"Disappearing Palestine" bus ads anger Jewish groups

[jbg]

Fine, but keeping the land is not exactly happening either. If they lost fair and square, Israel should say so (proudly as you do!), keep the land and allow rights to the the Arab populations.

As it stands it's a limbo of it's not their land but they're not Israe's responsibility either. They are a stateless people with virtually no rights.

Explain that.

The Arabs have a lot more rights in the "occupied" territories than in most of the Ummah. As far as keeping the land, except for Jerusalem this is not exactly land that Israel was pining for. They are unhappily occupying until the people decide that peace is better than war.

No, it's irrational. No one has said Israel is not entitled to a state, they're just not entitled to the one they have. They should have been given a piece of Germany...a big piece.

And given the perpetual German tug-of-war with its neighbors over Alsace-Lorraine, the Sudetenland and other border areas, can you imagine the warfare if a part of Germany were hived off? As it is most of the current State of Israel was not being used before Zionist development. The only thing that the Zionists disrupted was the Arabs' pining for a continuous Ummah from the Atlantic on the West to the Pacific on the East to the Indian Ocean and the African Sahel to the south.

As for land, use it or lose it.

[BC_chick]

The Arabs have a lot more rights in the "occupied" territories than in most of the Ummah. As far as keeping the land, except for Jerusalem this is not exactly land that Israel was pining for. They are unhappily occupying until the people decide that peace is better than war.

Awww poor Israel. Building settlements, putting up walls, building factories, bulldozing houses and farmland. That must be so difficult for them to do. What a daily struggle having to shove people further and further into a hellhole and build condos on their land.

Ok, let's say I believe you.

So, through all this terribly agonizing gut-wrenching expansionist policies, what happens if the Arabs never accept peace and their land gets tinier and the walls get taller?

Is Israel ever going to formally take care of the people of the land it 'unhappily' expands on? You know as an occupying entity they have that responsibility, right?

[eyeball]

The Arabs have a lot more rights in the "occupied" territories than in most of the Ummah. As far as keeping the land, except for Jerusalem this is not exactly land that Israel was pining for. They are unhappily occupying until the people decide that peace is better than war.

And given the perpetual German tug-of-war with its neighbors over Alsace-Lorraine, the Sudetenland and other border areas, can you imagine the warfare if a part of Germany were hived off? As it is most of the current State of Israel was not being used before Zionist development. The only thing that the Zionists disrupted was the Arabs' pining for a continuous Ummah from the Atlantic on the West to the Pacific on the East to the Indian Ocean and the African Sahel to the south.

As for land, use it or lose it.

They should come to North America then.

[jbg]

Awww poor Israel. Building settlements, putting up walls, building factories, bulldozing houses and farmland. That must be so difficult for them to do. What a daily struggle having to shove people further and further into a hellhole and build condos on their land.

Ok, let's say I believe you.

So, through all this terribly agonizing gut-wrenching expansionist policies, what happens if the Arabs never accept peace and their land gets tinier and the walls get taller?

Is Israel ever going to formally take care of the people of the land it 'unhappily' expands on? You know as an occupying entity they have that responsibility, right?

They should come to North America then.

How about the Arabs accepting peace? Why is peace a one way street towards oblivion for the Jewish state? Edited July 12, 2016 by jbg

[Rue]

The only one saying that is you.

And you're just doing it as propaganda, because you refuse to answer legitimate questions, like:

What does Israel plan to do with the Arabs who live in Palestine?

.

I only speak for myself when I express opinions Jacee. I don't refer to myself as "others". Take a look who turns themselves into a plural when

I debate them about anti Semitism. Its not me.

There are numerous posts and threads that use Israel as a pretext to spew anti Semitism. For that matter I think the Middle East conflict can and has ben used to say thinks that smeer all Arabs and Muslims. I've protested it and will continue to do so when it happens.

In this thread, I don't have to say anything else. Don't have to. This thread was about an add on a bus. It now has nothing to do with the topic of the thread and recycles the usual recycled scripts about Israel, Jews, Zionists.

This thread is about local politics not an issue that has nothing to do with local politics.

The fact this thread continues speaks loudly.

You want to engage me in debates over the future of Palestinians it belongs in the Rest of the world and you already know my answer to what should be done with both Israelis and Palestinians. You know my position better than anyone. I do not think for one second you believe I do not think Palestinians should have a second state .

Please we are swamped with non stop anti Israel threads. Go to one.

[Charles Anthony]

Folks,

Please avoid thread drift.

[Big Guy]

Either the maps referenced in the OP which show the Israelis taking of Palestinian land are correct or they are not correct.

Nothing I have seen here or elsewhere indicates that they are not correct.

[eyeball]

How about the Arabs accepting peace? Why is peace a one way street towards oblivion for the Jewish state?

It would be nice if Palestinians offered it and even nicer if Israel accepted.

[H10]

The maps are more or less accurate. The reality is there won't be a West Bank in 20-30 years, there will just be an Israel and a gaza strip. The West Bank will continue to be swallowed up by Israeli settlers and eventually just cease to exist. There is no political will to force Israel out of the West Bank, but they have an ever growing population. The irony of all this of course is that Israel will end up swallowing the entire West Bank, but it will be a poison pill. They are just adding more Arabs into Israel who will eventually out populate the jews and Israel will try to hang on to some form of an apartheid state at that point and no longer be democratic but ultimately will lose its grip. It is very ironic but has been repeated throughout history literally dozens of times. Powerful empire conquer weaker peoples, weaker people outpopulate the stronger people, stronger people try to hold onto power through apartheid system, which just invigorates the weaker people to overthrow the minority oppressors, minority oppress culture gets absorbed. This has gone on since the days of Rome with the Germanics and Greece with the Dorians and Arabia with the Ethiopians and Persians.

