The Untold Story: Why do they hate us so much?

[Djamila]

I am very well versed in Israeli politics and the political climit of the Middle East. Calling me ignorant simply exaserbates the insult and disappointment. You have always been one of my favorite people here but I simply feel I have nothing else to discuss with you.

Please take the last word here as I bid you nothing but peace and blessings.

Same to you. If you actually know what is being done to the Palestinians, and support it, then I've nothing else to discuss either.

 

[Super Universe]

You really believe if the Palestinian people stopped fighting, there would be peace?

Israel has done nothing but expand since it was established by the European powers after WWII. Israel is still pushing settlements deeper and deeper into the West Bank and until it is stopped, permanantly, it is not safe for the Palestinians to put down their weapons.

As it stands, the Palestinians a people slated for destruction. If they weren't fighting, the Gaza Strip would still be occupied, illegal Israeli settlements would still be growing there - and despite what they've gained there, there's still not much hope they'll ever be allowed to return to their homes and live in peace, as they did prior to the arrival of European, Jewish settlers. So they fight - they're not going to lie down and die like dogs, without a word.

And, I pray, one day they'll be successful. Israel will be stopped, and Arabia will be safe from colonization. We've seen the effects of that in Africa - it's never good, and the colonists never win.

In 772 bc the northern Israelite (Jewish) capital of Samaria was destroyed by the Assyrians. That's 2,778 years ago. Not all of the Jews left the area in the great diaspora.

Jews have been living in the area around Jerusalem since the time of Moses predating Palestinian settlements by more than three thousand years. Jewish people in the area even predate the invention of the word "Palestina" by the Romans but their numbers weren't significant until the late 1800's.

Jews began returning to Israel in great numbers in the late 1800's because many Jewish writers began calling for a return to their ancestral homeland. Then after WW2 and the holocaust many Jews felt they needed to leave the nations that considered them foreigners.

But how did the Jews retake the land around Jerusalem? They bought it. That's right, they paid for it as greedy Palestinians sold their land at inflated prices to the incoming Jewish people.

Israel was not established by the European powers after WW2. In fact, after many Palestinian revolts against the British their government issued the White Paper of 1939 that attempted to stop the inflow of Jews to the area and placed restrictions on Jewish land ownership but the Jews simply made their way around the British rules.

In 1923 the British traded the Golan Heights to the French who owned the area now called Syria. Only 43 years later Syria would lose the Golan Heights to Israeli forces in the Seven Day War. Syria still calls for the return of the Golan Heights, not because it has any historical rights to it but because the Golan's high mountain region is militarily significant.

The British Mandate established a nation called Palestine that divided Jewish areas and the Palestinian area. The Palestinian area was immediately absorbed by it's neighbor Trans-Jordan (today's Jordan) but for some reason the palestinian people didn't resort to fire bombing Trans-Jordanian pre-schools.

This area was eventually to be lost by Jordan to Israel in the Seven Day War.

No European power established Israel, it's people did that on their own when they declared the Nation of Israel in 1947 and were immediately invaded on all sides, not by Palestinians, but by arabs who thought they would have an easy victory. Even today the arabs are using the Palestinians as puppets as they give $25,000 to every Palestinian who explodes themself in an attack against Israel.

Israel is not pushing deeper into the West Bank. It's owned the entire area since the end of the war. It can develop it as it sees fit. In fact, it has a responsibility to grow into and develop it's land.

 

[kiwimac]

The fact of the matter is that if reasons are sought for hatred, they will be found. We need to find reasons for forgiveness.

 

[lilithu]

Cowards. I spit on their dust every time I pass Ground Zero.

Interesting. How do you spit on their dust without spitting on the dust of their victims as well?

 

[!Fluffy!]

Interesting. How do you spit on their dust without spitting on the dust of their victims as well?

Pithily purposeful point-missing.

 

[!Fluffy!]

In 772 bc the northern Israelite (Jewish) capital of Samaria was destroyed by the Assyrians. That's 2,778 years ago. Not all of the Jews left the area in the great diaspora.

Jews have been living in the area around Jerusalem since the time of Moses predating Palestinian settlements by more than three thousand years. Jewish people in the area even predate the invention of the word "Palestina" by the Romans but their numbers weren't significant until the late 1800's.

Jews began returning to Israel in great numbers in the late 1800's because many Jewish writers began calling for a return to their ancestral homeland. Then after WW2 and the holocaust many Jews felt they needed to leave the nations that considered them foreigners.

But how did the Jews retake the land around Jerusalem? They bought it. That's right, they paid for it as greedy Palestinians sold their land at inflated prices to the incoming Jewish people.

Israel was not established by the European powers after WW2. In fact, after many Palestinian revolts against the British their government issued the White Paper of 1939 that attempted to stop the inflow of Jews to the area and placed restrictions on Jewish land ownership but the Jews simply made their way around the British rules.

In 1923 the British traded the Golan Heights to the French who owned the area now called Syria. Only 43 years later Syria would lose the Golan Heights to Israeli forces in the Seven Day War. Syria still calls for the return of the Golan Heights, not because it has any historical rights to it but because the Golan's high mountain region is militarily significant.

The British Mandate established a nation called Palestine that divided Jewish areas and the Palestinian area. The Palestinian area was immediately absorbed by it's neighbor Trans-Jordan (today's Jordan) but for some reason the palestinian people didn't resort to fire bombing Trans-Jordanian pre-schools.

This area was eventually to be lost by Jordan to Israel in the Seven Day War.

No European power established Israel, it's people did that on their own when they declared the Nation of Israel in 1947 and were immediately invaded on all sides, not by Palestinians, but by arabs who thought they would have an easy victory. Even today the arabs are using the Palestinians as puppets as they give $25,000 to every Palestinian who explodes themself in an attack against Israel.

Israel is not pushing deeper into the West Bank. It's owned the entire area since the end of the war. It can develop it as it sees fit. In fact, it has a responsibility to grow into and develop it's land.

Quite possibly the best post on the subject I've ever seen, I'm keeping it on my Favorites list and declaring it POTD (Post Of The Day).

 

[fullyveiled muslimah]

I thought this might be an interesting link on the subject. http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/

The site appears not to have an islamic bias to it, so I thought it apt to place it. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been brewing for many years now. Everyone talks about Israel's right to exist, which I have no problem with, but what about the palestinians right to live where they have been living for some time?

I'll give an example. This American land we're on is originally Native American land. Suppose they all got together and decided that they will forcibly take back land that was forcibly taken from them. To do this they simply went around to each home and settlement and removed all of us whether we liked it or not. In retaliation the government fights back, in an attempt to stop the Natives from such a hostile takeover. The Natives are fighting because they say they have a right to exist autonomously as a nation, and a responsibility to take back a land that was usurped so many years ago by American settlers. Who is right in this imaginary conflict? Do the Natives have a right to take the land back in such a way, even if it meant to death of many innocent people? Even if it means driving people from thier homes? Would you give up your home to them? After all, they'd have a point. The land was taken by force, and they were nearly destroyed as a result of it. Suppose also that the British decided to financially support them as well, so if America fights the Natives they are essentially fighting Britain as well. My point is whether Israel wishes to exist as a nation means nothing to a people who have been occupying the same area for so many generations and feel they have as much rights to the land as the Israelis do.

Suppose the Palestinians did leave peacefully, where would they go? Who would take them in? Should they began to try and forcibly take someone else's land and displace them? We are talking about actual people here not stats and numbers. Actual families, husbands, wives, and children. All these people would just pack up and leave? Is it really that simple, to pack up and leave a country or leave your home and just get lost? What about sharing the land? If the Jew wanna own it fine, but why so the Palestinians have to leave before the Jews own the place? I mean for instance if the building I live in switches owners, why does the new owner have to put me out in order to own the place? Legally he/she right to kick me out so they can do what they want to do with the property, but is that right? Legal and illegal is a far cry from right and wrong. Israel appears to be working on the basis of whats legal and illegal without taking into account whether what was legal was right or not.

 

[gnostic]

Since it has turned into Palestinian-Israeli issue, I would like the say that the two sides here, at RF, that support either Israel or the Palestinians, are both completely wrong.

Both Israelis and Palestinians are bl#@dy wrong. They are both also bl#@dy stupid too. The pointing finger and blaming one side or other, won't work, because they have both committed atrocities on one another - not just Palestinians, and not just the Israelis.

Until both side here agreed that both sides in Israeli-Palestinian governments, military and terrorists have failed their people, then I think you here are deluding yourselves as much the Israelis or Palestinians being morally right.

It is completely stupid to blame the whome mess on all Israelis-Jews. And it is equally stupid to blame all Palestinians-Muslims for the whole crisis.

It is all the civilians, who just want peace...and I mean real peace...between the two people who have paid the heavy prices for this continual cycle of violence and those who want to win by the force of arms, and I don't think either sides in RF is helping at all when you take a high moral ground for the atrocities that have take place.

 

[PureX]

This is why people fight wars. Or decide to make peace.

It's not a question of who's "right". I think that is essentially the problem, here. I think the Israelis need to stop trying to be righteous, and understand that they ARE the invaders. They are in the wrong. They are the bad guys who are taking and holding other people's land by force, and that's that. If the people who's land they are stealing choose to fight them, and many of them will, then they will have to be killed. And that's the ugly truth of it, when you're the invader.

And the Palestinians need to understand this as well. Being "right" don't mean squat. You have been invaded and much of your land has been stolen by force. Now, you can fight the invaders, who will then kill you, because they have superior weapons, and in the process they will also kill many of your wives and children, because that's what happen in wars. Or you can try and make a deal with them, so that you can live in peace on what little land you have left. I realize that you won't like either of these solutions, but they are all that's open to you at the moment.

Unfortunately, the result is that some of the Palestinians want to fight, and some want to make a deal, but the Israelis can't do both. So as long as some are fighting, many will be killed.

I really hate to even say this, but at some point I think the Israelis are going to have to accept that they are the bad guys in this situation, and just do what must be done to put an end to it. And what must be done will mean wiping out the resistance to the point where it can no longer resist.

We in the U.S., on the other hand, should stay the hell OUT OF IT. We have already meddled far to much and too often in the affairs of the middle east, with disastrous results. It's time for us to concentrate on changing our dependance on oil as a fuel source, to hydrogen, as quickly as possible, and to let nature take it's course in the middle east. Whomever comes out on top, we will then have to find a way deal with.

If we keep throwing in with Israel, then WE, TOO, WILL HAVE TO FACE UP TO BEING THE BAD GUYS. We will have to understand and accept that we are helping the invaders wipe out the people who's land they are stealing. Because we can't have it both ways. We don't get to pretend we're the good guys while we're supporting a nation that has invaded and stolen their land from others, by force.

 

[michel]

We don't get to pretend we're the good guys while we're supporting a nation that has invaded and stolen their land from others, by force.

I am not going to bother to argue your position on your belief of the rights and wrongs of the setting up of Israel.

But I would say this to you; if you were walking down a road, and saw a fight between two guys going on, would you just pass them by, and quickly forget having seen the fight ? - or might you try and intervene, to see if you could stop the fight?

I think any decent human's gut reaction is to try and help. Just because both the parties are "unhelpable" is what makes it so frustrating.

 

[gnostic]

If we keep throwing in with Israel, then WE, TOO, WILL HAVE TO FACE UP TO BEING THE BAD GUYS.

I think it is too late for that. The world already think you're (I mean the "Americans") the bad guys.

When Bush came to power, he immediately took side, instead of mediating. He was supposed to let the Israelis and Palestinians to talk it out, to make a deal. Bush just added more fuel to the fire that was almost put out.

He was ready to take on China, if you haven't forgotten. Remember the spy plane incidence, months before this stupid nonsense about axis of evil. By right, China had the right to shoot down spy plane or those in Chinese custody, by right the Chinese could have execute spies. The US would've done so, if the position was reverse. Instead, Bush delievered ultimatum, of going to war. The spy-plane incidence was an omen of what type of president it was going to be. 9-11 gave him perfect excuse to go to war, and it was justified in Afghanistan, but not in Iraq. The idiot was deadset on fighting another war, before the al-Qaeda and the Talibans. How stupid a president can be?

Let's face clear fact. Your president is war-monger. He wanted the war. He truly wanted to be war-hero, like during WW2. He has odd and archaic notion, the cowboy mentality. He talks about peace and democracy, but I seriously doubt that he know what peace means.

It was bad enough to have one cowboy Republican president, but to have 3 Republican presidents, is simply astonishing stupid.

 

[PureX]

I think it is too late for that. The world already think you're (I mean the "Americans") the bad guys.

What you know about us doesn't matter very much. We can easily ignore that (though the time is coming when this will no longer be so easy). It's what we are willing to see in ourselves that matters. That's what I meant. We need to stop insisting in the face of all evidence to the contrary that we are always the "good guys". In the case of the middle east, in particular, we have most definitely NOT been the "good guys". In Iraq specifically, we made all that noise about Saddam having poison weapons, yet not one politician or even news man was courageous enough to stand up and tell the American people that WE GAVE SADDAM THOSE CHEMICAL WEAPONS SO THAT HE COULD USE THEM ON IRAN!!! AND WE EVEN GAVE HIM SATELLITE INTELLIGENCE SO HE COULD USE THEM EFFECTIVELY!!! AND GUESS WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF THIS OPERATION ... IT WAS DONALD RUMSFELD!!! And now we Americans act all outraged because the Iranians don't like us??? What? Are we friggin' idiots??? Of course the Iranians don't like us! Why the hell would they??? We gave their enemy poison gas and helped him use it on their own soldiers. Imagine the irony, from an Iranian's perspective, seeing the Unites States now being humiliated by the very Iraqi bullyboys that we created, trained, and armed with poison weapons against them!!!

