assume.

[DogOnPorch]

No, he speaks the truth in the fact that many countries do the 'nazi salute'.

Then your claim is that Grand Mufti had no connection to National Socialism and Pan-Arabism?

When someone throws out the 'jew baiter', it means they have little else to actually talk about. It's a trend with you dear Doggy.

bud...like naiomi...is a Jew baiter. That's why they post here.

[GostHacked]

Then your claim is that Grand Mufti had no connection to National Socialism and Pan-Arabism?

I don't think that was the point he was getting at. There were people among allied and axis countries all sending the jews and others to the gas chambers/concentration camps. So it's expected that Mufti would because he was on Hitler's side, but you really have to question the actions of the allies who did the same or allowed those actions to happen.

The Russian Gulags seems to have some hidden stories about how many Ukrainians were killed. Among those killed included Estonians, Croatians, Germans, even Russian Muslims, from what I am reading it seems that Russia killed a lot more people through camps than the germans did to the jews.

http://www.ukemonde.com/genocide/margolisholocaust.html (not sure on the validity of the source)

edit for another link

http://archive.catholicherald.co.uk/articles/a0000619.shtml

bud...like naiomi...is a Jew baiter. That's why they post here.

Naiomi has an agenda, that is quite clear. But damn if you keep feeding the trolls they are going to come back and ask for more food.

Edited October 13, 2010 by GostHacked

[DogOnPorch]

I don't think that was the point he was getting at. There were people among allied and axis countries all sending the jews and others to the gas chambers/concentration camps. So it's expected that Mufti would because he was on Hitler's side, but you really have to question the actions of the allies who did the same or allowed those actions to happen.

The 'point' bud is trying to make is that having a leader who met Hitler and was buddies with Himmler and Eichmann is no big deal. Every leader apparently does it. It dilutes that nasty Arab-Nazi connection that ended up killing nearly all the Jews in Hungary and Bulgaria. That other armies on the planet knowingly give the fascist salute says quite a bit about their leadership more than National Socialism being a sane alternative to freedom.

The Russian Gulags seems to have some hidden stories about how many Ukrainians were killed. Among those killed included Estonians, Croatians, Germans, even Russian Muslims, from what I am reading it seems that Russia killed a lot more people through camps than the germans did to the jews.

http://www.ukemonde.com/genocide/margolisholocaust.html (not sure on the validity of the source)

Stalin is no friend of mine. Plus, you turned down my offer of a private conversation on the matter of my views.

Naiomi has an agenda, that is quite clear. But damn if you keep feeding the trolls they are going to come back and ask for more food.

I feed you, don't I?

[GostHacked]

The 'point' bud is trying to make is that having a leader who met Hitler and was buddies with Himmler and Eichmann is no big deal. Every leader apparently does it. It dilutes that nasty Arab-Nazi connection that ended up killing nearly all the Jews in Hungary and Bulgaria. That other armies on the planet knowingly give the fascist salute says quite a bit about their leadership more than National Socialism being a sane alternative to freedom.

There were Arab-Nazi connections, there were Allied-Nazi connections. Again it does not discount or ignore the actions and relations of Mufti to the Nazis, but why are we complaining about a person that did exactly what he wanted to do, and yet we have entities within the allies that facilitated and actually allowed the atrocities to take place all the while they abhored the idea of the atrocities that were about to be committed. They had chances to prevent it, why was that not done? OH yes, no one in Europe liked the Jews. So maybe from the Allied Europeans P.O.V. that they could take care of two problems with one stone.

Stalin is no friend of mine. Plus, you turned down my offer of a private conversation on the matter of my views.

I don't care to take this conversation private, it won't get us anywhere because we have opposing views. And your lack of dialogue in these threads (apart from one liners) don't exactly encourage me to take any conversation with you private. I don't like to take any debate here private. I have for sake of clarity with a couple posters, but that's on an individual basis.

If you have something of value to say that will add to the debate/conversation, let it out. Let us all know. I think others would be interested to hear it. Do you feel comfortable enough to talk about it publicly?

I feed you, don't I?

Actually you don't. Feeding would imply that you have something of value to give me.

[DogOnPorch]

You're free to post information of Allied leaders working with the Nazis.

[jbg]

Is it possible that there was no infrastructure in place for water when Israel was created? And if so, why? And during the time the Brits oversaw the Mandate, there might not have been any plan to get an infrastructure built for water delivery.

I was talking about the period during Ottoman rule, where the status quo ante was that most of modern Israel was uncultivated swamp, desert or other wasteland.

Maybe before the mass immigration of Jews, there was no need to make all the land suitable for land. And with the barrier wall now in place , severely restricting how the Palestinians live, they have little to no hope of building any kind of infrastructure that would not be considered a target by Israel. It's possible that the land Palestinians used for agriculture before the inception of modern Israel, now belongs to Israel. So the only option is to make other land suitable for farming that was not good for farming previously.

The barrier wall has nothing to do with this. My point is that the Zionists made the land useful and most Arabs that lived there during the period of the British mandate moved in after the Zionists improved the land, and were not displaced ancestral residents.

When lack of food is an issue due to a blockade and other restrictions, it would be vital to prep more land for agriculture. If you are not getting the aid from abroad, you need to do it yourself. Why would they concentrate on other types of commerce when they can barely feed themselves? Farming would be a top priority I would assume.

Or they could follow Israel's and Japan's example and do something else well and trade for the food they need.

[jbg]

The Russian Gulags seems to have some hidden stories about how many Ukrainians were killed. Among those killed included Estonians, Croatians, Germans, even Russian Muslims, from what I am reading it seems that Russia killed a lot more people through camps than the germans did to the jews.

The Holodomer was also an atrocity.

But bear in mind that the Russians got their shot at the Jews during the 1890's. The flight from Russian atrocities is why I'm sitting in front a keyboard about 40 Trudeau Units from New York City rather than in Kiev.

[DogOnPorch]

The Holodomer was also an atrocity.

But bear in mind that the Russians got their shot at the Jews during the 1890's. The flight from Russian atrocities is why I'm sitting in front a keyboard about 40 Trudeau Units from New York City rather than in Kiev.

You too? Well there yah go. Volga Germany here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_Germans

[GostHacked]

I was talking about the period during Ottoman rule, where the status quo ante was that most of modern Israel was uncultivated swamp, desert or other wasteland.

OK that clarifies things a little. Why would it remain uncultivated until the zionists moved in? What prevented it before?

The barrier wall has nothing to do with this. My point is that the Zionists made the land useful and most Arabs that lived there during the period of the British mandate moved in after the Zionists improved the land, and were not displaced ancestral residents.

Or they could follow Israel's and Japan's example and do something else well and trade for the food they need.

What can the Palestinians trade for food?

[dre]

Then your claim is that Grand Mufti had no connection to National Socialism and Pan-Arabism?

bud...like naiomi...is a Jew baiter. That's why they post here.

Makes no difference if that claim is true or not. Your origional assertion is still pure horseshit. And youre the one trying to bait people here. Like you did with your idiotic bullshit last night... trying to pretend Im laughing about dead jews when anyone with even grade2 reading comprehension could immediately see I was laughing at hilarity of your unmitigated abject idiocy.

[bloodyminded]

Makes no difference if that claim is true or not. Your origional assertion is still pure horseshit. And youre the one trying to bait people here. Like you did with your idiotic bullshit last night... trying to pretend Im laughing about dead jews when anyone with even grade2 reading comprehension could immediately see I was laughing at hilarity of your unmitigated abject idiocy.

It was obvious enough, as you say.

[dre]

Your take on this as a water dispute is interesting and original.

