My Defense of Palestine

theleafy (53)in #discussion • 9 years ago

So i saw this post today that @openparadigm wrote and i wanted to make some comments about it. Lately the only reason Israel is being topic around here Trump's move and reactions about it. So this is my simple question. Why?

Part one

Firstly let's get of this straight. This is not a fight between 300 Palestinians and wonderful Israel. This is a fight between Arabs (by the way there's only like 3 Arabs there so who cares?) and the Jews. (i don't know their count but more than the Arabs so they're more important)

The British Mandate Palestine was split up to become homelands for the two people. Seventy-eight percent was given to the Arabs of the area to become the country of Jordan.
Twenty-two percent was given to the Jews but the Arabs protested they wanted more!

Greedy Arabs bla bla bla so it goes like that.

So let's stop for a second. Let's look at today. Let's look at who's greedy now?
Why is it sometimes so difficult to accept the fact we shoud stop cruelty amongst poor people instead of defending it by peaceful israel giving 5 percent to Arabs in 1948?

But if you really want to talk about peaceful Israel, let's talk about Deir Yassin Massacre in 1948.

The Deir Yassin massacre took place on April 9, 1948, when around 120 fighters from the Zionist paramilitary groups Irgun and Lehi attacked Deir Yassin, a Palestinian Arab village of roughly 600 people near Jerusalem. The assault occurred as Jewish militia sought to relieve the blockade of Jerusalem during the civil war that preceded the end of British rule in Palestine.
source

Most of the Arab countries didn't even give enough reaction for the last things thats going on. Why are we talking about the 5 percent in 1948 eventhough it's not true? Why aren't we talking about todays Palestine and Israel if you really wanna defend Israel. Arab and Jews war was in 1948. Now we have innocent people getting killed in front of us. So when it comes to a situation to talk about, you can't ignore Palestine and just say let me talk about 1948. But even if you're going to talk about 1948, you have to talk with every facts.

I respect @openparadigm opinion however it doesn't mean i have to agree it. Trumps move is nothing but creating chaos. And Netanyahu liking it. Let's just accept the fact.

source

#politics #history #informationwar

9 years ago in #discussion by theleafy (53)

Sort:

openparadigm (57) 9 years ago

41 dead Israelis, 110 Arabs dead not a massacre, a battle.

The battle was ferocious and took several hours, in part because the attackers were poorly trained, disorganized, lacked reliable intelligence, and had no idea what to do with prisoners. The Irgun suffered 41 casualties, including four dead. At least one member of Lehi (Amos Keinan) was killed by friendly fire. The larger number of Palestinian casualties was partly due to the mehod typically used to storm houses at that time, which was to first throw in a grenade. In some cases, housed collapsed on the residents.

Counting the Dead

Surprisingly, after the “massacre,” the Irgun escorted a representative of the Red Cross through the town and held a press conference. The New York Times' subsequent description of the battle was essentially the same as Begin's. The Times said more than 200 Arabs were killed, 40 captured and 70 women and children were released. No hint of a massacre appeared in the report. “Paradoxically, the Jews say about 250 out of 400 village inhabitants [were killed], while Arab survivors say only 110 of 1,000.”7 A study by Bir Zeit University, based on discussions with each family from the village, arrived at a figure of 107 Arab civilians dead and 12 wounded, in addition to 13 "fighters," evidence that the number of dead was smaller than claimed and that the village did have troops based there.8 Other Arab sources have subsequently suggested the number may have been even lower.

Just four days after the reports from Deir Yassin were published, an Arab force ambushed a Jewish convoy on the way to Hadassah Hospital, killing 77 Jews, including doctors, nurses, patients, and the director of the hospital. Another 23 people were injured. This massacre attracted little attention and is never mentioned by those who are quick to bring up Deir Yassin. Moreover, despite attacks such as this against the Jewish community in Palestine, in which more than 500 Jews were killed in the first four months after the partition decision alone, Jews did not flee.

The Palestinians knew, despite their rhetoric to the contrary, the Jews were not trying to annihilate them; otherwise, they would not have been allowed to evacuate Tiberias, Haifa or any of the other towns captured by the Jews. Moreover, the Palestinians could find sanctuary in nearby states. The Jews, however, had no place to run had they wanted to. They were willing to fight to the death for their country. It came to that for many, because the Arabs were interested in annihilating the Jews, as Secretary-General of the Arab League Azzam Pasha made clear in an interview with the Egyptian paper Akhbar al-Yom before the war (October 11, 1947): “It will be a war of annihilation. It will be a momentous massacre in history that will be talked about like the massacres of the Mongols or the Crusades.”

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-capture-of-deir-yassin

$0.00

[-]

interceptor (52) 9 years ago (edited)

jewishvirtuallibrary is actually a source?

still,

"The larger number of Palestinian casualties was partly due to the mehod typically used to storm houses at that time, which was to first throw in a grenade."

how nice ^^

this bright tradition of victims storming the houses of terrorists still lives ^^

just look at this poor victims face, hes so happy because his enemies miscalculated the number of dead bodies. means god is on his side ^^

edit>
oh and i almost forgot,

this article contains IRONY and SARCASM, so BE WARNED.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

openparadigm (57) 9 years ago

Why not? Do you dispute the facts as reported in that article, why? Because Jews?

$0.00

[-]

interceptor (52) 9 years ago

"Why not? Do you dispute the facts as reported in that article, why? "

it looks more like personal view on historical event.
and i love such articles and people who are writing, editing and sharing it. they can be useful if you have enough of info gathered already. its like, if you missed something important, there will always be some clues in such whitewashing articles.

‚‚Because Jews?"

something tells me you can better than that.

$0.00

[-]

openparadigm (57) 9 years ago

Let me get this straight, you doubt the facts presented by this source, because it looks like a personal view...
... just like the other article you didn't read?
Its my personal view that you wouldn't know a real argument if it bit you on the ass.
I sure hope you can do better than this because I'm already bored with you.

$0.00

[-]

interceptor (52) 9 years ago

and im not surprised that your personal view cant go further from peoples asses. thats also the maximum reach of your facts.

you still have to make some more effort. when you write something here, whole world can come and read it. some of us are used to higher quality than daily propaganda you are ok with. some of us are professionals, experienced, and very talented in data mining, source checking, analyzing and finding relations. declaring something as a FACT requires a lot of time and hard work.

what you did, it was sloppy work, and now you re butthurt because i called you out for it.

think of that, try to be better.

$0.00

[-]