Skip to main content

View Diary: 'We Want the Whole World To Know About Us' (213 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The Nakba (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    npbeachfun, hypersphere01

    ...was Palestinian Arabs fleeing homes in a time of war or expelled by gangs that would become leaders of Israel or expelled by Israel after '48.

    The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

    by callmecassandra on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:23:16 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The Nakba was the result of the Arab attack (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Paul in Berkeley, jhritz

      President of the Elders of Zion Chapter 112

      by Pumpkinlove on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:27:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And the Palestinian refusal to accept partition. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Paul in Berkeley, Keith Moon, jhritz

        President of the Elders of Zion Chapter 112

        by Pumpkinlove on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:28:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Nothing (6+ / 0-)

        you say will change the fact that Palestinian Arabs fled a war, an act of any human fearing their lives. Nothing you say will change the fact that Jewish gangs expelled and/or slaughtered Palestinian Arabs.

        You don't get to blame someone else for your deeds. When Arab states attacked Israel, the blame lies with the Arab states. When Israel expelled Palestinians Arabs and razed Palestinian villages, then the blame for this lies with Israel.

        The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

        by callmecassandra on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:33:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And the violence commited by Palestinians (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Five Thirty, Keith Moon, jhritz

          during that time period?

          Their refusal to accept Partition?

          So you agree, the Nakba didn't just happen to Palestinians.

          President of the Elders of Zion Chapter 112

          by Pumpkinlove on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:36:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  And the Palestinians (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Paul in Berkeley, Keith Moon, jhritz

          just sat and watched? They were not involved? They didn't massacre Jewish civilians in '21 or '29 or '36 or...
          The war just kinda happened to them while they were busy doing something else?

          •  I'm a bit absent-minded on occassion, (7+ / 0-)

            but I don't seem to remember ever blaming victims of crimes for the crimes committed against them. That ain't my thing.

            What is it with you? The Nakba happened. There's no lessening of that crime. So what's the relevance of your comment?

            The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

            by callmecassandra on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:52:26 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I like your "I don't blame the victims" mantra (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Pumpkinlove, Keith Moon, jhritz

              But it rings kind of hollow when you pretend there are victims only in one group, or that things happen in a vacuum.

              I'm a bit absent-minded myself, but I I don't seem to remember you ever blaming the Palestinians for anything whatsoever to do with the war in 1948.

              •  Again, where you getting my "pretense"? (5+ / 0-)

                Show me.

                And as I've said before, I'm not going to blame Palestinians for being expelled. This is a crime. I'm not going to blame Palestinians for being massacred. These are crimes.

                Everything else may be debatable. The two items above are not...

                The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

                by callmecassandra on Sat May 12, 2007 at 08:14:35 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Fair enough. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Keith Moon, jhritz

                  Anything you do blame the Palestinians for?

                  •  See (5+ / 0-)

                    comment

                    As for that time, I do blame Arab states for placing Palestinians in the middle and then abandoning them. There's not a doubt in my mind that there were influences from Arab states. It was their interests after all affected by the creation of Israel. And a nation is by nature, selfish. It has to be...

                    I understand why Palestinians were shocked and angry by a decision not made by them (the partition and who wouldn't be?) but once realizing that this was not going to change, the leaders should have made an effort to accept the inevitable. Isreal was created and recognized, no going back. Time to move forward. Easier said than done, but there you go...

                    I currently blame Arab states, the leaders really, for using the occupation as a way to gain support from the populace and then dropping Palestinians for political expediency.

                    Now just because I fault Israel for some things, doesn't mean I exonerate Palestinians for everything. I just have a tendency to focus only one a topic or point I'm going on about...

                    The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

                    by callmecassandra on Sat May 12, 2007 at 09:14:20 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  . (0+ / 0-)

                      First of all, thanks for clarifying your position.

                      My question was meant more in the time frame of the 1948 war and situation that preceded it, since that was what we were discussing. So the comment you linked to doesn't really answer my question.

                      So let me rephrase:

                      Do you think the Palestinians carry any blame for events leading to, and during, the 1948 war?

                      •  What did you have in mind specifically? (0+ / 0-)

                        As I said above, I understand why Palestinians rejected the partition since they had no say in the matter. I would fight against it were to ever happen in the U.S. Do you doubt Israelis would resist if a partition was proposed in the UN today for Israel? All hell would break loose. And believe or not, I would support the Israelis.

                        But, tell me what you have in mind, specifically? This war was too huge, many participants, many instances of wrong doing. But I will say now that all Jews who were expelled and massacred by Palestinian militants and gangs could never be justified. Not even in an act of resistance. As I've said before wrt Palestinians, criminal and murderous. Never to be excused, rationalized, or justified.

                        The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

                        by callmecassandra on Sat May 12, 2007 at 04:32:10 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

            •  The problem is the Nakba wasn't a crime. (1+ / 1-)
              Recommended by:
              jhritz
              Hidden by:
              Diaries

              The Nakba was a choice.  They refused Partition.   They attacked Jewish towns and laid seige to  Jerusalem.    They acted and in hindsight, it was the wrong thing to do.  The Nakba was a catastrophe of their own making.

              President of the Elders of Zion Chapter 112

              by Pumpkinlove on Sat May 12, 2007 at 08:07:13 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Expulsions and massacres are crimes. (6+ / 0-)

                This doesn't change whether it's committed against Arabs or Jews.

                The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

                by callmecassandra on Sat May 12, 2007 at 08:15:37 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  They chose war not peace. (3+ / 1-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Paul in Berkeley, another American, jhritz
                  Hidden by:
                  Diaries

                  The Nakba is a consequence of their actions.

                  President of the Elders of Zion Chapter 112

                  by Pumpkinlove on Sat May 12, 2007 at 08:25:31 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'll keep saying this PL (6+ / 0-)

                    Expulsions and massacres are crimes. Period. End of Story. No sequel. No part deux. No mitigation. No justification. No rationalization. No leniency.

                    The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

                    by callmecassandra on Sat May 12, 2007 at 08:35:28 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  A partial truth. Surely not TR material. (0+ / 0-)

                    Arab rejection of partition in the form of an attempt, first, to prevent Israel from coming into existence and, then, to destroy it, surely was a necessary condition for the creation of the Palestinian Arab refugees.

                    But, IMHO, it was not a sufficient condition. Although Israel went to war with the intention of defending itself against a threatened genocidal attack, not with the intention of expelling Arab citizens of Mandatory Palestine, Benny Morris, among others, has demonstrated that, on many occasions, Israelis did act with such an intention. For reasons that I have discussed elsewhere, however, a "return" to Israel is not a reasonable solution to the resulting problem.

                    Uprated to counter the ratings abuse.

                    Al Gore should be president.

                    by another American on Sat May 12, 2007 at 02:48:19 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Was the intention... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      sofia

                      ...to have a Jewish majority state?

                      If so, how could that come about without expulsions?

                      The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world She didn't exist.

                      by callmecassandra on Sat May 12, 2007 at 04:33:21 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Mass immigration of so-called Displaced Persons, (0+ / 0-)

                        that is, survivors of the Shoah (Holocaust) almost immediately would have given Israel within the 1947 borders a substantial Jewish majority. Any immigration of Jews from Muslim countries would have solidified that majority further. Expulsions were unnecessary and, as Benny Morris also documents, not planned.

                        Al Gore should be president.

                        by another American on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:25:28 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Not really (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          callmecassandra

                          Between 1947-49 only about 125,000 Holocaust survivors immigrated to Palestine/Israel.  That still wouldn't have given the Jewish state a stable enough majority.  In addition the expulsions of Palestinians by Zionist forces began before the arrival of Jews that fled/were expelled from Arab countries.

                          •  Immigration statistics (0+ / 0-)

                            suggest otherwise. A pdf from the Central Bureau of Statistics of Israel is available here. For the period 1948, i.e., the creation of the State, through 1951, total immigration to  Israel was 687,624, of whom  332,802 came from Europe. If, as you did, one chooses to start in 1947, the number presumably would be greater. If one is assuming an international regime that practices the principle of everyone being free to leave their country, then we can assume there would have been a very significant immigration from the USSR.

                            In sum, the existence of a Jewish majority was not in question. Benny Morris has shown that the Yishuv entered the conflict expecting that the Arab population would remain and not planning mass expulsions.

                            There are many other (much more intentional) examples of population exchanges and transfers more-or-less contemporary to 1948 where most reasonable people recognize that the solution does not include a restoration of the status quo ante. A few examples would include India-Pakistan and the various ethnic German refugees into the two Germanies after World War II.

                            Al Gore should be president.

                            by another American on Sun May 13, 2007 at 04:41:42 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The relevent period is between 1947-49.. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            callmecassandra

                            ..(partition through the war), unless you believe the Yishuv or the new state of Israel could insure those future immigration figures, or even insure the outcome of the war. In addition it would have extremely diffucult for the new state to keep close to a million Palestinians under martial law until 1966, as opposed to the hundred thousand that remained in Israel and were kept under martial law until 1966.

                            If you link directly to the PDF (not just the Hebrew version of the home page of Israel's CBS) in English, I'd be happy to take a look at it. Do you dispute the approx. 125,000 number?

                          •  Oh, and Benny Morris.. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            callmecassandra

                            A few quotes from his interview with Ari Shavit titled "Survival of the Fittest?", Ha'aretz, January, 2004, here and here.

                            There are circumstances in history that justify ethnic cleansing. I know that this term is completely negative in the discourse of the 21st century, but when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide—the annihilation of your people—I prefer ethnic cleansing.

                            That was the situation. That is what Zionism faced. A Jewish state would not have come into being without the uprooting of 700,000 Palestinians. Therefore it was necessary to uproot them. There was no choice but to expel that population. It was necessary to cleanse the hinterland and cleanse the border areas and cleanse the main roads. It was necessary to cleanse the villages from which our convoys and our settlements were fired on.

                            [..]

                            From April 1948, Ben-Gurion is projecting a message of transfer. There is no explicit order of his in writing, there is no orderly comprehensive policy, but there is an atmosphere of [population] transfer. The transfer idea is in the air. The entire leadership understands that this is the idea. The officer corps understands what is required of them. Under Ben-Gurion, a consensus of transfer is created.

                            He understood that there could be no Jewish state with a large and hostile Arab minority in its midst. There would be no such state. It would not be able to exist. [...] If he had not done what he did, a state would not have come into being. [...] Without the uprooting of the Palestinians, a Jewish state would not have arisen here.

              •  Why was a partition necessary? (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                johnnygunn, hypersphere01, umkahlil

                Either you are for the status quo, or you're not. -7.00, -2.92

                by mattes on Sat May 12, 2007 at 08:38:42 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Why Was It Necessary ?!?! (3+ / 0-)

                  The British wanted out.
                  Western Holocaust guilt.
                  The refusal of Arabs to sell land.
                  The desire of ____ (fill in the great power)
                      to have a client state in the Middle East.
                  Palestine was not a viable geographic entity -
                      while the partition plan was.
                  Neocolonialism.
                  Cultural hegemony.
                  Racism.

                  •  Not any significant Arab refusal to sell land. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    sofia

                    Jewish purchases of land during the mandatory period generally were limited only by the available funding.

                    Al Gore should be president.

                    by another American on Sat May 12, 2007 at 03:01:46 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Not exactly true.. (0+ / 0-)

                      ..there was significant Arab refusal to sell land, but there were enough Arabs, especially absentee landlords willing to sell, that if there were more funds available for land purchases, more land could have been bought.

                      •  That's what I mean by saying there was no (0+ / 0-)

                        "significant" refusal. Because more land was available for purchase than the Zionist movement had funds available, the refusals that did occur were not significant.

                        Al Gore should be president.

                        by another American on Sat May 12, 2007 at 07:26:44 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Well.. (0+ / 0-)

                          ..it's partly a matter of semantics, but using your interpretation of "significant" there were refusals to sell in areas that the Yishuv viewed as necessary to form contiguity between Jewish settlements, so in that regard those refusals to sell were significant even in the context of how you're
                          interpreting "significant".

                          •  Indeed, I think we're (0+ / 0-)

                            down to a question of semantics. You're right that certain Arab refusals had significance. I think I'm right that Arab refusals were not significant as a cause of partition, which is the claim to which I was responding.

                            Al Gore should be president.

                            by another American on Sat May 12, 2007 at 08:15:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

    •  They were also poor farmers (0+ / 0-)

      living in a land that has been ruled by a countless number of conquers

      Their personal history going back long before the CE told them to Flee, and after the now Conquer were done with the war, they could return home... go back to living as they always had under a new power, the only thing that would effect their life would be the Taxes.

      "people ignorant of one another's existence, held apart by walls of hatred and lies, and yet almost exactly the same" George Orwell~1984

      by npbeachfun on Sat May 12, 2007 at 01:06:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site