[jacee]

In this thread, I don't have to say anything else. Don't have to. This thread was about an add on a bus. You want to engage me in debates over the future of Palestinians it belongs in the Rest of the world and you already know my answer to what should be done with both Israelis and Palestinians. You know my position better than anyone. I do not think for one second you believe I do not think Palestinians should have a second state .

Please we are swamped with non stop anti Israel threads. Go to one.

This thread is about Disappearing Palestine ... the ad on the bus.

The maps of the Palestinian state being 'disappeared'.

What does Israel plan to do with the Arabs who live in shrinking Palestine?

.

[Bonam]

The maps are more or less accurate. The reality is there won't be a West Bank in 20-30 years, there will just be an Israel and a gaza strip.

The third map is more or less accurate, but the fourth is not. Israel makes no permanent claims to most of that area, barring some disputes in/near east Jerusalem and some other pieces of territory too small to even be seen on that map. If/when Israel and the Palestinians come to a final peace agreement, the Palestinian state will look a lot closer to what is shown on the 1967 map than on the incorrect 2012 map.

The West Bank will continue to be swallowed up by Israeli settlers and eventually just cease to exist. There is no political will to force Israel out of the West Bank, but they have an ever growing population. The irony of all this of course is that Israel will end up swallowing the entire West Bank, but it will be a poison pill.

Pretty sure Israel understands this and has no interest at all in absorbing the West Bank for this reason.

[H10]

The third map is more or less accurate, but the fourth is not. Israel makes no permanent claims to most of that area, barring some disputes in/near east Jerusalem and some other pieces of territory too small to even be seen on that map. If/when Israel and the Palestinians come to a final peace agreement, the Palestinian state will look a lot closer to what is shown on the 1967 map than on the incorrect 2012 map.

Pretty sure Israel understands this and has no interest at all in absorbing the West Bank for this reason.

I think the fourth map represents Israeli settlements in the West Bank which are functionally part of Israel. Do you have any evidence that the Israel settlements occupy less than that area?

I think Israeli academics and intellectuals understand this and even the government does on an intellectual level. However do the developers, who are making millions and billions selling Palestinian land care? Do the Israeli jewish people moving into those settlement zones care that they can get a cheaper house with a yard? The majority is not thinking long term, they are thinking I want a house with a yard now, and I can only get that land, that farm, in the West Bank. When you have 1 million Israelis living in the west bank with dozens of members in parliament, when that happens, do you think all those people are just going to leave? Or will they pressure the Israeli government to absorb it? Even if the map is not accurate, at the pace which Israeli settlements are going into Palestine, they will eventually just take all the land, absorb the entire thing and Israel will eventually become an Arab state.

[jbg]

The "pre" 1946 map is of the unincorporated Palestinian territory prior to the UN giving much of it to Israel. Zionists will argue there was no Palestine prior to 1946. That has the dubious distinction of being both technically true and deliberately misleading. There was no country of Palestine internationally recognized as an independent state, but that's because it was a British controlled territory. The boundaries are still accurate. The green areas really are where all the Palestinians lived (most of the region), and the white areas really are the few places where Jewish settlements were at the time.

Your point elides the fact that Britain had already given the parts of the Palestinian Mandate to establish the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan around 1922 or 1923 so the Arabs arguably already got their share. Then the British, under Arab pressure, curtailed Jewish immigration when the need was greatest, at the beginning of WW II.

The 1947 map really is how the UN cut up the territory. They absolutely screwed the Palestinian people over.

The 1947 Map was far more generous to the Arabs than what they kept from the 1949 Armistice, a/k/a 1967 Borders. Israel was basically almost cut in two in an “hourglass” shape. Nevertheless the Jews accepted those borders. They would have been OK if the Arabs were willing to stop fighting. Which they weren’t. Most expected Israel to die during that war. When it didn’t and began to conquer territory the U.S. not surprisingly stopped them at what became the 1949 Armistice Line. Note, the West should have but did not insist on peace as a price of “stopping the war.”

The difference from 1947 to now is pretty close too, but for different reasons. A chunk was taken all at once in 1967 when Egypt, Syria and Jordan got involved in a few border disputes. Israel was backed by the US, and had much more formidable armed forces.

The U.S. did not back Israel. Michael Orens, in the classic book Six Days of War made clear that the U.S. stood neutral against Israel. Bogged down by Vietnam it didn’t actively stop Israel, as Truman did in 1949, as Eisenhower did in 1956 and Nixon did in 1973. And what happened was a sea blockage by Egypt of the port of Eilat, and a land invasion by Syria, Egypt and Jordan. It was an attempt, to quote Nasser, to “drive Israel into the sea” and not “a few border disputes.

Instead of just declaring victory against those other countries, they used it as a cover for taking even more land and screwing the Palestinians over even more.

The land was taken as a result of the Arabs’ loss in a war of aggression. Why haven’t the Palestinians learned, after almost 70 years of futility, that it would be better to sit down and seriously negotiate boundaries, and then have a “Canada/U.S.” type of relationship than continuing to butcher Israelis in restaurants, cradles and uteruses to no effect other than to invite retaliation?