Your conclusions - with which I agree - show also that failing to remember, never mind learning from, History will open the doors to easy propaganda and then to results soaked in blood.
Excellent conclusion to an excellent series. Thank you for your balanced, factual, history of the politics involved in the Middle East. Now that we have an accurate man's world view of the Middle East, how about doing the same from a Biblical worldview?
That might explain how Israel has survived "miraculously" as a nation since the time of David. What the actual boundaries of Israel are, as covenanted by God. It might also explain how any men wanting to eliminate the nation of Israel are in defiance and disobedience to God. It might also predict the future successes of those repeated attempts, up to and including the final attempt.
I realize it is a daunting task, but I firmly believe you are best qualified to attempt it.
"So are the ‘plst’, the Philistines, who gave their name to ‘Palestine’.
Yet unlike the Israelites, there is no continuity between those Philistines and the present day Palestinians... "
These two statements are the direct 180º opposite of the facts. Modern Israel is 77 years old. Its ruling elite came from Europe and the USA. The mixed population of Palestine – Muslims, Orthodox Jews, Christians – were an ethnic native population whose direct ancestors trace back at least centuries, 1700 years for the Christians, even more for the Arabs.
This population had been under British occupation since 1917 and thus they had been permitted no sovereign government, much less an army. In 1948 a well armed, trained and equipped 30,000 man army of Zionists easily conquered this civilian population, destroyed their villages and mass murdered many thus driving them out to Gaza and the West Bank while Britain and America stood by and did nothing. In 1967 Gaza, Golan and the West Bank were conquered and put under occupation, an illegal act and an illegal occupation which – according to the UN Charter – the occupied population has the right to resist. The conquest of 1967 saw the IDF deliberately mass murder women and children and I heard personal testimony of that fact from an Israeli in 1967.
I urge everyone to educate themselves by listening to Miko Peled's talk he gave in Seattle in 2012.
The danger of global nuclear war if Israel uses even one of its dozens of nuclear warheads is far too great for Israel's violence to be tolerated. Israel must be stopped.
Under international law, Israel has no right to occupy, much less "ethically cleanse" Gaza and the West Bank and the occupied population has the right to resist.
But to me, right now, arguments about rights are tedious and boring and, quite apparently, futile.
After a full on exchange of nuclear missiles between the USA and Russia the extinction of human beings cannot be ruled out as a possibility. There is no other issue worth bothering with by comparison to that fact.
I forgot to mention the racism of your argument as expressed in "continuity between those Philistines and the present day Palestinians". I find this line of thinking unconscionable. Racism and apartheid are intolerable in this world of today. Israel is a racist, race-based, apartheid state. The criminal cartel who runs it threatens the entire world. I have no respect for racists. I demand my vote as a citizen of the world, as a human being who is, like all of us are, under the threat of nuclear war. Stop Israel!!
If you are going to accuse me of racism, come with proof.
My claim about continuity between philistines and present-day Palestinians is NOT racism, not even close. It is a true historical fact. And where did I support or advocate for ‘apartheid’? You CANNOT just start throwing such severe accusations around, based on NOTHING in my articles! Show me where I even hinted at ‘apartheid’? Or defended such?
You are grandstanding now, without engaging what I actually wrote. Even worse, you are accusing me falsely.
I see that I did say "the racism of your argument" and that is an insult. I'm sorry. I spoke carelessly. I didn't mean to insult you personally. I was meaning to emphasize the nature of the terms, not you personally. I don't know you – nor you me – but nothing of yours I have ever read marks you as a bad person, quite the opposite. So please forgive my careless words.
I should have explained myself more clearly. (But how many volumes of round and round arguments would that take, even if I could do it!)
I am going to try to be succinct – which is a skill I'm really incompetent at.
My argument is that the terms of the foundation of Israel specify an exclusively Jewish State. The exclusivity of a Jewish State is more than implied, it has been violently enforced. The inevitable result of that is physical, legalistic and social separation of those deemed proper Jewish citizens and those of a lesser class. Separation of Jews from Non-Jews by class based on ancestry tends to make Judaism less a religious belief, and more of a racial distinction.
This is apartheid, by any name. It inevitably must be enforced by coercion; violent coercion by force of arms was the foundation of Israel in 1948. Two peoples were violently driven apart. You and I have utterly irreconcilably different opinions about that. You think it defensive and I disagree on that point.
Every forceful action will cause an equal reaction in the opposite direction. This is as true socially as it is in mechanics. Force calls forth its opposite.
