Home | 
I wasn't vague. If Arab countries hadn't tried to wipe them out they probably would have kept to themselves and not tried to create a strategic buffer.Originally Posted by Muslima
'
ummmmmmmm, that wasn't the point Med
Do you think the land allocated to Israel by the UN in 1948, (postage stamp size according to Newsguy) would have been sufficient? Assuming the Arab's had accepted it?
Or do you think Israel would have tried to conquer more,
Or just accepted it ......
What do you others think?
IF..... IF Arab countries would have been civilized countries, instead of evil dictatorships bent on mass-murdering their neighbors and blaming all their societies' problems on others, everything would be very different today.
Unfortunately, we have to deal with the reality that the Arabs were never interested in peaceful coexistence with Israel, not in 1948, not in 1967, not at any time since, including the Palestinian state offered by Barak and Clinton to Arafat 5 years ago.
Every peaceful gesture and offer of a Palestinian state has been rejected by the Arabs, and now there are certain consequences to deal with.
"All we are saying is give peace a chance." - John Lennon
-----
www.fromil.com - live Radio from Israel.
You are wondering what would happen if the victims of Arab violence, racism and religious intolerance weren't subjected to that savage, inhuman violence?You seem more intent on proving Israeli's are not conquerors
Is that something to be proud of? ....just kidding
symantec's aside,
Or to put it clearly,
What would Israel have done if her neighbour's hadn't been hostile to her creation. ie. accepted her 1967 borders....
Makes one wonder what would happen to the women in Arab countries if they were allowed to hold jobs, or go out by themselves or if they weren't "legally" burned alive by their husbands at the husband's whim. Would these women respond with violence if they were given more rights or not victimized?
Your question also makes me wonder what those Christian teenagers would have done if they weren't brutally murdered by mobs of Palestinian Arabs, after being charged with trumped up false charges. Do you feel that these murdered Christian teenagers, if they had lived, would have gone home and then attacked their neighbors?
You might also ask how well Sudanese women would do if they weren't raped by the Arabs who are looting, plundering, raping and murdering tens of thousands of Sudanese.
Do you really feel that the raped Sudanese women would eventually attempt to conquer neighboring countries if they weren't raped and tortured by Arabs?
What about yourself? Have you ever been a victim? If not, how has that changed your level of violence?
You are wondering what would happen if the victims of Arab violence, racism and religious intolerance weren't subjected to that savage, inhuman violence?
Makes one wonder what would happen to the women in Arab countries if they were allowed to hold jobs, or go out by themselves or if they weren't "legally" burned alive by their husbands at the husband's whim. Would these women respond with violence if they were given more rights or not victimized?
Your question also makes me wonder what those Christian teenagers would have done if they weren't brutally murdered by mobs of Palestinian Arabs, after being charged with trumped up false charges. Do you feel that these murdered Christian teenagers, if they had lived, would have gone home and then attacked their neighbors?
You might also ask how well Sudanese women would do if they weren't raped by the Arabs who are looting, plundering, raping and murdering tens of thousands of Sudanese.
Do you really feel that the raped Sudanese women would eventually attempt to conquer neighboring countries if they weren't raped and tortured by Arabs?
What about yourself? Have you ever been a victim? If not, how has that changed your level of violence?
In case you missed the point, here it is,
What would Israel have done if her neighbour's hadn't been hostile to her creation. ie. accepted her 1967 borders....
either stick to it or ignore, but don't bring in issues irrelevant to the subject
I didn't miss the point. I understand where you are going. It's an interesting point. What would have happened if Jewish families hadn't been brutalized in Algeria, where about 140,000 Jews were driven out, or in Egypt where about 75,000 Jews were driven out, or Iran where 90,000 Jews were driven out, or Iraq where 150,000 Jews were driven out, or Lebanon where 20,000 Jews were driven out, or Libya where 38,000 Jews were driven out, or Morocco where 260,000 Jews were driven out, or Syria where 30,000 Jews were driven out, or Tunisia where 105,000 Jews were driven out, or Yemen where 63,000 Jews were driven out? What would the Arabs have done to the Jews in those countries, if the Arabs hadn't driven the Jews out?
Oh, of course, you asked what would the Jews have done if they weren't driven out. Did you include the Jews that were driven out of Europe? But, then again, most Jews weren't driven out of Europe, they either escaped or survived long, tortured months in concentration camps.
But...... silly me. You want to know if Jews had turned down the awful UN partition which set up the Jewish State on roughly 5,500 square miles with the population of 538,000 Jews and 397,000 Arabs. The Arab State was set up as 4,500 square miles with a population of 804,000 Arabs and 10,000 Jews. Though the Jewish State was bigger, most of that Jewish State was desert.
The Arabs turned down the partition. The Jews accepted the partition, even though it was a rotten deal. The Arabs, in turn, attacked the Jews.
But, once again...... In a more direct answer to your question, throughout the history of Palestine, when the Jews of Israel wanted to obtain more land, they usually purchased the land from the Arabs. The Jews of the region had a long record of paying Arabs for land. Currently, any Arab who sells land to a Jew would be murdered by his Arab brothers, so land acquisition by Jews is out of the question.
I would assume that the Jews of Israel would continue the practice of purchasing land from the Arabs, as they have done so many times throughout history. Bu that would have happened only if the Arabs had acted more like human beings and less like savage, subhuman animals, and if the Arabs had accepted the UN partition of 1947.
Probably nothing at all. It wasn't really until 72 or 73 that the so called settlers arrived in Yesha. And from that point it took another 10 years for the population of Jews in Yesha to grow above a tiny handful. During that time, Sharon, one of the moving forces behind it, struck on a very common sense realization - that Israel had to control the Judean and Samarian hills if they were to have any hope of strategic depth against an enemy that was dedicated to their extermination. Which translates roughly into a program to move Jews into those areas and hold them for strategic purposes looking east, against Jordan, Syria and Iraq. By the time there was a practical infrastructure to do this the PLO had already fomented another war - this one in Lebanon. Naturally no Israeli leader would propose pulling out of a strategic stronghold in a time of war. Remember also that when the IDF moved into southern lebanon it was at the request of one faction of the Lebanese government coupled with Israel's own intent to stop PLO incursions into northern Israel that were occuring more frequently. At this point the feasibility of withdrawing from a strategic stronghold facing an enemy that was at that very moment moving forces into Lebanon in order to attack them from a different direction, would of course be zero.
So if the Arabs had licked their wounds and been as happy with the Israelis final position in 67 as they were perfectly happy to abandon their own Palestinians then it's entirely possible that Israel would have never progressed into Yesha.
Israel would have reclaimed its historical right to the lands of Eretz Israel.
[/QUOTE]
After "islam is a religion of peace", the above is the most fantastic statement i have ever read! And i have read quite a few of these fantastic statements from our resident mohamaddan apologist, muslima. and that's saying some'in.
That, in my opinion, is the KEY. At least "half a brain." Apparently, that is too much to ask for nowadays. Where despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, people compare arafat with Gandhi and mohammad with Moses.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks