Please or to access all these features

Conflict in the Middle East
Thread gallery
10
SummerFeverVenice · 21/05/2024 08:10

@onegrumpyoldwoman

The Wikipedia page you linked- did you even read it?

It says that the annexation wasn’t an full annexation because Jordan wasn’t adding West Bank to itself to be part of Jordan but holding the land in trust for a future Palestinian State: “A month afterwards [after the announcement of annexation], the Arab League, having received assurances from Jordan, resolved to treat the annexed area as being held in trust until the Palestine question was resolved.” The US and U.K. accepted Jordan’s control of West Bank as well on these terms- that it was a temporary control of the land, not an addition of it to Jordan.

Your link also confirms that the Arab League did not attack Israel like you said:
”Following the End of the British Mandate for Palestine and Israel's declaration of independence on 14 May 1948, the Arab Legion, under the leadership of Sir John Bagot Glubb, known as Glubb Pasha, was ordered to enter Mandatory Palestine and secure the UN-designated Arab area.”

The only parts of the “Arab designated area” by the UN partition for a Palestine that ended up being fully annexed were the ones taken by Israel:
”The remainder of the area designated as part of an Arab state under the UN Partition Plan was partly occupied by Egypt (Gaza Strip), partly occupied and annexed by Israel (West Negev, West Galilee, Jaffa).”

I am sure there is more.

onegrumpyoldwoman · 21/05/2024 00:37

SummerFeverVenice · 20/05/2024 19:47

Your version of history did not happen.

  1. The “Arab League” did not include the Palestinians or Palestine, and so were not offered any land at all, nor did they “want it all for themselves”. The Arab league were Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan and Yemen. The Arab league objected to the UN partition being decided without any Palestinian leader being part of the negotiations. They objected to the exclusion of Palestinians.

  2. The British accepted the partition on behalf of the Palestinians. Many Palestinian groups objected ofc. No Palestinian leader was consulted. Palestinians had no say.

  3. The US accepted the partition on behalf of the US Zionists who wished to found Israel. Many Jewish groups already in Palestine also objected.

  4. The Nakba started in 1947 as various Jewish militias started to seize land from Palestinians paying little attention to the UN partition boundaries. There were splinter terrorist groups on each side as well doing bombings and murders.

  5. The Arab league looked on with concern and only after over 250,000 Palestinian refugees had entered the neighbouring countries did they invade as peace keepers. You can read their UN cable listing their reasons. Their troops stayed within the UN partition borders and did not invade into the territory that was formally announced in 1948 as Israel. So no, they did not attack Israel at all. Isrsel’s proto-IDF, the Haganah and other armed militias didn’t stick to the UN partition borders which is why by the end of the war, i
    Israel had seized far more land than the UN partition had given them.

  6. Egypt and Jordan successfully defended and occupied Gaza and West Bank while lobbying the UN to recognise a Palestinian state per their partition. Predictably, the US and U.K. vetoed every such motion as the US still does today. This lasted until Israel attacked in the 1967 six day war and took Gaza and West Bank from them. Jordan never annexed the West Bank and Egypt never annexed the Gaza Strip. Both areas never legally or formally or even locally were viewed as part of Egypt or Jordan.

When you say “they had rejected” - no one in the Palestinian mandate Arab or Jewish was part of the UN partition negotiations. No one there agreed with the partition. They all refused the legitimacy of the UN partition.

The Arab league were offered NO LAND. They are foreign countries. They only intervened when the Nakba was at its peak and even when they did, they respected the UN partition even though they had disagreed with the way in which it had been decided. They disagreed with the US and U.K. drawing lines on the map and then using the UN to implement it. The saying “a land with no people for a people with no land” is how they viewed it. No local leader, Jewish or Arab, was included in the decision.

I really haven't got the time or inclination to unpick all that strange story.

Jordan never annexed the West Bank and Egypt never annexed the Gaza Strip. Both areas never legally or formally or even locally were viewed as part of Egypt or Jordan.

No-one said Egypt annexed the Gaza Strip.

So Wikipedia is wrong about the Jordanian annexation of the West Bank?? You'd better let them know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordanian_annexation_of_the_West_Bank

Jordanian annexation of the West Bank - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordanian_annexation_of_the_West_Bank

SummerFeverVenice · 20/05/2024 19:47

onegrumpyoldwoman · 17/05/2024 20:51

That is incorrect.