An exclusively Jewish State in Palestine – where prior to 1917 there had been Orthodox Jews, Orthodox Christians and Sunni Muslims living side by side – necessitates violence.
This conflict grows more implacable the more force is applied. Those on both sides grow more bitter and vengeful the more the violence is ratcheted up.
The calls for violence by Muslims against Jews and corresponding calls to annihilate the Arabs are often quoted from ancient books but the violence did not come out of ancient books or some Clash of Civilizations. Not in my view. They come out of the bitterness of people who have seen their innocent loved ones murdered.
Just one instance out of many:
During 2018 and 2019 an unarmed crowd of Gazans assembled once a week at the "fence" around Gaza protesting by shouting and carrying signs. They called it the Great March of Return, but of course there were razor wire and gun towers and soldiers in their way. The response of the IDF was to kill dozens and maim and mutilate hundreds by sniper rifle fire. That was the last time non-violence was tried in the effort to free Gaza. Gaza's food, water, fuel, medicines, baby diapers etc are under the armed control of the IDF. This makes Gaza a Concentration Camp. So October 7th did not come unprovoked.
Without truth and reconciliation there is no end of this.
And yet unless reconciliation is the end the alternative is the extinction of both sides from the land. In former times that was physically impossible.
That is no longer the case. Israel was allowed to illegally acquire nuclear weapons. That is a matter of historical record. A national territory scarcely bigger than Greater Seoul, South Korea, and far less populated, is governed by people who see themselves as embattled and permanently at war and who have some dozens of nuclear warheads at their command.
This threatens the entire world with the possibility of human extinction.
If I had Aladdin's Lamp and the Genie I would wish that Israel's nuclear weapons would disappear. My second wish would disappear the "fence" around Gaza. My third wish would move all the "settlers" out of the West Bank. Those three disappearances are going to happen sooner or later, that's my intuition. I think that will be a good thing.
I wish to rest my case at this point and agree to disagree. Have the last word if you want it. I'm done.
No, those 2 statements I gave are not diametric opposite of the facts. Of course, modern Israel is only 77 years old, but that is not what I was talking about, was I? By that same metric, there are no Palestinians, either, as there never was a state with such a name. This is what shooting from the hip produces: clear contradictions in your own position.
The ruling elite of modern Israel come from Europe, the USA, but also from the Middle East and North-Africa. And before that, they came from the diaspora, either caused by the Romans or the Assyrians, but they originated from the same area, roughly coinciding with modern Israel. Are you denying that fact?
I did go over the makeup of ‘Palestinians’, as well, nothing in what I wrote contradicts facts.
Next, you try to juxtapose ‘Palestinians’ who, as they were under British occupation since 1917, were ‘not permitted sovereign government, much less an army’, but then you add ‘a well armed, trained and equipped 30,000 man army of Zionists’. Where did they come from? The Jews who immigrated to the British Mandate were similarly under the ‘occupation’ of the British, and were similarly not allowed to have sovereignty or their own army. The moment they declared their independence, in line with the plan of the United Nations, they were attacked with the combined armies of all their Arab neighbors, helped with local militia of fedayeen.
Next: ‘mass murdered many’? Did you even read my article on the Nakba? Or are you just repeating what you heard elsewhere? I am willing to engage in dialogue, but that requires that you engage what I wrote, and support it, and not just spout talking points.
Was the 1967 war really ‘illegal’? The UN DOES allow pre-emptive strikes, which was absolutely warranted at that time, given the build-up of forces of Egypt in the Sinai, ordering the UN peacekeeping troops to withdraw immediately, breaking the demilitarized zone there. Who was acting illegally?
On the right to resist: this ‘resistance’ goes back way before any ‘occupation’, and thus is not against ‘occupation’...
If you have support of ‘deliberate mass murder’ in 1967, please provide it. Again: bare assertion is NOT helpful to any conversation. I did the research, provided all my sources, and you come on, rejecting it all, based on your word alone? No one learns anything from that.
Next, the biggest mistake you made:
“But to me, right now, arguments about rights are tedious and boring and, quite apparently, futile.”
Yet you base your whole position on the direct rejection of Israel’s right to exist, something you still haven’t explained or supported as to why Israel has no such right.
Can’t do that.
Again, if you think I made a mistake, feel free to point out what was wrong, and, more importantly, explain WHY it was wrong, providing support for your claims.
The author has written an excellent series of articles. Unfortunately, if it's longer than a three or four word slogan, it won't capture the hearts and minds of this new generation.
Your conclusions - with which I agree - show also that failing to remember, never mind learning from, History will open the doors to easy propaganda and then to results soaked in blood.
Excellent conclusion to an excellent series. Thank you for your balanced, factual, history of the politics involved in the Middle East. Now that we have an accurate man's world view of the Middle East, how about doing the same from a Biblical worldview?
That might explain how Israel has survived "miraculously" as a nation since the time of David. What the actual boundaries of Israel are, as covenanted by God. It might also explain how any men wanting to eliminate the nation of Israel are in defiance and disobedience to God. It might also predict the future successes of those repeated attempts, up to and including the final attempt.
I realize it is a daunting task, but I firmly believe you are best qualified to attempt it.
God bless.
In total agreement!!
"Israel is old, and mentioned by the Egyptians.
"So are the ‘plst’, the Philistines, who gave their name to ‘Palestine’.
Yet unlike the Israelites, there is no continuity between those Philistines and the present day Palestinians... "
These two statements are the direct 180º opposite of the facts. Modern Israel is 77 years old. Its ruling elite came from Europe and the USA. The mixed population of Palestine – Muslims, Orthodox Jews, Christians – were an ethnic native population whose direct ancestors trace back at least centuries, 1700 years for the Christians, even more for the Arabs.
This population had been under British occupation since 1917 and thus they had been permitted no sovereign government, much less an army. In 1948 a well armed, trained and equipped 30,000 man army of Zionists easily conquered this civilian population, destroyed their villages and mass murdered many thus driving them out to Gaza and the West Bank while Britain and America stood by and did nothing. In 1967 Gaza, Golan and the West Bank were conquered and put under occupation, an illegal act and an illegal occupation which – according to the UN Charter – the occupied population has the right to resist. The conquest of 1967 saw the IDF deliberately mass murder women and children and I heard personal testimony of that fact from an Israeli in 1967.
I urge everyone to educate themselves by listening to Miko Peled's talk he gave in Seattle in 2012.
Miko Peled Seattle. Oct. 1, 2012 - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOaxAckFCuQ
The danger of global nuclear war if Israel uses even one of its dozens of nuclear warheads is far too great for Israel's violence to be tolerated. Israel must be stopped.
Under international law, Israel has no right to occupy, much less "ethically cleanse" Gaza and the West Bank and the occupied population has the right to resist.
But to me, right now, arguments about rights are tedious and boring and, quite apparently, futile.
After a full on exchange of nuclear missiles between the USA and Russia the extinction of human beings cannot be ruled out as a possibility. There is no other issue worth bothering with by comparison to that fact.
Israel be damned!
I forgot to mention the racism of your argument as expressed in "continuity between those Philistines and the present day Palestinians". I find this line of thinking unconscionable. Racism and apartheid are intolerable in this world of today. Israel is a racist, race-based, apartheid state. The criminal cartel who runs it threatens the entire world. I have no respect for racists. I demand my vote as a citizen of the world, as a human being who is, like all of us are, under the threat of nuclear war. Stop Israel!!
If you are going to accuse me of racism, come with proof.
My claim about continuity between philistines and present-day Palestinians is NOT racism, not even close. It is a true historical fact. And where did I support or advocate for ‘apartheid’? You CANNOT just start throwing such severe accusations around, based on NOTHING in my articles! Show me where I even hinted at ‘apartheid’? Or defended such?
You are grandstanding now, without engaging what I actually wrote. Even worse, you are accusing me falsely.
I see that I did say "the racism of your argument" and that is an insult. I'm sorry. I spoke carelessly. I didn't mean to insult you personally. I was meaning to emphasize the nature of the terms, not you personally. I don't know you – nor you me – but nothing of yours I have ever read marks you as a bad person, quite the opposite. So please forgive my careless words.
I should have explained myself more clearly. (But how many volumes of round and round arguments would that take, even if I could do it!)
I am going to try to be succinct – which is a skill I'm really incompetent at.
My argument is that the terms of the foundation of Israel specify an exclusively Jewish State. The exclusivity of a Jewish State is more than implied, it has been violently enforced. The inevitable result of that is physical, legalistic and social separation of those deemed proper Jewish citizens and those of a lesser class. Separation of Jews from Non-Jews by class based on ancestry tends to make Judaism less a religious belief, and more of a racial distinction.
This is apartheid, by any name. It inevitably must be enforced by coercion; violent coercion by force of arms was the foundation of Israel in 1948. Two peoples were violently driven apart. You and I have utterly irreconcilably different opinions about that. You think it defensive and I disagree on that point.
Every forceful action will cause an equal reaction in the opposite direction. This is as true socially as it is in mechanics. Force calls forth its opposite.
An exclusively Jewish State in Palestine – where prior to 1917 there had been Orthodox Jews, Orthodox Christians and Sunni Muslims living side by side – necessitates violence.
This conflict grows more implacable the more force is applied. Those on both sides grow more bitter and vengeful the more the violence is ratcheted up.
The calls for violence by Muslims against Jews and corresponding calls to annihilate the Arabs are often quoted from ancient books but the violence did not come out of ancient books or some Clash of Civilizations. Not in my view. They come out of the bitterness of people who have seen their innocent loved ones murdered.
Just one instance out of many:
During 2018 and 2019 an unarmed crowd of Gazans assembled once a week at the "fence" around Gaza protesting by shouting and carrying signs. They called it the Great March of Return, but of course there were razor wire and gun towers and soldiers in their way. The response of the IDF was to kill dozens and maim and mutilate hundreds by sniper rifle fire. That was the last time non-violence was tried in the effort to free Gaza. Gaza's food, water, fuel, medicines, baby diapers etc are under the armed control of the IDF. This makes Gaza a Concentration Camp. So October 7th did not come unprovoked.
Without truth and reconciliation there is no end of this.
And yet unless reconciliation is the end the alternative is the extinction of both sides from the land. In former times that was physically impossible.
That is no longer the case. Israel was allowed to illegally acquire nuclear weapons. That is a matter of historical record. A national territory scarcely bigger than Greater Seoul, South Korea, and far less populated, is governed by people who see themselves as embattled and permanently at war and who have some dozens of nuclear warheads at their command.
This threatens the entire world with the possibility of human extinction.
If I had Aladdin's Lamp and the Genie I would wish that Israel's nuclear weapons would disappear. My second wish would disappear the "fence" around Gaza. My third wish would move all the "settlers" out of the West Bank. Those three disappearances are going to happen sooner or later, that's my intuition. I think that will be a good thing.
I wish to rest my case at this point and agree to disagree. Have the last word if you want it. I'm done.
No, those 2 statements I gave are not diametric opposite of the facts. Of course, modern Israel is only 77 years old, but that is not what I was talking about, was I? By that same metric, there are no Palestinians, either, as there never was a state with such a name. This is what shooting from the hip produces: clear contradictions in your own position.
The ruling elite of modern Israel come from Europe, the USA, but also from the Middle East and North-Africa. And before that, they came from the diaspora, either caused by the Romans or the Assyrians, but they originated from the same area, roughly coinciding with modern Israel. Are you denying that fact?
I did go over the makeup of ‘Palestinians’, as well, nothing in what I wrote contradicts facts.
Next, you try to juxtapose ‘Palestinians’ who, as they were under British occupation since 1917, were ‘not permitted sovereign government, much less an army’, but then you add ‘a well armed, trained and equipped 30,000 man army of Zionists’. Where did they come from? The Jews who immigrated to the British Mandate were similarly under the ‘occupation’ of the British, and were similarly not allowed to have sovereignty or their own army. The moment they declared their independence, in line with the plan of the United Nations, they were attacked with the combined armies of all their Arab neighbors, helped with local militia of fedayeen.
Next: ‘mass murdered many’? Did you even read my article on the Nakba? Or are you just repeating what you heard elsewhere? I am willing to engage in dialogue, but that requires that you engage what I wrote, and support it, and not just spout talking points.
Was the 1967 war really ‘illegal’? The UN DOES allow pre-emptive strikes, which was absolutely warranted at that time, given the build-up of forces of Egypt in the Sinai, ordering the UN peacekeeping troops to withdraw immediately, breaking the demilitarized zone there. Who was acting illegally?
On the right to resist: this ‘resistance’ goes back way before any ‘occupation’, and thus is not against ‘occupation’...
If you have support of ‘deliberate mass murder’ in 1967, please provide it. Again: bare assertion is NOT helpful to any conversation. I did the research, provided all my sources, and you come on, rejecting it all, based on your word alone? No one learns anything from that.
Next, the biggest mistake you made:
“But to me, right now, arguments about rights are tedious and boring and, quite apparently, futile.”
Yet you base your whole position on the direct rejection of Israel’s right to exist, something you still haven’t explained or supported as to why Israel has no such right.
Can’t do that.
Again, if you think I made a mistake, feel free to point out what was wrong, and, more importantly, explain WHY it was wrong, providing support for your claims.
The author has written an excellent series of articles. Unfortunately, if it's longer than a three or four word slogan, it won't capture the hearts and minds of this new generation.
Which is why this conflict is so easily abused, as no one understands it...