That being said, if it was a water dispute, why wasn't the infrastructure for the use of water always in place? It would seem to me that the prior Arab inhabitants were not making much use of the water, but when the Zionist settlers arrived they promptly went to work to make the land arable and the Holy Land inhabitable. In other words, they put a largely fallow resource to use.

The fact that the British and French chopped up the Holy Land pretty much at random, based on their own imperial interests and later to appease Arab rioters should not be held against those productively using a resource.

That being said, the opening post is about the question of what the Palestinians would be, on a productive basis, to make a go of prospective nationhood. Obviously I'm skeptical. A thread about the history of Mideast water, or lack thereof may be very interesting, but it assumes that the only economic activity of the region is agricultural. As Israel has shown, the area can support high tech industries that are not water-intensive. Can't the Palestinians find some activity that doesn't depend upon drenching semi-arid land?

That being said, if it was a water dispute, why wasn't the infrastructure for the use of water always in place? It would seem to me that the prior Arab inhabitants were not making much use of the water, but when the Zionist settlers arrived they promptly went to work to make the land arable and the Holy Land inhabitable. In other words, they put a largely fallow resource to use.

No it wasnt a fallow resource at all. All that water comes from the River Jordan which supplies water directly and indirectly to a few different countries. When Israel built its national water carrier and started diverting that water, they actually reduced the ammount of water available for the Hashemites. When the arabs attempted a similar water diversion project to the one Israel had built, Israel bombed it.

Really what we have is a garden variety dispute over resources between a downstream state, and hostile upstream states in a region thats getting drier and where no water means you die. And the problem is going to get worse, not better.

Your take on this as a water dispute is interesting and original.

Actually its not origional. Youll see heavy emphasis on water in virtually every historical account you read from all sides.

From Wiki on the events leading up to the 1967 war.

In 1964, Israel began drawing water from the Jordan River for its National Water Carrier, reducing the flow that reached Hashemite territory. The following year, the Arab states began construction of the Headwater Diversion Plan, which, once completed, would divert the waters of the Banias Stream before the water entered Israel and the Sea of Galilee, to flow instead into a dam at Mukhaiba for use by Jordan and Syria, and divert the waters of the Hasbani into the Litani River, in Lebanon.[31] The diversion works would have reduced the installed capacity of Israel's carrier by about 35%, and Israel's overall water supply by about 11%.[32]

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) attacked the diversion works in Syria in March, May, and August 1965, perpetuating a prolonged chain of border violence that linked directly to the events leading to war.[33]

[jbg]

No it wasnt a fallow resource at all. All that water comes from the River Jordan which supplies water directly and indirectly to a few different countries. When Israel built its national water carrier and started diverting that water, they actually reduced the ammount of water available for the Hashemites. When the arabs attempted a similar water diversion project to the one Israel had built, Israel bombed it.

Really what we have is a garden variety dispute over resources between a downstream state, and hostile upstream states in a region thats getting drier and where no water means you die. And the problem is going to get worse, not better.

*************

Actually its not origional. Youll see heavy emphasis on water in virtually every historical account you read from all sides.

From Wiki on the events leading up to the 1967 war.

Reading from what you posted and the Wiki segment, there was nothing "garden variety" at all. There was in fact very little agriculture in the area other than that of the Zionists. The Jordan/Syria project was a crude attempt to kill Israel by thirst since it was instituted only after Israel started making use of the resources. This was already a front in the war. It was hardly a situation akin to the U.S. bombing irrigation facilities in BC's Okanagan Valley.

[dre]

That being said, the opening post is about the question of what the Palestinians would be, on a productive basis, to make a go of prospective nationhood. Obviously I'm skeptical. A thread about the history of Mideast water, or lack thereof may be very interesting, but it assumes that the only economic activity of the region is agricultural. As Israel has shown, the area can support high tech industries that are not water-intensive. Can't the Palestinians find some activity that doesn't depend upon drenching semi-arid land?

Yeah well, as you notice Im one of the few people that actually tried to answer your questions.

