Isreal: Why was it created?

are u out of ur mind ???
have u ever heard of the Bible ?
while the USA exist for about 500 years ,Jerusalem and Israel exist for more than 2000 years.
but...for more than 200 years ,Jews and Arabs lived together.
no one can say who was here before ,we are one ,we were born together and as it seem we`ll die together.


Dan Ledeman

 

I understand what you mean. Although I too wish to learn. It's odd, but why our we even siding with Israel? Maybe, if we're humaine as we say we are, we'd help the Palestines. If killing people is Palestinians only defense for keeping crazy Israelites off of their land then so be it. (WWII vet convinced me on this)

 

great analysis

 

River,

Oversimplified, Israel was created to be a "safe haven" for post-WWII jews who, despite Hitler being overthrown, were still not that welcome in certain parts of Europe. The idea also being that it was a kind of return to their "homeland." So, they had already been kicked out of their modern hoes in Euro countires - make 'em a new/old one.

 

RR -

I posted this in another thread... http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31062

1. ARCHEOLOGY

The first reason is that Israel has the right to the land because of all of the archeological evidence. All the archeological evidence supports it. Every time there is a dig in Israel, it does nothing but support the fact that Israelis have had a presence there for 3,000 years. The coins, the cities, the pottery, the culture -- there are other people, groups that are there, but there is no mistaking the fact that Israelis have been present in that land for 3,000 years. It predates any claims that other peoples in the region may have.

The ancient Philistines are extinct. Many other ancient peoples are extinct. They do not have the unbroken line to this date that the Israelis have. Even the Egyptians of today are not racial Egyptians of 2,000, 3,000 years ago. They are primarily an Arab people. The land is called Egypt, but they are not the same racial and ethnic stock as the old Egyptians of the ancient world.

The Israelis are in fact descended from the original Israelites.

2. HISTORY

The second proof of Israel's right to the land is the historic right. History supports it totally and completely. We know there has been an Israel up until the time of the Roman Empire. The Romans conquered the land. Israel had no homeland, although Jews were allowed to live there. They were driven from the land in two dispersions: One in 70 A.D. and the other in 135 A.D. But there was always a Jewish presence in the land.

The Turks, who took over about 700 years ago and ruled the land up until about World War One, had control. Then the land was conquered by the British. The Turks entered World War One on the side of Germany. The British knew they had to do something to punish Turkey, and also to break up that empire that was going to be a part of the whole effort of Germany in World War One. So the British sent troops against the Turks in the Holy Land.

One of the generals who was leading the British armies was a man named Allenby. Allenby was a Bible-believing Christian. He carried a Bible with him everywhere he went and he knew the significance of Jerusalem. The night before the attack against Jerusalem to drive out the Turks, Allenby prayed that God would allow him to capture the city without doing damage to the holy places.

That day, Allenby sent World War One biplanes over the city of Jerusalem to do a reconnaissance mission. You have to understand that the Turks had at that time never seen an airplane. So there they were, flying around. They looked in the sky and saw these fascinating inventions and did not know what they were, and they were terrified by them.

Then they were told they were going to be opposed by a man named Allenby the next day, which means, in their language, "man sent from God" or "prophet from God." They dared not fight against a prophet from God, so the next morning, when Allenby went to take Jerusalem, he went in and captured it without firing a single shot.

The British government was grateful to Jewish people around the world, particularly to one Jewish chemist who helped them manufacture niter. Niter is an ingredient that was used in nitroglycerin, which was sent over from the New World. But they did not have a way of getting it to England. The German U-boats were shooting on the boats, so most of the niter they were trying to import to make nitroglycerin was at the bottom of the ocean. But a man named Weizman, a Jewish chemist, discovered a way to make it from materials that existed in England. As a result, they were able to continue that supply.

The British at that time said they were going to give the Jewish people a homeland. That is all written down in history. They were gratified that the Jewish people, the bankers, came through and helped finance the war.

The homeland that Britain said it would set aside consisted of all of what is now Israel and all of what was then the nation of Jordan -- the whole thing. That was what Britain promised to give the Jews in 1917. In the beginning, there was some Arab support for this action. There was not a huge Arab population in the land at that time, and there is a reason for that. The land was not able to sustain a large population of people. It just did not have the development it needed to handle those people, and nobody really wanted this land. It was considered to be worthless land.

Mark Twain -- Samuel Clemens -- took a tour of Palestine in 1867. This is how he described that land. We are talking about Israel now. He said: "A desolate country whose soil is rich enough but is given over wholly to weeds. A silent, mournful expanse. We never saw a human being on the whole route. There was hardly a tree or a shrub anywhere. Even the olive and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country."

Where was this great Palestinian nation? It did not exist. It was not there. Palestinians were not there. Palestine was a region named by the Romans, but at that time it was under the control of Turkey, and there was no large mass of people there because the land would not support them.

This is the report that the Palestinian Royal Commission, created by the British, made. It quotes an account of the conditions on the coastal plain along the Mediterranean Sea in 1913. The Palestinian Royal Commission said:

"The road leading from Gaza to the north was only a summer track, suitable for transport by camels or carts. No orange groves, orchards or vineyards were to be seen until one reached the Yavnev village. Houses were mud. Schools did not exist. The western part toward the sea was almost a desert. The villages in this area were few and thinly populated. Many villages were deserted by their inhabitants."

That was 1913.

The French author Voltaire described Palestine as "a hopeless, dreary place." In short, under the Turks the land suffered from neglect and low population. That is a historic fact. The nation became populated by both Jews and Arabs because the land came to prosper when Jews came back and began to reclaim it. If there had never been any archaeological evidence to support the rights of the Israelis to the territory, it is also important to recognize that other nations in the area have no longstanding claim to the country either.

Did you know that Saudi Arabia was not created until 1913, Lebanon until 1920? Iraq did not exist as a nation until 1932, Syria until 1941. The borders of Jordan were established in 1946 and Kuwait in 1961. Any of these nations that would say Israel is only a recent arrival would have to deny their own rights as recent arrivals as well. They did not exist as countries. They were all under the control of the Turks.

Historically, Israel gained its independence in 1948.

 

just for the record : I`m a complete atheist.
but u don't really need the bible to know that Jerusalem ,the Jews and the Arabs were all here together for at least 2000-3000 years.

Dan Lederman

 

So, does Senator James Inhofe also support that Azatlan movement?

 

Inhofe is certainly not one of my favorites, and as I said in that thread I don't even support his main thrust, but he's right about the historical claims.

I don't know how he feels about illegal immigration. He probably supports it.

 

Some of his facts are a little off in regards to history...but of course Jews have been there longer than Muslims - wait for cheap applause - chirp chirp.

Historical claims or murky, which is why I brought up the return to Mexico stuff. Could have been interchanged with Native American movements.

What does illegal immigration have to do with it?

 

Illegal immigration = reclaiming Aztlan - in some quarters. I know, I know, your reference was concerning a hypothetical return of the land to the descendents of the Mexicans...

The historical claims aren't all that murky concerning Israel, though. It's pretty clear cut history that only Arab activists dispute. Irrelevant, though, in my mind. What matter is the current claim, not the historical claim... I just posted that for RR to get a sense of what the Jews are doing there - his original question.

 

Yeah, but "homeland" works better than an excerpt from long-winded politicians.

Anyone else think that countries are overrated?

 

RR -

You asked why Israel was created, and actually what I posted didn't specifically answer that. Here's a better explanation:

After WWI, the British controlled virtually all of what is now modern-day Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Kuwait. They did not want to control all of this land, but instead of just pulling out and leaving the region to its own unstable destiny, they decided to impose their own form of unstable destiny upon it. So over the years, they carved it up, creating states based loosely upon existing tribal lines; the last state they created before they finally and fully pulled their army out of the ME was Israel.

The Balfour Declaration in 1917 called for the creation of a Jewish state in their historical homeland, what was traditionally called Palestine (although there has never in history been a state called Palestine). But the Brits decided to try to keep a foothold in the ME for as long as they could, so it would be a while before Israel was created...

Then WWII and the Holocaust came. It's not often talked about or acknowledged, but even after the war most European countries still wanted to get rid of their Jews, one way or another. Conveniently, Britian was looking for a way to finally get out of the ME, secure in their concern that the region's oil resources were now coming under the protection of the Americans, and desperately needing to reduce their overseas deployments. So they got the UN to declare an Israeli state, while they hightailed it home.

There had always been a Jewish presence there, though - the flood from Europe just increased the numbers. And where there were Jews, there were two things necessary for life in the harsh desert plains: food and water. Well, food anyway; everyone in the region has always fought over water, since the dawn of history. But the Jews could actually make things grow in the Palestine deserts; the Arabs never could, and the Turkish overlords never spared the time or resources to develop the area. Most of the Arabs in the area were either Bedouin nomads, or Arabs who lived around the prosperous Jewish settlements, living with and off of the Jews. These latter Arabs later became what we now call "Palestinians".

But in short, in answer to your question of "Why was Israel created?", the answer is not nearly as simplistic as "might makes right". It was created for the same reason that all of the other existing Arab states were created: The Brits didn't want to rule the place, so they let someone else rule it. Also, the Euripeans wanted to get the Jews the hell out of their lands, and America wouldn't take them all, so they grasped an opportunity to get a good chunk of the Jews out of Europe.

Why do they have a right to the land? A number of reasons: first, the historical claim is pretty solid; second, the UN said they have a right to it. Most importantly, they built a modern, technological state there that could sustain a relatively large population in an area that would otherwise be virtually deserted. The last is most important - they built it, so it ought to belong to them.

Why does Israel still exist? Well that is due entirely to their military might, as if their neighbors had anything to say about it, they would not exist.

 

now there's a quote from which a rather interesting theological debate could spawn.

 

Killing innocent civilians?

Maybe you should think before you post.

 

Here's another potential questions that could also be applied to the European settlers/Native Americans situation.

How innocent are people who knowingly move onto land whose ownership is under dispute?

Discuss.

 

But in short, in answer to your question of "Why was Israel created?", the answer is not nearly as simplistic as "might makes right". It was created for the same reason that all of the other existing Arab states were created: The Brits didn't want to rule the place, so they let someone else rule it. Also, the Euripeans wanted to get the Jews the hell out of their lands, and America wouldn't take them all, so they grasped an opportunity to get a good chunk of the Jews out of Europe.

...

Why does Israel still exist? Well that is due entirely to their military might, as if their neighbors had anything to say about it, they would not exist.

I think a lot of Arab anger and resentment comes from the view that Israel is an extension of old colonial, imperial relationships for the reasons you've laid out above (plus others). Many Arab groups feel the military might of Israel would not exist if not for the overwhelming funding and support of the US, which further reinforces the view of Israel as a puppet of "the West." Some Arabs feel that Israel continues to exist, not because of their own military might but because of the military and economic might of the United States--which funds Israel while not allowing other local nations to similarly militarize. As far as some Palestinians are concerned, the establishment of the Jewish state was not much different from the take over of power from the Turks by the British. From the Palestinian perspective, they just got a new master.

Some Palestinians may also feel that an historical claim on land based on religion--meaning that this is your homeland because you are Jewish and Jews once lived here--is less powerful than being able to directly trace ones lineage through specific generations to a specific area of land where your nomadic ancestors lived. Moreover, I don't think you can invalidate one group's claim on the area based on a value judgement about how they utilized the land--nomadic vs. city life, farming vs. herding, modern technology vs. Bronze age technology, etc. Starting with Columbus, it was claimed that the New World was deserted, empty and unused (despite any natives) when the first settlers arrived here. In their visions of Manifest Destiny, the settlers saw the "undeveloped" New World as their right. The settlers either didn't see/understand how the natives used the land and/or they didn't care. My point is that the claims of colonists about the nature of the lands they wish to colonize must be taken with a grain of salt.

These types of post-colonial conflicts are still occuring all over the world--in Asia, Europe South America, and Africa. Usually, our government could care less about any of them, however, it is this particular conflict in the Middle East that has captured the attention, time, money and effort of our government and society. I think part of the reason we care has a lot to due with the land gift of the British (and the West) and the obligations which accompany it, imperial relationships established in the area during the cold war (to help keep the Soviets from dominating the ME), as well as a want or need to have some influence in an area so rich in oil. However, as I continue to learn more about this conflict through arguments and material referenced on this BBS, I find myself continually reaching to understand the reasons why our society cares so much about this conflict.

*I know I am off on a lot (maybe most) of the issues here. However, I thought I would stop lurking for a moment to contribute to this great discussion.