"From: Mrrzy
Date: 25 Sep 11 - 10:01 PM

...

Where Israel was carved out of existing territory, the natives weren't conquered or killed off, so while it is a *fact* that the UN created Israel legally, should that make the displaced homeless? "


1. The existing territory was the Jewish Homeland of Mandate Palestine, the Arab homeland ( of 77% of the Mandate was Transjordan)

2. If one is to consider the displaced Arab Palestinians ( around 640,000), the LARGER number of Jews ( 820,000) driven out of Arab nations ( and it was the Arab League that attacked the newly formed state of Israel) should ALSO be considered, UNLESS you insist that Jews are not human, and Arabs are. THAT seems to be the implied "fact" in many comments here.





"Or should they all just become Jordanian and Lebanese and other nationalities from areas surrounding Israel and let the Israelis take over more and more that they *weren't* given legally, and forget about Palestine, which has existed since before Judea?"

1. Yes, THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN, Israel absorbed the Jewish refugees from Arab nations, Pakistan absorbed the Moslem Refugees from India, and India absorbed the Hindu refugees from Pakistan and Bangladesh. When people here start arguing for giving Pakistan BACK to the Hindus who were driven out, THEN I might believe that they are NOT bunch of religious bigots and anti-semites.

2. Palestine was an administrative area of the Ottoman Empire. It was NOT an independent country until the Mandate. Judea was a portion of ancient Israel, which has NOT been brought up.



It seems that if Jews take lands back that had been from them " by force of arms ( 1948) " (Re the Mandate Palestine Jewish homeland boundaries) then they have to give it back, but when the Arabs "Take land by force of arms it means they get to keep it forever.

Anybody note a religious based bias besides me????