Jump to content


We Need Your Help - Become a Site Supporter

For 16 years we've been delivering WWII discussion and research, help support our efforts for the next 16 years. Become a WW2 Forums Patron!


Photo
- - - - -

Israel


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 Ben Dover

Ben Dover

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 506 posts
  • LocationThe London borough of Croydon, GB

Posted 05 April 2016 - 01:30 PM

I was going to call this thread

Churchill turning his back on Palestine.

But then I thought

'It's probably not worth it.'

 

 

 

...

Colonial Britain offered the Jews large territories in Africa but a Zionist movement wanted the Jews in their ancestral homeland.

 

Mostly Arabic; Palestine had a concentrated Jewish population, but because of WWI and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Palestine was under British control.The Balfour Agreement, signed in 1917 by Great Britain was a huge boost for the Zionist cause because it pledged Great Britain would do everything it could to establish a Jewish state in the region. This lead in part to even more migration back to 'The Holy Land' which already had settlements of persecuted Jews from Russia bank rolled by Americans and Europeans.

 

Created out of Palestine in 1948 by the British and recognised by the United States of America as a result of centuries of persecution I should imagine.

The mother of all post war settlements from WWII some could argue.


Edited by Ben Dover, 05 April 2016 - 01:51 PM.

  • YugoslavPartisan likes this

#2 Carronade

Carronade

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 05 April 2016 - 01:48 PM

If a colonial power or powers had moved large numbers of Jews to someplace in Africa or wherever, with the intention of making it a distinctly Jewish homeland, wouldn't that be just as much a source of conflict with the natives thereof as it was in Palestine?

 

The Balfour Declaration also stated that the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine would be without prejudice to existing non-Jewish communities, which was easier to write than to achieve.  Palestine was sometimes referred to as the "twice-promised land".



#3 Ben Dover

Ben Dover

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 506 posts
  • LocationThe London borough of Croydon, GB

Posted 05 April 2016 - 01:53 PM

If a colonial power or powers had moved large numbers of Jews to someplace in Africa or wherever, with the intention of making it a distinctly Jewish homeland, wouldn't that be just as much a source of conflict with the natives thereof as it was in Palestine?

I can easily imagine that, so - 'yeah' - It probably would.
 
Both of my neighbours growing up, not one side of my terraced house but both, were Indians who were British subjects so came here in the 1970s when there were tensions between them and Amin in Uganda. Loads of Indians in Africa from the Haj.

Edited by Ben Dover, 05 April 2016 - 01:56 PM.


#4 Brian Smith

Brian Smith

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • LocationBridlington East Riding Yorkshire England

Posted 05 April 2016 - 02:33 PM

The Balfour Declaration also stated that the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine would be without prejudice to existing non-Jewish communities, which was easier to write than to achieve.  Palestine was sometimes referred to as the "twice-promised land".

The problem is no one has taken this on with any conviction and as a result chaos resulted with most of the West lining up against Palastine. No wonder Israel believes it can do as it wants and get away with it.



#5 LJAd

LJAd

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,995 posts

Posted 05 April 2016 - 08:00 PM

The problem is no one has taken this on with any conviction and as a result chaos resulted with most of the West lining up against Palastine. No wonder Israel believes it can do as it wants and get away with it.

Correction :with most of the West lining up against Israel and kissing the behind of the Muslims .No wonder ISIS believes it can do as it wants and get away with it .



#6 Brian Smith

Brian Smith

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • LocationBridlington East Riding Yorkshire England

Posted 06 April 2016 - 12:33 PM

Correction :with most of the West lining up against Israel and kissing the behind of the Muslims .No wonder ISIS believes it can do as it wants and get away with it .

Not sure how you define the West but your list includes????????, and those who provide arms and support for Palastine????????????



#7 KodiakBeer

KodiakBeer

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,328 posts
  • LocationThe Arid Zone

Posted 06 April 2016 - 03:42 PM

When the Ottoman Empire got divided up, many people got screwed.  Where is Kurdistan, the Yazidi homeland, the Druze homeland, the Coptic and Byzantine Christian homelands?  Jews made up about 10% of the Ottoman population and got about 2% to 3% of the territory.

 

In fact, the "Palestinians" are mostly Arab and got the great majority of the land outside of Turkey itself.  It is the Syrians, Jordanians and Egyptians who have walled them out of their homelands.  They even withdrew the Jordanian and Egyptian citizenship they held prior to the 67/72 wars.  Those who stayed in Israel hold Israeli citizenship.  Those who lived outside Israel became stateless because of their Arab brethren, not the Israelis.

 

Israel is the Jewish homeland. Period.  They share it with those Arabs who chose to stay.  They have no obligation to allow the descendants of those who left for Egypt or Trans-Jordan two or three generations ago to immigrate into Israel today.  There is no "right of return" because few of them ever lived there, beyond a few very aged people who left in 1947. 


A Kodiak Bear Mauling (shameless plug): http://www.amazon.co...tmm_pap_title_0


#8 Takao

Takao

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,996 posts
  • LocationReading, PA

Posted 06 April 2016 - 05:28 PM

When the Ottoman Empire got divided up, many people got screwed.  Where is Kurdistan, the Yazidi homeland, the Druze homeland, the Coptic and Byzantine Christian homelands?  Jews made up about 10% of the Ottoman population and got about 2% to 3% of the territory.

Are you certain?  I think you have confused the fact that Jews made up 10% the population of Ottoman Palestine in 1914,

http://orientxxi.inf...-palestine,0733

with the Ottoman population as a whole - pf which they made up slightly over 1%.

http://psi424.cankay...1914 (1978).pdf

 

So, slightly over 1% of the population getting 2%-3% of the land is a very good deal.



#9 TiredOldSoldier

TiredOldSoldier

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,204 posts

Posted 07 April 2016 - 05:29 AM

And that 2% was not enough for them, so they grabbed more in 1956 and 1967, though the first time they were forced to give it back by international pressure. By which strange reasoning do you call Syria, Jorsan and Egyptt "homeland" of people who have been living in Palestine for generations and where the majority there (and probably still are if you sum the exiles with the residents) ?


Truth is the first victim of conflict

#10 KodiakBeer

KodiakBeer

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,328 posts
  • LocationThe Arid Zone

Posted 08 April 2016 - 01:36 AM

By which strange reasoning do you call Syria, Jorsan and Egyptt "homeland" of people who have been living in Palestine for generations

 

 

By the reasoning that they held Jordanian and Egyptian citizenship until those nations withdrew it. 


A Kodiak Bear Mauling (shameless plug): http://www.amazon.co...tmm_pap_title_0


#11 TiredOldSoldier

TiredOldSoldier

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,204 posts

Posted 09 April 2016 - 09:58 PM

The Palestinians are a distinct population group with significant differences from both the beduins that control Jordan and the Egyptians, as long as they had their own territory those countries had no objection to claiming sovereignty over them,  but once they were forced to abandon it nobody wanted them as the ties to the controlling country were pretty weak.  They were not Jordanian or Egyptian by choice or historical tradition  but because the colonial powers divided the area that way.


Truth is the first victim of conflict

#12 Ben Dover

Ben Dover

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 506 posts
  • LocationThe London borough of Croydon, GB

Posted 17 June 2016 - 11:30 PM

Treasured momento given to me at a BDS/Boycott Israel rally I ran into at Dam Square outside the Royal Palace of Amsterdam in Amsterdam an attractive young lady wearing jeans and a burqa and nice/cute boots when I saw her and the rally and expressed my support. She came up to me, give me this pamphlet;

57648632ccf2d_leafletside1.thumb.jpg.d40Side A

5764863580db9_leafletside2.thumb.jpg.14aSide B

 

She told me all about it but I just remembered thinking she looked hot/beautiful... Anyways, this is what she gave me that day in Amsterdam. :)


Edited by Ben Dover, 17 June 2016 - 11:32 PM.


#13 Poppy

Poppy

    grasshopper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,458 posts
  • LocationShambhala http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv9DwzU3KP0

Posted 18 June 2016 - 01:50 AM

Wish i knew more, speaking as a mid aged dude who doesn't have to deal with religious zealots or their philosophy . yet.

Just going to speculate. ..If a small country is threatened with annihilation from day 1 of their inception, it would make sense for the threatened country to fight for / and maintain a buffer zone...Look - they are building a wall.

If had to make a choice between a country who does dubious things to survive, or countries who want to eliminate a whole people and their religion...well- who would you side with


XX


#14 TIRDAD

TIRDAD

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 297 posts
  • LocationTEHRAN - IRI

Posted 26 June 2016 - 12:34 PM

why IDF does not kill them all ?

 

why are they still alive ?

 

how many more have to be killed (by terrorists, you call them : Arabs) ?

 

if coup 1979 was defeated, now there were no KSA, Iraq, Egypt, Bahrain, Qatar, and...

 

after iran turned to islam, it was getting thiner year by year ...



#15 mac_bolan00

mac_bolan00

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 716 posts

Posted 26 June 2016 - 11:36 PM

classic case of land reform gone wrong.


Ban shredded cheese. Make America grate again!


#16 USS Washington

USS Washington

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 572 posts
  • LocationThe Good old USofA

Posted 28 June 2016 - 11:57 PM

Was it necessary to relocate the Jews in the first place, the Nazis were defeated and the death camps shutdown, could they have just stayed in Europe?


War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertion of better men than himself.-John Stuart Mill


#17 mac_bolan00

mac_bolan00

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 716 posts

Posted 29 June 2016 - 04:35 AM

This brings me to what is, in my mind, a deeper mystery than the fate of The Afghan Girl: what happened to these two (European) Jewish children who lost their parents and were about to be deported from Palestine? This picture has haunted me since childhood.

 

433e33a6455a666ff5bd13be6e467d26.jpg


Ban shredded cheese. Make America grate again!


#18 wm.

wm.

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 638 posts
  • LocationSilesia Inferior

Posted 29 June 2016 - 08:40 AM

Was it necessary to relocate the Jews in the first place, the Nazis were defeated and the death camps shutdown, could they have just stayed in Europe?

The Jewish state; infrastructure, roads, schools - all that was created before the WW2 by five distinct waves of Jewish immigrants starting from 1880. So the people and infrastructure was there, they simply weren't allowed to declare independence earlier.

 

Many Jews, especially religious Jews didn't support Israel or were indifferent. For this, but mostly for economic reasons, most of the European Jews emigrated to the US, Western Europe, and other places, or stayed in their home countries. 

 

So the relocation was not needed in the sense that  only a minority of the European Jews ended up there. 

 

Similarly, wholesale removal of the Arabs living there were discussed and informally planned among Jewish leaders before the war, to make room for more Jewish settlers. 

 

Another interesting fact, without Holocaust Israel would be a radically different country today.

Majority of the European Jews were strongly religious: conservative, orthodox and ultra-orthodox. And they were the main victims of the Holocaust, most of them didn't survive - as they were the most defenseless part of the population, they had the least chance of survival. 

 

This means that a non-Holocaust Israel would be much more like today's Iran than a modern, Western country. 


Edited by wm., 29 June 2016 - 08:46 AM.

  • Poppy likes this

#19 green slime

green slime

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,815 posts

Posted 29 June 2016 - 02:29 PM

 Anyways, this is what she gave me that day in Amsterdam. :)

 

After all that prelude, I was half-expecting a picture of some venereal disease.


  • Otto likes this

#20 USS Washington

USS Washington

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 572 posts
  • LocationThe Good old USofA

Posted 30 June 2016 - 10:39 PM

The Jewish state; infrastructure, roads, schools - all that was created before the WW2 by five distinct waves of Jewish immigrants starting from 1880. So the people and infrastructure was there, they simply weren't allowed to declare independence earlier.

 

Many Jews, especially religious Jews didn't support Israel or were indifferent. For this, but mostly for economic reasons, most of the European Jews emigrated to the US, Western Europe, and other places, or stayed in their home countries. 

 

So the relocation was not needed in the sense that  only a minority of the European Jews ended up there. 

 

Similarly, wholesale removal of the Arabs living there were discussed and informally planned among Jewish leaders before the war, to make room for more Jewish settlers. 

 

Another interesting fact, without Holocaust Israel would be a radically different country today.

Majority of the European Jews were strongly religious: conservative, orthodox and ultra-orthodox. And they were the main victims of the Holocaust, most of them didn't survive - as they were the most defenseless part of the population, they had the least chance of survival. 

 

This means that a non-Holocaust Israel would be much more like today's Iran than a modern, Western country. 

  I can see Jewish leaders having plans/aspirations to wrench Israel from the Arabs, but my question was more about the Allies agreeing to relocate the jews following WW2 as being "necessary."


