Buchanan: Israel’s staging a “blitzkrieg” on its Gaza “concentration camp”
posted at 9:55 pm on January 8, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Not the first time a Nazi analogy has tripped lightly from his lips in this area, although like Cardinal Martino, he doesn’t quite have the stones to own up to what he means. He’s not comparing Gaza to a German death camp, you see, just to your average, run-of-the-mill concentration camp. The fact that he coughed up the word “blitzkrieg” literally in the same breath is but an unhappy coincidence.
A passage from Hitchens’s review of Buchanan’s World War II revisionism is worth quoting:
As the book develops, Buchanan begins to unmask his true colors more and more. It is one thing to make the case that Germany was ill-used, and German minorities harshly maltreated, as a consequence of the 1914 war of which Germany’s grim emperor was one of the prime instigators. It’s quite another thing to say that the Nazi decision to embark on a Holocaust of European Jewry was “not a cause of the war but an awful consequence of the war.” Not only is Buchanan claiming that Hitler’s fanatical racism did not hugely increase the likelihood of war, but he is also making the insinuation that those who wanted to resist him are the ones who are equally if not indeed mainly responsible for the murder of the Jews! This absolutely will not do. He adduces several quotations from Hitler and Goebbels, starting only in 1939 and ending in 1942, screaming that any outbreak of war to counter Nazi ambitions would lead to a terrible vengeance on the Jews. He forgets—at least I hope it’s only forgetfulness—that such murderous incitement began long, long before Hitler had even been a lunatic-fringe candidate in the 1920s.
Exit question: Wasn’t Russia’s assault on Georgia this summer a “blitzkrieg” too? No, wait, I forgot — that was our fault. Click the image to watch.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
the true church is not an organization, it is those that are His…
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 12:30 PM
So try to find any group that doesn’t have a “long history of anti-semitism”…Egyptians? Roman’s? Methodists? Atheists? Most any Government? University students?
right2bright on January 9, 2009 at 12:31 PM
Wait a minute, you mean stolaf is really a human being?
right2bright on January 9, 2009 at 12:33 PM
I like it. Well put.
Badger40 on January 9, 2009 at 12:33 PM
Ed and I huddled this morning about SaintOlaf and agreed it’s time his stay at Hot Air came to an end. This cinches it. Au revoir.
Allahpundit on January 9, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Thank you, AP and Ed.
kingsjester on January 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM
Allah, why is it you post the greatest threads so late? Please post earlier so I can get into the action! I miss the best stuff because I have to get up so early in the morning ):
beththebaker on January 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM
+100
beththebaker on January 9, 2009 at 12:37 PM
We have winner!
thomasaur on January 9, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Thanks, AP and Ed.
For SaintOalf, there’s always Stormfront. But wait, they aren’t ‘real’ Christians either, they’re mostly Southern Baptists. Whats this anti-Semite going to do now?
Lance Murdock on January 9, 2009 at 12:38 PM
Thanks AP. His crazy-evil/entertaining ratio went south weeks ago.
TheUnrepentantGeek on January 9, 2009 at 12:41 PM
beththebaker on January 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM
We had your back, kiddo. But we did miss your input.
kingsjester on January 9, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Co-winner! sorry r4l : (
thomasaur on January 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM
But the phrase “has a history of” actually means that the behavior in question is long-standing and repeated. Duh!
ProfessorMiao on January 9, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Whoah. What are we gonna do for fun now?
Ahh… There’s always DaveR!
Badger40 on January 9, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Thanks to AP and Ed, and good riddance to the self-proclaimed saint.
ProfessorMiao on January 9, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Badger40 on January 9, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Yep..Drywall, Benny, noneya, Poptech, etc.
Never a dull moment around here.
kingsjester on January 9, 2009 at 12:48 PM
its very difficult…there is a reason…they’ve earned the enmity of a very powerful individual…whose been around a long long time….
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Ok, doing that, but everything I’m finding is either citing the pope, or the only things they mention are about how we don’t like their beliefs, which I am in line with. I don’t hate the people, but I do want to show them that Jesus was in fact more than simply a prophet. What is anti-semite about that? Remember, my question was about Protestants in particular.
Kelligan on January 9, 2009 at 12:49 PM
His name is Buchanan, for God’s sake! He is a Nazi! He is just too obvious, with his name, his revisionist view of WW2 and his anti-semitism. He is an enabler and appeaser. I mean, of course, the German’s weren’t that bad back in the day, just misunderstood… No one really knew what was going on!
Seriously, Hitchens has this guy sorted out correctly. My mother lived through the blitz and my father killed stupid nazis like Buchanan. I would have a hard time not smacking him if I saw him. He disgraces good German-American people who made great sacrifices for this country against a true evil.
Oh, and BTW, good bye to “the Saint”.
yubley on January 9, 2009 at 12:50 PM
+1 ;-)
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Well, dammit, Allah! You just cut out 50% of the entertainment value guaranteed by an atheist post!
MadisonConservative on January 9, 2009 at 12:51 PM
You always do my dear, but I enjoy a good fight!
beththebaker on January 9, 2009 at 12:52 PM
Luther was a vicious anti-semite unfortunately…
link
and ‘he who shall not be named’ now that he is banned is right about the various christian groups condemning israel…its been a common practice among them…
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 12:53 PM
What Buchanan lacks in historical knowledge, he compensates for with his lack of military knowledge.
The current Gaza offensive is nothing like a blitzkrieg, as noted in this Wall Street Journal editorial:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123146309313766581.html?mod=rss_opinion_main
Alalazoo on January 9, 2009 at 12:54 PM
if you get a chance, read hal lindsey’s book ‘road to holocaust’ its pretty good.
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 12:55 PM
As for the topic…. why does Hannity and Laura Ingraham still let this bozo on their shows? Every time I hear him coming on, I e-mail the conservatives and ask not to let him be our voice..it’s bad enough that he is the only voice at MS NBC. It makes us all look bad.
Would they put David Duke on? It’s the same damnned thing!
beththebaker on January 9, 2009 at 12:56 PM
Pat Buchanan is an isolationist, his perspective starts from that position. If a person doesn’t believe in supporting Israel-democracy in the middle east. Well they might take the same tack Buchanan does. Freedom isn’t Free -trite? maybe but it is still true, it requires effort from us, and not an isolationist stance. That is the first thing I think “isolationist” when I listen to Pat Buchanan.
Dr Evil on January 9, 2009 at 12:59 PM
I meant the same tact.
Dr Evil on January 9, 2009 at 1:00 PM
its ok I’ll live with the disapointment…I think… ;-)
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 1:01 PM
Correct about Luther (we better be on our best behaviour seeing as they are “meeting” about us).
I am a Lutheran, and Luther was way off base on this, he was quite frankly fanatical, as was most of the Catholics, about the Jews.
But that is not uncommon for a man of faith to be sinful…
The thing is, Buchanan is fanatical now, with all the history and education to draw from…he still is an anti-semite.
At least Luther was so productive in other areas of his life, and Buchanan has added nothing…
right2bright on January 9, 2009 at 1:03 PM
I guess since the Evangelicals (in particular since I follow beliefs from both the Holiness and Fundamentalist movements) we’ve come a far place from where Martin Luther began. Those are both fairly recent, and there are quite a few other views that different demoninations and movements within the Protestant movement I can definitely say I heavily disagree with.
I was keeping my thinking more narrowly defined than the entire Protestant line, which was my mistake. Should have been more specific.
I’ll check out that book if I get a chance, but I currently have about 5 on the shelf I’m working on getting through and another 3 in the queue I have to buy =)
Kelligan on January 9, 2009 at 1:05 PM
No matter how you clean the kitchen, there are always a few cock-a-roaches crawling around…
right2bright on January 9, 2009 at 1:06 PM
BTW, I am a little ticked off your name…the other day one of our “lady” posters blasted me for something you posted (since many mistake our names), she attributed it to me (it was a petty comment, not one of your best)…that is about the third or fourth time that has happened.
Everyone, we are different people…very different, I am much better looking.
right2bright on January 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM
An isolationist would not label either side.. Pat always has a not so hidden motive behind his comments..listen carefully. This is old hat for Pat.. always takes sides against Israel- ALWAYS.
By simply using the words “concentration camp” it is a slam on Jews in general and diminishes the real concentration camp experience…it’s like using the word “rape” out of context..it diminishes the severity of the action. He’s a Jew hater, but he is not stupid.
beththebaker on January 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM
These guys keep getting it wrong. It’s not a concentration camp — it’s a ghetto. The analogy is not symmetric — the partisans didn’t target German civilians — but the concentration of despised people into a very small area and then the attacks upon them when they arm and resist is certainly so. The equivalence of Stukas to F-15s is astounding to me — history is indeed repeating itself to the extent that it can (Stuka dive-bombs didn’t have the precision targeting ability of a Hellfire).
I strongly disagree with Hamas’ tactic of targeting civilians with missiles and bombs (as well as their strident anti-Jewish rhetoric), but I can certainly understand their attempts to engage the IDF.
We went through the same situation here in the US with the Indians, and the Indians unified opinion against themselves by attacking civilians.
As the Jews were once the Roman Indians, the Palestinians are now the Israeli Indians, and the war is still going on. If history does unfortunately repeat itself, the Palestinians will be forced into diaspora, and then, two millenia or so later….
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 1:13 PM
Isn’t the point that the only stable, relatively open society (especially by middle-east standards) was first attacked by an Iranian-backed terrorist organization whose raison d’etre is to wipe the Israeli state off the map and kill as many Jews as possible? Surely they have a right to self defense regardless of who they’re descended from or what religion they practice?
Differences over religious doctrine really don’t change that fact.
patriette on January 9, 2009 at 1:14 PM
Not a fan of Pat Buchanan
Bob's Kid on January 9, 2009 at 1:16 PM
Wrong. Check the history of the region. Comparing the “Palestinians” to American Indians is apples and oranges. It is much more accurate to describe these people as Arab PAWNS. the vast majority of so called “palestinians” are not from what is known as modern day Israel. Most immigrated there from Assyria during the Jewish boom to find work on the Kibbutz because they had more freedom and better pay. When Israel became a state in 1948, Israel DID NOT force anyone out, rather, the surrounding Arab nations coaxed them out by promising to destroy Israel and giving them the spoils. When the first war turned out badly, the Arabs got the leverage they needed…why not assimilate these people into surrounding Arab countries? Because they did not and do not WANT them! That is the birth of this mess in a very brief nutshell.
beththebaker on January 9, 2009 at 1:25 PM
Interestingly, that’s the crux of the whole Palestine/Isreal conflict. Of course, each side views the other as the originator of that conflict, and will excuse attacks upon the other side’s civilians as “not a war crime”.
I think that Israel did the Palestinians dirty. I also think that Israel has the right and obligation to defend its citizens against attacks by terrorists. But, in my mind, the root of this whole conflict revolves around how Israel treated its opponent’s noncombatants during the War of Independence and subsequent conflicts — they were herded off their land into refugee camps, and the land quickly redistributed to incoming Jewish immigrants.
We see the echo of this type of behavior in the Settler movement in Israel today.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 1:42 PM
Thank you! Thank you!! Thank you!!!
Hilts on January 9, 2009 at 1:43 PM
That is such a crock of shite from the Chomsky/Zinn School of pseudo history.
Hilts on January 9, 2009 at 1:44 PM
Canada Park.
Moshe Dayan:
There is no land on the face of this planet which is not claimed by someone. You may claim that the Palestinians are all rejects from areas other than Israel, and that the land of Israel was unoccupied before the arrival of the Jews, but Moshe Dayan, one of the architects and staunchest defenders of Israel, understands whose land this was, and hence the root of the conflict.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 1:53 PM
Prove it. Give me some “real” history.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 1:54 PM
I, personally, do not consider attempts to convert me to be antisemitic. I do get bristly at being told I’m destined for eternity to fry in hell, though.
If Judaism were a proselytizing religion, Jews would all be trying to convince Christians that they are worshipping a false prophet. Many Christians would be highly offended by that. That’s the way I feel about attempts to convert me to Christianity.
ProfessorMiao on January 9, 2009 at 2:09 PM
When the Arab world refused to accept partition and attacked – with the support of many of the local Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians – the entire equation changed. The possibility for peaceful coexistence got thrown out the window, and blaming it all on Israel may be popular but it does a real injustice to what the facts on the ground were in 1948.
ProfessorMiao on January 9, 2009 at 2:15 PM
The A-rabs (Nazi sympathizers in World War II) launched a war of aggression against the Jewish people of Israel, lost and fled. While the whole world watched, they lost to the team at the bottom of the league!!They must accept the consequences. By the way what about the almost 1,000, 000 Jews who fled from Arab lands?
Hilts on January 9, 2009 at 2:21 PM
just because we’re not paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get us!!
very true! he had a lot of guts to stand up to the catholic church…I think his anti-semitism was rooted in his view of prophecy…that the jews were ‘rejected’..
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 2:26 PM
Hal’s a good guy…he’s on the trinity networks on friday at 7:30 central…
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 2:27 PM
I have tried for years to warn people about Buchanan and his rants against Israel.He like Ron Paul give consev. a bad name.Rush washed his hands of this man years ago.It,s ashame Hannity can,t do the same.
thmcbb on January 9, 2009 at 2:29 PM
HA!!! good, good!! I’ve thought about changing my monikor to HASSAN BEN SOBER (from a stooges show…vernon dent played an arab) but I can’t change my monikor!
where are those emoticons with the tongue sticking out when ou need them… ;-)
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 2:29 PM
After Olaf got the hook, I’d be careful what I write.
Sultry Beauty on January 9, 2009 at 2:29 PM
if that is ‘esthier’ I could say the sky is blue, and she’d be upset.
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 2:31 PM
first there weren’t any arabs there, except for wandering bedoins, when the jews started settling there in the 1800s…mark twain remarked what a barren waste the land was…
when Jordan controlled the west bank, they could have given the ‘palestinians’ a state…why didn’t they?
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 2:35 PM
The facts on the ground were that Zionists (I use this term in the way Theodor Herzl would use it) owned about 6% of the land at the founding of what is now the State of Israel. The most conservative distribution was that of the 1936 Peel Commission, which would have given 15% of the land to a new Jewish state; the later UN partition plan would give 50% of the land to the new Jewish state. The difference was the Holocaust and about 10 years; the horror of the Holocaust was still very strong, and motivated the world community to establish a strong Jewish state with plenty of land to allow resettlement of Jewish refugees.
I agree that the Arab leaders were stupid in starting a war (and they started it within hours of the Isreali declaration of independence), but their war was motivated by one indisputable fact — the world, led by Europe, was about to take 44% of the land away from their citizens and redistribute that land to people from Europe.
They lost that war and nearly all their land, just as the Indians lost theirs — to a technologically more advanced adversary.
The entire issue in Gaza and Isreal revolves around land. “Next Year in Jerusalem!” now has meaning to more than one people.
Finally, there were many Palestinians who remained peaceful. Again, I offer as an example what is now known as Canada Park, whose creation after the 1967 war required the destruction of both a mosque and a Catholic Church [as well as the rest of the village of ‘Imwas — a contemporary picture by a sympathetic Isreali soldier shows an animated Catholic priest begging the soldier’s superiors not to raze the village. This happened in spite of the fact that its citizens had maintained cordial relations with the nearby kibbutz from which the Isreali soldier originated. The citizens of ‘Imwas took the fight to regain their land all the way to the Israeli Supreme Court and lost. Such actions do not indicate hostile intent — to use the legal system of your putative adversary shows a sign of respect which was not accorded to the people of Imwas themselves. Their victory in this whole matter consisted of a second court fight (which they won) to require the placement of signs in the park indicating where the village’s buildings had stood — previous signs had detailed antiquities but left the appearance that the land had been unoccupied for millenia. A shallow victory, but a victory nonetheless.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 3:10 PM
It was her, I forget who takes potshots, because in reality, we are just posters…most with alter egos. We would probably never recognize each other in public.
But that was definitely her…hey estheir, it was him and not me…
right2bright on January 9, 2009 at 3:14 PM
Yes. and I might add… several arab countries were ‘created’ by the league of nations at the same time Israel was. The original borders of Israel would have made it a much larger country, but Arabs complained and , like today with the UN, they caved, re-drew borders in favor of the Arabs. Look at a map…a tiny sliver among a huge area. Jews were happy to have it.
All of the Arab countries promptly EXPELLED it’s rather sizeable Jewish populations and took all their property. Those “refugees” went to Israel and were absorbed. The Arabs refused to absorb their fellow Arabs…. and do not talk to me about different ’sects” of Arabs..ther are different “sects’ of Jews..but they were ALL taken in.
Why do people like Unclesmrgol love to talk about the palestinian refugees, but refuse to acknowledge the Jewish refugees. Why quote the compassion of Moshe Dyan, but not quote an equally compassionate Arab leader?
Answer: Hypocrisy
beththebaker on January 9, 2009 at 3:15 PM
The only churches that did not persecute Jews during the middle ages were the ones that hadn’t been formed yet.
A very sad period in our history, one that unfortunately we may never live down.
The best we can do is live our lives in way that shows that we are no longer like that and hope that someday all Jews come to believe it.
Unfortunately morons like Olaf make that objective so much harder to reach.
(It helps that he frequently declares that the rest of us aren’t real Christians.)
MarkTheGreat on January 9, 2009 at 3:15 PM
that won’t be enough, I’m afriad…you’d have to repent in sackcloth and ashes….
she’s a real ‘doozy’ sheesh….
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 3:25 PM
Translation: Jews don’t count as refugees or as actual people.
Man, I hope you’ll be as much fun as SaintO, but we’ll see…
mjk on January 9, 2009 at 3:26 PM
very true…the hatred for the jews is wide and deep…few escape it…but like I said they have a very powerful enemy who has been around a long, long time…
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 3:27 PM
The MSM loves to put Buchanan the boogeyman on a pedestal.
MajorKong on January 9, 2009 at 3:28 PM
A few statements I object to.
First of all, claiming that the Jews were from Europe seems a rather high gloss doesn’t it? After all … there’s a rather large and well circulated book that seems to mention where those folks just might have been originated.
Secondly, the idea that the issue in Israel revolves around land is yet another gloss. It seems to the casual observer that it revolves around a general Arab preference for dead Jews. And has for quite some time. Like before the modern state of Israel. Tis’ called a convenient pretext.
And as for the Arab refugees known as the “Palestinian people”. Well. Claiming that “many were peaceful” is sort of like saying that many Nazis had qualms about killing Jews. I’m sure it could be true, but the movement persists – and both Palestinian governments have terrorism at their core. Those people could have had land and peace. But that’s not what they want.
They want dead Jews sir, and no number of high gloss evasions and moral equivalence will change that. You can’t make peace with an enemy determined to kill you. Or I suppose you can … death is peaceful, after all.
TheUnrepentantGeek on January 9, 2009 at 3:35 PM
I don’t remember this “person” posting anything before today. He might be Saint Olaf’s sock puppet.
Lance Murdock on January 9, 2009 at 3:44 PM
I believe you are getting context from the book The Case for Israel by Alan Dershowitz — and those statistics are shown to be wrong by the British (mandate) census conducted in Palestine in 1931 — the last good census before WWII stopped such “frippery”. In the 1931 census (which occurs just at the start of the main period of Jewish immigration), about 1 million people were living in the area now covered by Israel, of which about 17% were Jewish. This is an interesting source for statistics based on the various census’ and estimates by the British during the period prior to the War of Independence.
And Mark Twain, in “The Innocents Abroad”, had a habit of calling places he visited deserts. He called Greece a desert too in that same memoir:
From the above, one would want to rush over to Greece to claim all that untenanted land, right?
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 4:15 PM
I think my bona fides are better than yours. You ought to go over to the Captain’s Quarters archives and check out Captain Ed’s old homestead. Or how about I save you a bit of searching for my old comments over there?
As you can see, this identical argument occurred about 10 months ago between Naftali and myself, but without the pointed personal rancor which seems to pervade conversations here on Hot Air.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 4:23 PM
nope…
link
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 4:26 PM
link
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 4:33 PM
The Jews have gone crazy
Opps, some one miscalculated on this one! And guess what, Fatah is not coming to rescue Hamas.
And Pat Buchanan, how did a tough Irish kid like you ever get such a chip on your shoulder about the Jews? Did some Jewish kid steal your lunch money while you were school?
Mr. Joe on January 9, 2009 at 4:36 PM
+1
FloatingRock on January 9, 2009 at 4:40 PM
I would expect that. Relatively few Zionists, upon their arrival in Palestine, went into agriculture. Most settled in the major cities, of which Jerusalem is one.
Given their occupations prior to arrival, that would be expected. I certainly know that I, a city dweller, would try to settle in a city if I emigrated elsewhere.
The 1939 census of Jerusalem by the British (done for military draft purposes) shows statistics similar to the ones you cite.
But, again, citing statistics for cities does not make them appropriate for rural areas. If that were the case, we could take the stats for San Francisco and conclude that the Republicans stole the election, because Obama didn’t get 100% of the electoral votes.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 4:49 PM
right4life,
I count jewishvirtuallibrary.com as being even more of a cherry-picker for stats than palestineremembered.org.
Note that the Mark Twain quote is here too. If the place is so desolate, then why were over 225 Palestinian olive trees cut down by Settlers, as I linked above. If the place were truly as desolate as stated, then those olive trees (which take over a century to grow to the size depicted in the pictures in the link) would not have existed.
Here is another link concerning olive trees in Israel.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 5:03 PM
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 1:53 PM
Can you cite your source for that quote – as it is uncited and incomplete, making it is easy to interpret it in what ever manner suits the reader.
Actually, there were non-Bedouin Arabs living in that area. But among the scant inhabitants there also Christians and Jews. The Ottoman Empire collected taxes on their citizenry. And in the collecting you need some sort of census. Various interpretations of their census data for the part of the 1800’s when Jewish Emigration began again puts the entire population of the area at about a half a million. Jews and Christians (Christian-Arabs too) were required to pay an extra tax. There are books and books discussing the data – Here is a link that offers much of the data, and some interpretations.
Palestinians=American Indians – is an analogy that exemplifies a lack of understanding of the history of the area. If left to stand a casual read to this site might think it truth, but it is not.
Under the Ottoman Empire the area was known as Damascus, not Palestina as the Emperor Hadrian named it. Here is good Map that allows the viewer to see the boarders of the Empire at different times in history.
The Ottoman Empire was a Fief system. If you are unfamiliar with the history of exactly who owned that land, and how it was managed prior to the end of WWI here is a Brief paper that reads easily. By the latter parts of the 1800’s, the Ottoman Empire was in full decline. Areas in southern Damascus were mostly owned by absentee landlords of Arab Nobility. The heavy taxation was making it undesirable to be a tenant farmer & vast areas were abandoned. At this same time, some wealthy European Jews bought or funded purchases of this land. And the first many large waves of Jewish emigration began.
So who owned the land at that point? The Empire? The Arab Nobles? The Jews? Or the Tenant Farmers? Only the first three parties. Tenants do not own the land they live/work on.
After WWI, the area came under the control of the British. In 1923, the area under the British mandate is divided into 2 areas “Palestine” and “Trans-Jordan”. In simple terms – one area is Jewish and the other is Arab. So in the area now (and for the first time in history) know as Palestine Who owns the land? The British? The Arab Nobles (to some extent)? The Jews? Or the tenants? Again it’s the first 3. Not the tenants.
Under the British, there was Emigration by more Jews and Immigration (legal and illegal) by Arabs. Under the British rule, the standard of living was vastly better than under the Turks and better than other areas that used to be a part of the Ottoman Empire. If you look at that first link to census data, you can see that the Arab population triples under the British. And the conflicts are exponential.
By 1947 the British are sick of it & throw their hands up giving the issue to the UN – the area is again divided up again with more land going to Arabs (the West Bank and Gaza) and the UN declares that if you have lived in the British area of Palestine for at least 2 years you are now known as a Palestinian and can be classified as a refugee. A war ensues & we all know how that turned out.
So now, whose land is it? Well apparently Israel belongs to Israelis (Arab, Christian and Jewish), Gaza & the West bank to Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians, and Trans-Jordan is now called Jordan to Arabs who call themselves Jordanians.
In latter wars, started by neighboring Arab Nations, Israel wins back the area the UN took and the Sinai Desert. Moshe Dayan does not eject the Arabs in the land that was won – he hopes to live in peace with them and educate them… and we all know how that turned out.
But Who owns the land after the 1967 war? Israel. That’s it. In 1982 Israel give the Sinai back to Egypt- land for peace, or something.
So how exactly are the descendants of tenant farmers and immigrants the rightful owners of this land? Gaza is a ghetto because it serves a purpose to the Arab overlords, not because of Israel.
batterup on January 9, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Unc, you’re great at trotting out numbers and anecdotes without any references. I don’t recall what the Jewish population of the British mandate was in 1948, but I do know that the Balfour declaration promised ALL of the British Palestinian mandate to the Jews, and at the time of that promise that included the country that is now Jordan.
I also know that the UN partition plan gave Israel 3 disconnected pieces, most of which was the Negev desert. Ben Gurion pleaded with the Arabs who lived within the boundaries of what, by the partition plan, was to become Israel, to remain. There was no intention to throw them out. Large numbers did not; many did and are Israeli citizens. And yes, after the Arabs attacked, many were driven out for a variety of reasons, including the fact that their villages were being used as bases from which to launch attacks on convoys trying to supply the Israel’s half of Jerusalem. The exigencies of the war itself – started by the Arabs – and the need for contiguous and secure territory in light of the security situation led to the expulsions that did occur.
As for the “technological superiority” of nascent IDF, what are you talking about? The Israelis were no better, and probably less well equipped, than were the fancy Jordanian battalions who were led by members of the British military.
ProfessorMiao on January 9, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Never heard of kibbutzim????? They were the basis of the Zionist movement! Zionist settlers drained swamps to create farmland, planted trees and tons of sabra to mitigate desert-like conditions. They built large, cooperative mixed farms with herd and orchards on lands that largely had not been previously farmed, at least in recent history. And they did it on land they bought legally from Arab landowners.
ProfessorMiao on January 9, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Buchanan said Israel has been fired upon for “six months with these little rockets that didn’t kill anybody.” Wha?
In case no one mentioned it, it’s well documented that dozens of Israelis have been killed and the rockets have been raining for at least six or seven years. Not even to mentioned the hundrends, including children, who’ve been suicide bombed in the past several years by Hamas, Fatah, at all the other screwy death cultists called Muslims. Buchanan is cracked in the head. It’s amazing how someone so lucid on republicanism and conservatism could be so morally equivalent when it comes to terrorists vs. Jews. Between this and some of his writings, a rational person would not be far off base to conclude that he has a big chip on his shoulder for Israel. Whether he has or what level is his animus towards Jews, who really knows?
Western_Civ on January 9, 2009 at 5:31 PM
I think he has been posting longer then you…
right2bright on January 9, 2009 at 6:08 PM
unclesmrgol,
You are confused. Please allow me to help you out. Here we go:
Arabs are occupying Jewish lands, have been for the last few hundred years. The land of Israel belongs to the Jews. This land has been given to them by the Almighty God, for all eternity.
No matter which inconsequential tribe (like this current one from Arabia) traverses it, and occupies it at any point in history , it will be gone in due time, with its tail tucked neatly between its legs, just like the Canaanites, Philistines and a bunch of others who are dead and gone, and the ancient Greeks and Macedonians, Romans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Ottomans and those spunky British. Got that ?
runner on January 9, 2009 at 6:10 PM
Oh, and awesome news about Olaf – he is nuts, of course.
runner on January 9, 2009 at 6:12 PM
Nice.
TheUnrepentantGeek on January 9, 2009 at 6:34 PM
The Moshe Dayan one? It happened at a memorial service at Kibbutz Nahal Oz for kibbutznik Ro’i Rutenburg, who was killed by an Egyptian military sniper. The full quote is in the wikipedia article, but I repeat it here:
There’s enough truth in this to satisfy every side. I’ve just been repeating in my comments the feelings Dayan had, because I agree with them — they are my feelings too.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 6:35 PM
An accurate description of the many parts of Greece that I have seen. The same can be said for many parts of Spain.
Johan Klaus on January 9, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Who am I to argue with that kind of blazing logic? But I’m feeling particularly feisty this fine Friday eve, so I will.
It wasn’t God who made Canada Park. It wasn’t God who had the Romans kick those pesky Jewish militants out of Palestine, and it certainly wasn’t God who helped them return, any more than it was God who helped the Germans in the Holocaust.
We currently live in a world whose evil and good are the product of those whom God created. God has given us a roadmap to guide us through a life filled with high mountains and low valleys, and I can certainly see when someone or other has screwed it up and gone “off trail” so to speak.
I think the Israelis and the Palistinians did screw up, early on, and their children are paying the awful price.
That said, what would Jesus do to the people of Gaza?
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 6:43 PM
Well, the Greeks did torch a fair amount of their property a while back — you sure have to love the smackdown of ill-thought environmental protection laws by a few enterprising capitalists…
And as for Spain, the rain does fall mainly on the plain…
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 6:46 PM
I recently went to a high school reunion. I graduated in the fifties and there was a guy that I had not seen in fifty two years. This guy wanted to fight me over some supposed slight that happened in school. I think that the same thinking may be clouding the minds of many Palestinians.
Johan Klaus on January 9, 2009 at 6:52 PM
Absolutely correct. Britain, promising land it didn’t own, to other people who didn’t own it either, and without paying any heed to those (at least 1.3 million in both Israel and the Transjordan as of the 1931 census) who were actually on the land.
Balfour was quite good at giving away land — examine his role in the Irish Problem to understand this.
Remember, we are also talking about Britain, king of the partition. Every partition the Brits did didn’t work out well for those partitioned, because they always involved sweeping people off of their ancestral lands and sending them elsewhere. Want to know the base reason behind the Pakistani/Indian dispute? Look back to Partition.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 6:57 PM
Absolutely — except taking someone land (and killing those who opposed) is a bit more than a slight. This is sort of like saying that it was only a “slight” when the Romans kicked the militant Jews out of Palestine two millenia ago. Those in the Diaspora certainly thought it more than a slight, and their descendents, remaining true to their beliefs, have built a modern Israel.
Take the next step and view diaspora (small d) from the Palestinian standpoint, and you start to get the idea of where I’m going.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 7:02 PM
To be fair, it is very hard to find an example of an “equally compassionate Arab leader” …
tom on January 9, 2009 at 7:04 PM
Given that crucifixion is legal again, I think it’s pretty safe to say what the Palestinians would do to Jesus.
TheUnrepentantGeek on January 9, 2009 at 8:04 PM
Hmm, looks like I missed a good one.
Thank you AP and Ed and sweet little baby Jesus.
It’s about time. Although, I agree with most, he was kinda entertaining. About as entertaining a paper cut on an eyeball.
Geronimo on January 9, 2009 at 9:57 PM
I’ll tell ya what ‘unc’ it really doesn’t matter how many Arabs were there…they were the invaders…from the 600s the muslims invaded christian lands….and the Lord God Almighty gave it to the jews 4000 years ago…and He scattered them…and has given it to them again…
and when the Muslim hordes attack it, led by Iran, and backed by the Russians…the Lord Himself will go to war, and the muslims will get a very ugly surprise..
Israel is the Jews…and it will be their’s until this world ends…and there is nothing you, or the arabs, or the devil himself can do about it…learn to love it, cause its the best thing going!!! WHOOOOOOOOOO (a little ric flair lingo)
right4life on January 9, 2009 at 11:09 PM
And look how he ended up. Let that be a lesson to all.
FeralCat on January 9, 2009 at 11:22 PM
I don’t think you are paying enough attention to the demographics.
unclesmrgol on January 9, 2009 at 11:25 PM
Can you point out any posts where you point out the faults of say…Hamas, muslim, or any other non-christian or jewish group? Are you sure you are a cristian. Where is your love for Israel?
kanda on January 10, 2009 at 8:03 AM
yep Jesus did all that and remained a Jew the entire time. His example should be good enough for a christian like you.
kanda on January 10, 2009 at 8:24 AM
Actually their are according to the rules of war and the Geneva Conventions. They are called non-combatants.
kanda on January 10, 2009 at 8:26 AM
Didn’t Pat Buchanan get stupid some time ago on Israel when they were striking Hezbo?
Yep. Michelle lit him and Chris Matthews up.
Here it is.
Best VENT ever.
Black Adam on January 10, 2009 at 8:35 AM
Gosh that anti-christ comment kind of got to me too. It’s a lost opportunity but sometimes these right wing christian radicals just will not accept the truth. It’s another proof that wingnuts right or left are …..nuts.
kanda on January 10, 2009 at 8:37 AM
I agree. the left leaning PC press keeps these reminders well hidden for a reason.
kanda on January 10, 2009 at 8:44 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »