- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 10/18/25 at 8:38 pm to LSUbest
It really isn't a centuries old conflict. It took off right after WWI, in 1920-21. Was At that time the Arabs in the Palestine area welcomed the Jews who were indeed getting persecuted in Europe & Russia to settle peacefully. It was the Zionists that were the problem. These Jewish zealots wanted to move in and take over the Palestine area.
The Zionists used everything at their disposal to take power...the British government, the French who had been promised land by Britain during the war, & by moving in young, military aged, single revolutionaries from Russia (mostly).
I'm not siding with the Arabs or the Jews. I'm just saying that I get the animosity on both sides. The Jews supposedly just wanted a safe place to coexist with the Arab population; and many did. But the Zionist movement is what radicalized the Arab population in Palestine by taking over & forcing the Arabs out of their homeland.
The Zionists used everything at their disposal to take power...the British government, the French who had been promised land by Britain during the war, & by moving in young, military aged, single revolutionaries from Russia (mostly).
I'm not siding with the Arabs or the Jews. I'm just saying that I get the animosity on both sides. The Jews supposedly just wanted a safe place to coexist with the Arab population; and many did. But the Zionist movement is what radicalized the Arab population in Palestine by taking over & forcing the Arabs out of their homeland.
Posted on 10/18/25 at 8:57 pm to scorb
quote:
I'm not siding with the Arabs or the Jews. I'm just saying that I get the animosity on both sides. The Jews supposedly just wanted a safe place to coexist with the Arab population; and many did. But the Zionist movement is what radicalized the Arab population in Palestine by taking over & forcing the Arabs out of their homeland.
And you are correct. Israel did some mean stuff. Pushing people off of land when they were perfectly willing to coexist. It was Israel's right, and now they are paying for it, big time.
That said, though that was a long time ago. And since then Israel gave a significant portion of their country away. But that hasn't appeased them and now we have what we have.
Posted on 10/18/25 at 8:59 pm to RFK
I’m of the opinion it’s really a case of bad vs worse
Posted on 10/18/25 at 11:05 pm to scorb
BS who taught you that crap?
Posted on 10/19/25 at 5:13 am to scorb
quote:Negative.
It really isn't a centuries old conflict. It took off right after WWI, in 1920-21.
The Balfour Declaration was not where "it took off." It took off with 19th century European and Ottoman anti-semitism. Balfour in 1917 was nearly a midpoint.
quote:That is 100% false. Some did because they sold land and domiciles at profit. But the 19th century aliyah was far from "welcomed" by locals.
Arabs in the Palestine area welcomed the Jews who were indeed getting persecuted in Europe & Russia to settle peacefully.
quote:The question is "why?"
These Jewish zealots wanted to move in and take over the Palestine area.
What was the environment driving the action?
You seem to naively imply the aliyah occurred in a vacuum. It didn't. European pogroms and Ottoman ranked antisemitism (Communities were ranked, with the Muslims first, then the Greeks, then the Armenians, then the Jews) drove Jewish response.
quote:You've got it flipped. European and Arab behavior is what radicalized Jews in the Zionist movement.
But the Zionist movement is what radicalized the Arab population in Palestine by taking over & forcing the Arabs out of their homeland.
Posted on 10/19/25 at 5:17 am to RFK
In the current struggle, Isreal is right. They were attacked and have every right to go scorched earth.
Posted on 10/19/25 at 5:19 am to Penrod
quote:
Yours is the kind of flawed thinking that results in a hundred years of warfare. There are all kinds of “peoples” who have the same “right” to a homeland that you say the Palestinians have - Native Americans, Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh, Uyghurs - but they don’t have it because they weren’t powerful enough to sustain it. When foreign powers support the pitifully weak Palestinian society’s “rights” to a homeland they perpetuate a war that can only continue with outside help. This outside help brings outside help for the Israelis, and you have a Great Power playground of carnage and death.
Sounds an argument for might makes right.
In that case, why are we propping up Israel? Should have let Iran and co wipe them off the map. Survival of the fittest.
Posted on 10/19/25 at 5:31 am to uziyourillusion
quote:Does it??
Sounds an argument for might makes right.
A policing response to a group advocating genocide, then acting on the call, "sounds like an argument for might makes right"?
That is a very interesting take.
Posted on 10/19/25 at 5:31 am to RFK
Muslims are like a bacterial infection and war is like the antibiotic. The problem is we never finish taking the antibiotic and that bacteria comes back. You have to kill all of the bacteria to restore complete health.
Posted on 10/19/25 at 8:13 am to RFK
quote:
Who is Right
It doesn't really matter.
Israel's interests align with ours.
"Palestine's" interests don't.
It's an easy choice.
This post was edited on 10/19/25 at 8:15 am
Posted on 10/19/25 at 9:19 am to RFK
Not sure about the Middle East but the Jews in NYC are about to be run out of town by the commies, will soon be the Upper Middle East Side.
Posted on 10/19/25 at 1:05 pm to uziyourillusion
quote:
Sounds an argument for might makes right.
In that case, why are we propping up Israel? Should have let Iran and co wipe them off the map. Survival of the fittest.
You ask the right questions.
First, it is not an absolute argument for might makes right, but it is an argument for pragmatism when faced with that. For example, you don’t seem to be arguing that we support the Uyghurs against China - pragmatism.
Second, I’m with you in that we should not be funding Israel. Helping them? Sure, as the only democracy in the area, they should have our best wishes and cooperation, but they can fund themselves. In the aftermath of The Holocaust it was different, and we were obliged to help them after what they went through. But at some point, certainly by the 1980’s, our support should have been spiritual and through intelligence sharing, diplomacy, etc - not money.
Third, if we withdrew support for Israel no countries would wipe them off the map. They are far more powerful than the any practical combination of Arab and Persian countries. In the event all of them attacked, Israel could obliterate their capitals in hours.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News