Gee! I wonder why the Iranians would be instigating trouble for us in Iraq, now!?!?! *hahaha*

When Bush came to power....

Bush is a national disgrace, there is no doubt about that. And I'm hoping that he has proven to be such a monumental embarrassment to the Unites States that the idiots in this country who elected him, and who elected Bush senior, and who elected Ronald Reagan, will finally begin to see the stupidity of their voting habits, of their political agendas, and will either stop voting or start voting for different people and for different reasons. But I am sad to report to you that this in not likely to happen in a big way. Most of those people are still just as stupid and selfish as they have always been, and will continue to fall for the same line of crap, and vote for the same kinds of candidates, because they refuse to acknowledge that they are not the "good guys" that they imagine themselves to be, and neither are the people they are voting for.

However, I do believe that a few are beginning to see the light, and because the last several elections were so close, a few may be enough. Our problem, now, in the United States, is that the big corporations who are paying for the political campaigns are deciding who the candidates are going to be, and they like things the way they are. So the electorate aren't even going to get any decent candidates from which to choose. And to fix this problem will require significant election reforms that will not happen because the corporations own the politicians who are in power now, and who are the only people who could makes these changes. And none of them want anything to change. They're all getting rich.

It was bad enough to have one cowboy Republican president, but to have 3 Republican presidents, is simply astonishing stupid.

It's easy to be blind to your own stupidity when you're a rich and powerful nation. Look what happened to Michael Jackson.

 

[gnostic]

What you know about us doesn't matter very much. We can easily ignore that (though the time is coming when this will no longer be so easy).

That really depends on if you travel oversea much. Do you do much travels out of the US?

Most Americans who spend time, working overseas, don't like the way Bush is handling the wars and foreign policies, and they are majority who usually vote against Bush, because they know it affects them, even they are not to blame for US foreign policies.

It is only don't leave US soil, who don't travel aboard, who don't realise how unfair many of American foreign policies, both socially, culturally and economically.

We need to stop insisting in the face of all evidence to the contrary that we are always the "good guys". In the case of the middle east, in particular, we have most definitely NOT been the "good guys".

But it's not just in Middle East.

Latin Americans can't stand US officials and companies, because they see no better than the Spanish heritage who pillage Central and South America. The US companies and government have done as much damage to their economies and exploit them in the last century as Spain had previous done in the centuries before that. Even now the taffic have crippling effects on their export to the US, barring these countries from selling their products, while the US demands these poor countries to buy US products.

This has been going on for years before the current Bush, but it has worsened, with him in power. The idea of free trade in the US is not free at all. The US and European countries are taking advantages of this so-called "free trade". Why do you the Latin American countries are willing to deal with China than with the US?

Bill Gate have done far more than Bush in Africa that sometimes you wonder who is running the country.

Why do you think the Latin American populace don't warmly welcome Bush in his current visit? As long as Bush acts the bully in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East with foreign, economic and military policies, these non-US people would continue to see the US as The Bad Guy.

 

[love]

Certain times call for a strong man of convictions.

 

[gnostic]

Certain times call for a strong man of convictions.

You mean "obstinate" man.

Personally, I would rather be a smart man than just a strong man.

A smart man wouldn't have fake intelligence reports (WMDs), in order to start a war. A smart man would not have disband the entire army and police, which have caused months of insecurity. A smart man would have realise that his strategy wouldn't work, and need to change it. A smart man would have also listen to generals and other high ranking officers who have been in Iraq, because they are the ones who really know what's going on, and not just Rumsfeld, CIA and the Pentagon. And a smart man would not continuously make more enemies.

You saw how good the CIA were in reporting WMDs or that Saddam was getting uranium the Niger. You saw how good CIA were in stopping 9/11. They had some information pre-9/11 but refused to share information with home security and the FBI of pending attacks on US soil.

 

[PureX]

That really depends on if you travel oversea much. Do you do much travels out of the US?

Most Americans who spend time, working overseas, don't like the way Bush is handling the wars and foreign policies, and they are majority who usually vote against Bush, because they know it affects them, even they are not to blame for US foreign policies.