Its a tough place to live IMO, and Im skeptical that either Palestine or Israel will ever exist without pretty heavy foreign aid.

In any case... theres no question they have to start with an agrarian economy and go from there. I think they can develope other industries in the future but it will take a long time. You dont go from living under a brutal and oppressive military occupation in ajbect squallor to being an industrial powerhouse overnight.

A best case scenario would probably look something like Jordan. They could have an agrarian economy with limited exports of things like textiles, olive oil, etc etc. Maybe phosphate mining and that kind of thing. Water exports.

But again... this isnt going to happen anyways. Why on earth would Israel leave the occupied territories in the absense of some meaningfull pressure to do so? Theyre better off keeping the land, forcing palestinians to live in sqaullor, and indefinately plundering it for resources they vitally need. Lets face it... nobody is going to stop them... and they arent going to give up more than half of their water supply voluntarily, especially with water in the Kinneret receding.

This ones in the books folks! Its a done deal. There aint gonna be no two state solution... thats just a western fantasy. Israel will maintain the status quo, and settle more and more of the land over the next few decades, to ensure theyre control of the water is permanent. If they give any land back to the Palestinians it will be useless shit they dont want (like Gaza). They will continue to impose harsh limits on the Palestinians use of their own water... quotas that give them 1/5th as much water as an Israeli is allowed to use, which should effectively keep the palestinians stalled as far as any kind of economic or human development goes.

Even talking about a two state solution is kinda silly. Its certainly not something that anybody who has been paying attention is holding out much hope for.

Edited October 13, 2010 by dre

[dre]

Reading from what you posted and the Wiki segment, there was nothing "garden variety" at all. There was in fact very little agriculture in the area other than that of the Zionists. The Jordan/Syria project was a crude attempt to kill Israel by thirst since it was instituted only after Israel started making use of the resources. This was already a front in the war. It was hardly a situation akin to the U.S. bombing irrigation facilities in BC's Okanagan Valley.

The Jordan/Syria project was a crude attempt to kill Israel by thirst since it was instituted only after Israel started making use of the resources.

It was an attempt to do the exact same thing Israel had just done to them with its own water diversion project. Take more for YOU leaving less for THEM.

There was in fact very little agriculture in the area other than that of the Zionists.

But that water doesnt just supply that area. It supplies Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria as well. Israels water diversion project deprived the Hashemites of water they badly needed, and the arabs responded with their own. Both sides tried to screw each other.

Theres not enough for all them to use it as liberally as they would like so they fight over it. Not suprising really. Countries have fought over that kind of stuff since history began.

[jbg]

But again... this isnt going to happen anyways. Why on earth would Israel leave the occupied territories in the absense of some meaningfull pressure to do so? Theyre better off keeping the land, forcing palestinians to live in sqaullor, and indefinately plundering it for resources they vitally need. Lets face it... nobody is going to stop them... and they arent going to give up more than half of their water supply voluntarily, especially with water in the Kinneret receding.

The "meaningful (sp) pressure" to leave is the fact that Jews generally have very low reproduction rates and do not want to create apartheid conditions. As a liberal democracy they do not want to become a demographic minority; a serious and real spector here. I suspect that if they could meaningfully reduce their military spending they'd rather desalinate than draw from Galilee.

[Bonam]

The "meaningful (sp) pressure" to leave is the fact that Jews generally have very low reproduction rates and do not want to create apartheid conditions.

Well, compared to the Palestinians the Jews have low reproduction rates. Compared to any other Western country, however, the reproduction rate of Israeli Jews is huge, at about 3 births per woman per lifetime as opposed to 1.1-2.0 range in most Western countries. Israel and the US (at 2.1) are actually the ONLY two Western countries with healthy demographic outlooks, as far as I'm aware.

[M.Dancer]

The West Bank suffers from many of the same problems as other countries...

Sometimes they are ironic

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=309877