In accordance with the United Nations Partition Plan (1947), both the Arabs and the Jews were offered some land, and the possibility of having their own state. The Arab League was opposed to any partition whatsoever, wanting to keep all the land for themselves, and especially opposed to the establishment of Israel. Israel accepted the UN offer, and the Arabs (who have since 1964 re-branded and re-marketed themselves as Palestinian) declined, deciding instead to persuade their co-religionists (Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Transjordan, Syria and Yemen) to join them in attacking Israel, whose sovereignty they refused to acknowledge.

From the very first day they tried to eradicate Israel.

Israel became an independent state on 14 May 1948 and the very next day, on 15 May 1948, Israel was attacked, by 8 different armies.
Had they won there would not be the current situation of stateless Palestinians. It is more likely that Jordan would have annexed most of the region, rather than setting up another Arab country.
But they lost, losing in battle, even the territory offered to them by the UN, which they had previously declined.
Tragically, the Palestinians themselves are the authors of their own loss, their self-assured hubris, leading to nemesis, which ultimately resulted in self-inflicted retributive justice. This loss is known in Arabic as al-Nakba (The Catastrophe), although more accurately it should be called The Debacle.

As a result of this war, Israel kept the original territory offered to them by the UN Partition plan, plus gained 60% of the territory allotted to the Arabs, (let me repeat: which they had rejected),
Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip and Jordan annexed (illegally) the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
To clarify, in 1947 most of the land set aside by the UN Partition Plan for an Arab State in the West Bank and East Jerusalem became occupied territory, but occupied by Jordan, not by Israel.
^^
That seems simple enough.

Your version of history did not happen.

  1. The “Arab League” did not include the Palestinians or Palestine, and so were not offered any land at all, nor did they “want it all for themselves”. The Arab league were Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan and Yemen. The Arab league objected to the UN partition being decided without any Palestinian leader being part of the negotiations. They objected to the exclusion of Palestinians.

  2. The British accepted the partition on behalf of the Palestinians. Many Palestinian groups objected ofc. No Palestinian leader was consulted. Palestinians had no say.

  3. The US accepted the partition on behalf of the US Zionists who wished to found Israel. Many Jewish groups already in Palestine also objected.

  4. The Nakba started in 1947 as various Jewish militias started to seize land from Palestinians paying little attention to the UN partition boundaries. There were splinter terrorist groups on each side as well doing bombings and murders.

  5. The Arab league looked on with concern and only after over 250,000 Palestinian refugees had entered the neighbouring countries did they invade as peace keepers. You can read their UN cable listing their reasons. Their troops stayed within the UN partition borders and did not invade into the territory that was formally announced in 1948 as Israel. So no, they did not attack Israel at all. Isrsel’s proto-IDF, the Haganah and other armed militias didn’t stick to the UN partition borders which is why by the end of the war, i
    Israel had seized far more land than the UN partition had given them.

  6. Egypt and Jordan successfully defended and occupied Gaza and West Bank while lobbying the UN to recognise a Palestinian state per their partition. Predictably, the US and U.K. vetoed every such motion as the US still does today. This lasted until Israel attacked in the 1967 six day war and took Gaza and West Bank from them. Jordan never annexed the West Bank and Egypt never annexed the Gaza Strip. Both areas never legally or formally or even locally were viewed as part of Egypt or Jordan.

When you say “they had rejected” - no one in the Palestinian mandate Arab or Jewish was part of the UN partition negotiations. No one there agreed with the partition. They all refused the legitimacy of the UN partition.

The Arab league were offered NO LAND. They are foreign countries. They only intervened when the Nakba was at its peak and even when they did, they respected the UN partition even though they had disagreed with the way in which it had been decided. They disagreed with the US and U.K. drawing lines on the map and then using the UN to implement it. The saying “a land with no people for a people with no land” is how they viewed it. No local leader, Jewish or Arab, was included in the decision.

onegrumpyoldwoman · 17/05/2024 20:51

SummerFeverVenice · 17/05/2024 15:20

Yy, only proof is the historical fact that the 1.5m refugee Palestinians in all the refugee camps in Gaza have been there since 1948’s Nakba. The Palestinians who had been herded there by the Israeli state in 1948 had been promised they’d be allowed back to their homes in days, weeks at most, but instead their homes and lands were given away to Jewish settlers or their villages were bulldozed and things like parks, or beach resorts or universities were built on top.

That is incorrect.

In accordance with the United Nations Partition Plan (1947), both the Arabs and the Jews were offered some land, and the possibility of having their own state. The Arab League was opposed to any partition whatsoever, wanting to keep all the land for themselves, and especially opposed to the establishment of Israel. Israel accepted the UN offer, and the Arabs (who have since 1964 re-branded and re-marketed themselves as Palestinian) declined, deciding instead to persuade their co-religionists (Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Transjordan, Syria and Yemen) to join them in attacking Israel, whose sovereignty they refused to acknowledge.

From the very first day they tried to eradicate Israel.

Israel became an independent state on 14 May 1948 and the very next day, on 15 May 1948, Israel was attacked, by 8 different armies.
Had they won there would not be the current situation of stateless Palestinians. It is more likely that Jordan would have annexed most of the region, rather than setting up another Arab country.
But they lost, losing in battle, even the territory offered to them by the UN, which they had previously declined.
Tragically, the Palestinians themselves are the authors of their own loss, their self-assured hubris, leading to nemesis, which ultimately resulted in self-inflicted retributive justice. This loss is known in Arabic as al-Nakba (The Catastrophe), although more accurately it should be called The Debacle.

As a result of this war, Israel kept the original territory offered to them by the UN Partition plan, plus gained 60% of the territory allotted to the Arabs, (let me repeat: which they had rejected),
Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip and Jordan annexed (illegally) the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
To clarify, in 1947 most of the land set aside by the UN Partition Plan for an Arab State in the West Bank and East Jerusalem became occupied territory, but occupied by Jordan, not by Israel.
^^
That seems simple enough.

onegrumpyoldwoman · 17/05/2024 20:30

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

DistinguishedSocialCommentator · 17/05/2024 17:52

I refer you all to my previous posts.
It is a fact that Egypt that is RIGHT NEXT DOOR to Gaza refuses to let people in for fear of the the murderous Hamas and gang coming in and causing problems there.

The people of both Gaza and Israel will suffer until the likes of Hamas and their proxies are taken out or taught a lesson

Just release the hostages and hand over Hamas and their leaders the fighting would stop today

The Rafah crossing - we all know why its closed

SummerFeverVenice · 17/05/2024 16:00

DistinguishedSocialCommentator · 16/05/2024 13:06

Just becaue one or two idiots say stuff like that it does not mean it will happen

You get cleons in Russia saying awful stuff, EG "nuke Britain" on an almost regular basis.
Therefore, a non-story IMO.

However, I'm not sure why Egypt is not letting people in for a short time until Hamas has been eradicated and hostages released. The Israeil PM can be kicked along with settlers from the West Bank

If mass displacement is needed to eradicate Hamas, why Egypt?
Why isn’t Israel letting civilians out of Gaza for a short time until Hamas is eradicated? Israel is the occupying power, it is their responsibility to handle this, not fob it off on a neighbouring country.

We didn’t ask France to take on all the Irish…so we could eliminate the IRA…

Your solution of mass displacement is both preposterous and illegal.

SummerFeverVenice · 17/05/2024 15:23

DistinguishedSocialCommentator · 17/05/2024 13:49

So the "news" is "not news" because it does not suit your agenda?

Which part of the following are you unable to comprehend??

'Egypt' and other Arab nations do not want the people of Gaza is for fear of the shit-stirring, murderous Hamas and their cronies would sneaking in with the ordinary people of Gaza and destabilise their country and that my dear friend is a fact

And for the 99.9% of Palestinians that aren’t terrorists, to allow Isrsel to forcibly deport all Palestinians from Gaza would make Egypt and other nations complicit in ethnic cleansing, which is a crime against humanity.

SummerFeverVenice · 17/05/2024 15:20

DistinguishedSocialCommentator · 16/05/2024 20:41

Also there is a very real risk they wouldn't be allowed back into Gaza and it would become a permanent situation.

A load or total rubbish that is said without a shred of proof

Do you really want me to tell you why Egypt or anyone else does not want them??

Yy, only proof is the historical fact that the 1.5m refugee Palestinians in all the refugee camps in Gaza have been there since 1948’s Nakba. The Palestinians who had been herded there by the Israeli state in 1948 had been promised they’d be allowed back to their homes in days, weeks at most, but instead their homes and lands were given away to Jewish settlers or their villages were bulldozed and things like parks, or beach resorts or universities were built on top.

dadoodoodoo · 17/05/2024 15:10

DistinguishedSocialCommentator · 17/05/2024 13:49

So the "news" is "not news" because it does not suit your agenda?

Which part of the following are you unable to comprehend??

'Egypt' and other Arab nations do not want the people of Gaza is for fear of the shit-stirring, murderous Hamas and their cronies would sneaking in with the ordinary people of Gaza and destabilise their country and that my dear friend is a fact

I mean it;s not the "big reveal" that you seem to think it is. No-one is denying this on this thread and @theABC has already raised the security concerns. It is a security risk that Egypt is understandably nervous of, particularly given the issues with the Muslim Brotherhood. But they are also concerned that the situation could become permanent given the both covert and overt discussions going on in Israel. I have never said this is the only concern.

DistinguishedSocialCommentator · 17/05/2024 13:49

dadoodoodoo · 17/05/2024 12:00

That's not news - and has been acknowledged up thread. But it doesn't mean there aren't other concerns.

So the "news" is "not news" because it does not suit your agenda?

Which part of the following are you unable to comprehend??

'Egypt' and other Arab nations do not want the people of Gaza is for fear of the shit-stirring, murderous Hamas and their cronies would sneaking in with the ordinary people of Gaza and destabilise their country and that my dear friend is a fact

dadoodoodoo · 17/05/2024 12:00

DistinguishedSocialCommentator · 17/05/2024 09:29

The real reason why Egypt wont allow Gazans in

Egypt is also concerned that opening the crossing could allow in Hamas and its sympathizers.

https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/why-egypt-wont-open-border-its-palestinian-neighbors

That's not news - and has been acknowledged up thread. But it doesn't mean there aren't other concerns.

dadoodoodoo · 17/05/2024 09:24

@DistinguishedSocialCommentator With this sort of rhetoric and discussion going on, how can you not think think that both Egypt and the people of Gaza have a right to be concerned about this? There is clearly a faction who want Gazans resettled elsewhere. And as there is no end game for "the day after" for Gaza I really don't see how you can discount it. Not particularly great examples below but am at work so can't spend longer on this.
An Israeli ministry, in a 'concept paper,' proposes transferring Gaza civilians to Egypt's Sinai | AP News
Israeli MKs Call on West to 'Welcome' Refugees From Gaza - Israel News - Haaretz.com

Israeli MKs call on West to 'welcome' refugees from Gaza

***

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-14/ty-article/israeli-mks-publish-plan-to-transfer-gazans-to-europe-to-alleviate-humanitarian-crisis/0000018b-ce7c-d168-a3ef-dffeed320000

DistinguishedSocialCommentator · 16/05/2024 20:41

Also there is a very real risk they wouldn't be allowed back into Gaza and it would become a permanent situation.

A load or total rubbish that is said without a shred of proof

Do you really want me to tell you why Egypt or anyone else does not want them??

Tel12 · 16/05/2024 16:01

This has always been the game plan.

Auvergne63 · 16/05/2024 16:00

PosterBoy · 14/11/2023 14:00

How about Madagascar?

Are you ready for the backlash?

dadoodoodoo · 16/05/2024 15:50

TheABC · 16/05/2024 14:01

However, I'm not sure why Egypt is not letting people in for a short time until Hamas has been eradicated and hostages released. The Israeil PM can be kicked along with settlers from the West Bank

Egypt already has 70,000 Palestinian refugees and their own internal problems. They don't want an increase and if Hamas does start firing rockets from Egyptian territory in Israel it could wreck the peace treaty between the two countries.

Also there is a very real risk they wouldn't be allowed back into Gaza and it would become a permanent situation.

TheABC · 16/05/2024 14:01

However, I'm not sure why Egypt is not letting people in for a short time until Hamas has been eradicated and hostages released. The Israeil PM can be kicked along with settlers from the West Bank

Egypt already has 70,000 Palestinian refugees and their own internal problems. They don't want an increase and if Hamas does start firing rockets from Egyptian territory in Israel it could wreck the peace treaty between the two countries.

DistinguishedSocialCommentator · 16/05/2024 13:06

Just becaue one or two idiots say stuff like that it does not mean it will happen

You get cleons in Russia saying awful stuff, EG "nuke Britain" on an almost regular basis.
Therefore, a non-story IMO.

However, I'm not sure why Egypt is not letting people in for a short time until Hamas has been eradicated and hostages released. The Israeil PM can be kicked along with settlers from the West Bank

FtRttS · 22/11/2023 18:38

100%

FtRttS · 22/11/2023 18:34

Simple solution. Go back to the United Nations mapped area of 64’. Send all the illegal settlers back to wherever they came from or Israel territories absorb them. Palestine once again becomes a recognised state and governs its people. Israel to be held accountable and tried for all the war crimes it has committed against Palestinians since 48’.

FtRttS · 22/11/2023 18:28

Agree 100%

marmaladeandpeanutbutter · 16/11/2023 07:59

Why am I not surprised!