It is only don't leave US soil, who don't travel aboard, who don't realise how unfair many of American foreign policies, both socially, culturally and economically.

But it's not just in Middle East.

Latin Americans can't stand US officials and companies, because they see no better than the Spanish heritage who pillage Central and South America. The US companies and government have done as much damage to their economies and exploit them in the last century as Spain had previous done in the centuries before that. Even now the taffic have crippling effects on their export to the US, barring these countries from selling their products, while the US demands these poor countries to buy US products.

This has been going on for years before the current Bush, but it has worsened, with him in power. The idea of free trade in the US is not free at all. The US and European countries are taking advantages of this so-called "free trade". Why do you the Latin American countries are willing to deal with China than with the US?

Bill Gate have done far more than Bush in Africa that sometimes you wonder who is running the country.

Why do you think the Latin American populace don't warmly welcome Bush in his current visit? As long as Bush acts the bully in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East with foreign, economic and military policies, these non-US people would continue to see the US as The Bad Guy.

I agree with every point you made. And sadly, I have no idea what to do about any of it except to make sure that I vote in every election, and try to get others to do the same.

 

[PureX]

Certain times call for a strong man of convictions.

When a stupid man is "strong in his convictions", he becomes a dangerous fool. George Bush is a stupid, ignorant man, who is willfully so, and proud of it. In fact, he's so stupid that he actually thinks that he's smarter than everyone else. You can see this every time he speaks in public, as he keeps expresses absurdly over-simplistic observations as though he were the only man in the room clever enough to recognize how wise they are, when in fact he's the only man in the room stupid enough not to see how absurdly over-simplistic his thinking really is. And then he becomes incredulous and condescending when he sees that no one in the room is wowed by his amazing "insight". And he walks away imagining that the press are all against him, and that this is why they refused to recognize his superior moral position and insight.

He'd be quite a comic figure if he weren't the president of the United States, and have already caused so much pointless death and destruction.

 

[fullyveiled muslimah]

When a stupid man is "strong in his convictions", he becomes a dangerous fool.

Couldn't have said it better myself. It's rare, but this time I agree with bothe you Prex and gnostic.

 

[gnostic]

To Love.

I know Americans value their freedom and democracy, Love, and Bush showed that he value them too. He keep making it his motto in his repeated rhetorics whenever he is making speech about what he was doing in Iraq is the right thing.

Personally, I don't think the US's freedom and democracy was threatened in any way by 9/11. It certainly was threatened by Iraq, which was seriously weakened by the 1st Gulf War and years of long sanction. The war in Iraq, was uncalled for, Love. In Afghanistan I could understand, but not in Iraq.

However, it is clearly that many Americans are become disillusion by his freedom and democracy rhetorics about Iraq. Americans living and working outside of US were the first to realise their "freedom" were threatened, not by the terrorists and certainly not by Iraq, but by the very man you and other fellow-Americans that have elected him.

Look how many times, he and his closest aides, have blundered in domestic security issues that are tied with war in Iraq.

• I have already mentioned CIA. Did the CIA based their intelligence on real findings of WMDs? Or was their intelligence really the compromised and based solely on the agenda of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld? Bush and his cronies have been feeding the American people with false reports.
• The Libby's case. Do you seriously think that Cheney, or even Bush, is not involved with the retaliation on the former ambassador Wilson, by exposing his wife as operative agent in public? Everyone with half-a-brain, know that Libby is Cheney's fall guy and scapegoat for the whole incidence.
• The unauthorized tapping on American citizens. Although, I'm not an American, even I knew that the president can't carry out electronic tapping without the authorization from District Attorney and the court of law. He has clearly not the learned the lesson of Nixon and Watergate scandal.

Your freedom and democracy have been eroded by your president, who uses fear to get want he wanted. He actually made terrorism, particularly the al-Qaeda more popular than 9/11, all because he wanted to invade Iraq, and he did so on the false premise of WMDs. Don't you just find it strange that no WMDs have been found, and he no longer use it in his speeches? Instead he changed to the liberation of Iraqi people from dictator, which wasn't his original motivated him for going into Iraq in the first place.

And worse of all, he let bin Laden off free, by ending the war in Afghanistan prematurely. He should have chased bin Laden and Talibans into Pakistan, not go haring off to Iraq. But no. He was dead set on Iraq, even when there are no links between Saddam and bin Laden. Bush left Iraq in chaos and anarchy that follow the fall of Saddam's regime, allow al-Qaeda filtered in, because of the political vacuum.

 

[Darkness]

I have to stand with the Muslims in this thread. I should say more, but I do not have the time. :sorry1: