yes, you can delete it if you want. I almost deleted it myself.

The Brits left EVERYWHERE my friend. Israel wasn't a weird anomaly. One by one, they left their old colonies and conquests.

In India this was cheered. In Israel it's...guerrilla?

Let's at least be consistent.

What place isn't a mistake in the pure sense of the term? The USA? Canada? Go down the list. It's all products of a war at some time or other. That's humanity.

What Israel is or isn't, only matters to Israelis and Palestinians. Everyone else can play a meaningless "what if" game. The fact remains Israel exists after legally coming into being via the UN's process. It's done.

But one in particular with 100 times the vigor, effort and time.

Admitting that is all any of us ask at this point. On THIS conflict, you are locked in quite obviously. On the others, hardly at all. If that is a gross mischaracterization of you, mea culpa. But the evidence to the contrary isn't exactly plentiful.

Btw what other country in the world is considered "a huge mistake"?

I guess Victor might say Ukraine. Where else commonly?

Because if the list is Israel and maybe Ukraine (lol), then we have more evidence to the very very obvious.

USA was a hudge mistake lol. dont make **** up about me.

Victor I submit to you that the logic you're using to put the "USA" in the mistake pile, can be used for 90% of the planet. Same exact general circumstances.

How is that remotely productive?

Hamas are bad.

I would expect even the bloods or crips to do better than indiscriminately firing into a crowded apartment complex full of kids because a rival who shot at them was in there.

paid for by jerry seinfeld


whats the deal with zionist mobs!??

anybody else remember how apoplectic the West got about the Taliban blowing up those old Buddha statues?

Yeah it doesn't matter now.

I'm no expert. But I think most/many countries were started like, "hey those people have land and stuff we want, and our weapons are better than theirs. Let's take it!"

The Jews were coming off a few centuries of being tortured and stuff capped off by the Holocaust so I think their land grab was better justified than say, my own country's. Even if it was not fully justified.

The location was really badly chosen and it might have been better if they all just went to the US back then.

But we can't change the past and it's not all that important now. Most people alive today had nothing to do with that so i think it's a bit pointless to argue about it, as it pertains to current policy issues.

Ok so you didn’t know. Now that you have access to this information, you can see unequivocally that I am correct. That means you’re wrong. Now that you see you’re wrong about the origins of Israel, how has your view point changed?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewi...44%20to%201948.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You talk like your side isn't chopping the hands off detainees.

I have no idea what you're talking about. But trying to Israelsplain to me a place I know intimately is weird. There isn't a detail about the place you know that I don't. And not a part of the country I haven't walked in, give or take. Maybe there's a few random Kibbutz I've not set foot in. But from the very south to the very north, I've been everywhere. Even places like the very edges of Ramallah. I've slept in Bedouin tents there. I've talked to people of every religion. Of all the people itt, believe me you aren't going to teach me about it.

So you are admitting and agreeing that the pro israel forces started and won a guerilla war against the British.

That's not how it happened. But I believe that you believe that's how it happened. I have no doubt that you've simplified it down to that.

They didn't just leave many places peacefully. And speaking of India, people flippantly talk about WW3 in regards to Israel, but Pakistan and India have nukes on both sides.

All countries belong in the mistake pile.

What's this thing about being productive? Nothing in this thread will ever be productive.

PW, the British problem in the Mandate was one that lasted YEARS. Well before the 40's.

Let's look at Peel in 1937. We've brought it up here many times, nobody on your side ever seems to care about it

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

The Peel Commission, formally known as the Palestine Royal Commission, was a British Royal Commission of Inquiry, headed by Lord Peel, appointed in 1936 to investigate the causes of conflict in Mandatory Palestine, which was administered by the United Kingdom, following a six-month-long Arab general strike.

On 7 July 1937, the commission published a report that, for the first time, stated that the League of Nations Mandate had become unworkable and recommended partition.[1] The British cabinet endorsed the Partition plan in principle, but requested more information.[2] Following the publication, in 1938 the Woodhead Commission was appointed to examine it in detail and recommend an actual partition plan.

The Arabs opposed the partition plan and condemned it unanimously



So we're talking in the 30's, the Brits were talking a split. In this split, the Jews would get 17% of what you know as Israel today. They instantly accepted. The Arabs refused over 80% of the territory (lol!).

Does ANYONE care about that? Imagine that split today? It shows the Brits had been working on this for a long while. They left when truly there was no mediating it. The rest is history.

What really happened after WW2 is that the Empires realized the New World Order was that British Petroleum, Chevron, and TotalEnergies would occupy the Middle East instead of the UK, USA and France.

ok so help me understand

jews were in judea with palestinians from forever until 0BCE. and then again in 1942 till now

so what happened around 1942 that brought the jews back to judea and how did it happen?

Fact is for the enemies of Zionism, it's a pretty bitter pill to swallow knowing the Arabs turned down an offer for 83% of the country in the 30's. Because you can only draw 2 conclusions from that:

1) That's a people that wanted 0% Jews there (or darn close to it)

2) There were plenty of historical points along the way where choices emerged that would have lead to a better life for Palestinians. And they were turned down because of #1


This is a matter of historical record now

umm your link says the brits and the arabs opposed the partition plan.

You make the rejection sound a lot less reasonable than this does:

Acres of land is just a terrible measure. Most land in the world is unoccupied for a reason.

Arab land in the Peel partition includes the Negev