War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertion of better men than himself.-John Stuart Mill


#21 von Poop

von Poop

    Waspish

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,392 posts
  • LocationPerfidious Albion

User's Awards

2   

Posted 30 June 2016 - 10:55 PM

My Grandad got his MiD while stationed postwar in Palestine running a communications centre.
Him chatting about the period was the first time I ever heard someone say 'shithole'.
You learned some cool things while listening to Grandad.

Base%20service%20list.jpg
(Note the cunning heading up to Shetland as DDay kicked off. The man never failed to impress me.)


It's only the Internet...

 


#22 wm.

wm.

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 638 posts
  • LocationSilesia Inferior

Posted 01 July 2016 - 07:25 AM

  I can see Jewish leaders having plans/aspirations to wrench Israel from the Arabs, but my question was more about the Allies agreeing to relocate the jews following WW2 as being "necessary."

As far as I know, it's not true they agreed. And really the Allies had nothing to do with it.

The British controlled the territory, and they protected the ingenious population by severely limiting Jewish imigration. But many of them arrived there illegally anyway. 

 

Then the Jews forced the British out by a string of terrorist attacks (this is probably  why Palestine was called a shithole by von Poop's grandad, British soldiers and civilians were killed almost everyday there) and the others (mainly the superpowers: the US, the USSR - the rest was irrelevant small stuff  by then) accepted the reality on the ground. And really there was no other choice available. 

 

By that time there were millions of Jews in Palestine, and many more arrived after the British had left. So really it wasn't about a necessity of relocation, it happened anyway.

 

Additionally the superpowers had their own political goals in mind. For example, the USSR supported the creation of a Jewish state because they expected it would become their ally/lapdog, and wanted to weaken the British. They trained Jewish insurgents (mainly in Poland), delivered lots of weapons to them too (from Czechoslovakia).


Edited by wm., 01 July 2016 - 10:18 PM.


#23 Poppy

Poppy

    grasshopper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,458 posts
  • LocationShambhala http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv9DwzU3KP0

Posted 01 July 2016 - 08:33 PM

"This means that a non-Holocaust Israel would be much more like today's Iran than a modern, Western country."

Wow. Felt some rust fall off my brain. Thanks for that.


XX


#24 Skipper

Skipper

    Kommodore

  • ModeratorsOKF Moderator
  • 24,752 posts

Posted 08 July 2016 - 12:59 PM

Was it necessary to relocate the Jews in the first place, the Nazis were defeated and the death camps shutdown, could they have just stayed in Europe?

Some countries, for instance France have welcomed large numbers of Jews both Sepharades and Ashkenaze Jews. (up to the 1960s)  However returning home to some countries was bitter and sometimes impossible. see the kielce pogrom oF 1946 or the 1945 Krakov massacre. It is not often mentioned but Jews were taken from traisn and shot by Polish groups of partisans (especially in the Lodz area) . 

Also the Jews did not want to be "relocated". They were free men and meant to settle were they wanted, if possible in Europe, if not in the USA , Palestine or elsewwhere. 

 

http://www.unlivredu...fr/pogroms.html

 

https://en.wikipedia...anty_plaque.jpg

 

 

https://www.ushmm.or...duleId=10007941

 

800px-Kielce_planty_plaque.jpg


  • USS Washington likes this

Vorsicht+Feind.JPG


#25 wm.

wm.

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 638 posts
  • LocationSilesia Inferior

Posted 08 July 2016 - 07:34 PM

However returning home to some countries was bitter and sometimes impossible. see the kielce pogrom oF 1946 or the 1945 Krakov massacre. It is not often mentioned but Jews were taken from traisn and shot by Polish groups of partisans (especially in the Lodz area) . 

 

Returning to Poland was always possible, the Government allocated a few best parts of the former German territories to the Jews who lost everything during the war, and actually to all Jews - but especially those from the annexed by the Soviets Polish territories. 

And the "best parts" is no exaggeration whatsoever. 

 

It is true some parts of the country wasn't safe (for anybody) and people were killed frequently in terrorist attacks, but still it was only some parts. 

 

It's nice that the Jews could emigrate to the US, France, Canada. 

But actually the natives, the Poles had to "enjoy" the civil war, the poverty, post-war banditry, Soviet mass deportations, communist persecutions  to the fullest - they had nowhere to go. 

 

And I really wonder, how on Earth some dust-up with a single victim in Kraków, between some Jews and local lumpenproletariat (known in the US as white trash I believe) in a well known pre-war shithole became a "massacre".


  • USS Washington likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users