Steam'i Yükleyin
giriş
|
dil
简体中文 (Basitleştirilmiş Çince)
繁體中文 (Geleneksel Çince)
日本語 (Japonca)
한국어 (Korece)
ไทย (Tayca)
Български (Bulgarca)
Čeština (Çekçe)
Dansk (Danca)
Deutsch (Almanca)
English (İngilizce)
Español - España (İspanyolca - İspanya)
Español - Latinoamérica (İspanyolca - Latin Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Yunanca)
Français (Fransızca)
Italiano (İtalyanca)
Bahasa Indonesia (Endonezce)
Magyar (Macarca)
Nederlands (Hollandaca)
Norsk (Norveççe)
Polski (Lehçe)
Português (Portekizce - Portekiz)
Português - Brasil (Portekizce - Brezilya)
Română (Rumence)
Русский (Rusça)
Suomi (Fince)
Svenska (İsveççe)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamca)
Українська (Ukraynaca)
Bir çeviri sorunu bildirin
Tartışma Kuralları ve Yönergeleri
Bu iletiyi bildir
Does it really matter who was there first, thousands of years ago? The point I am trying to make is that our histories, regardless of version, edition, linear or not, they are part of the entire human story. Right or wrong, belief or truth, fact or fiction, is still only a matter of individual perspective & as single individuals we are not excluded from the entire human story, believe it or not.
Imho, all of our historical thoughts & actions, have resulted to where we are today. Is any one historical context any more significant or not, to any other? I am like you as in I also have a slightly different meaning of historical context. but I would like to hope that we are still just respectfully disagreeing on the same field but at different ends :))
I did quote the "Balfour Declaration", in post #144, but yet we still want to ignore its development & significance as to how we come to be where we are. It is plain to see there in print, original documents from the time.
No, the Balfour Deceleration outlined the limits or tried to define a difference between Israel & Palestine, do you want me to quote what I wrote earlier in post#144?
The original letter from BALFOUR to ROTHSCHILD dated November 1917, in part, says;
"it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"
Now obviously we can see that is not the current situation, nor has it been since Israels creation in 1948. Further developments of the original "Balfour Deceleration 1917" in particular those made in 1939 & 2017 by the British, do further imply or lay out definitions for 2 individual sovereignty's.
Funny is, that if you look at the countries name and flag. That you would say, that it was more for roman Catholic free masons, then for the jews.
The Arab people there, calling themselves Palestinians, claim they were denied some kind of due process and had lands stolen from them. Too bad. That's war. And the people who had their lands confiscated were compensated and mostly of the land owning upper class.
It's like a bunch of inner city gang members in New York claiming the right to kill and rebel because one of the Rockefellers had their mansions confiscated. It's ludicrous. But that's the comparative argument.
And now they attacked Israel as of last year, and are paying the price. Then people who don't understand war nor what actual genocide is claim atrocities and genocide.
When we are ignorant to other possibilities we only bolster our own narrow understanding. Not that there is a problem with that, as one eye remains closed we quickly place all blame on everything else other than ourselves, it robs us of ever considering our very own faults & failures.
Fair enough, I guess many only want to back one side over the other & dismiss any real empathy or two way street of respect & understanding. It keeps us from every dealing with anything by dialogue & compromise, blood shed is all that remains
Dangerous, is the thought to make my understanding of history the only righteous one & totally dismiss the possibility of any other version being even close to my own narrow perspective.
No wonder we are only left with War & our fingers in our ears, we supposedly remain as naively deaf & blind, as one another :(
very interesting how that works. i guess they can't do any wrong, huh?
The Hamas attack on Israel, in my opinion, was urged or ordered by Iran. Same thing with Houthis attacks on shipping off the Arabian coast. And, in my opinion, was done as a favor to Putin to try and tax US military and economic power. Which is a joke because the US is giving mostly hand-me-downs to the Ukraine.
And the US economy is coming out of a recession and growing. Putin hasn't taxed the US economy, and has destroyed nearly 90% or more of his own military capability.
Ages prior armies used to shell cities into submission. An army was not a "football team" there to only kill other soldiers, but to take territory through lethal means. And everybody was a target unless they surrendered. That's war.
These days we have rules of what and who you can shoot, which tends to neuter the process and bring a kind of legal framework to the exercise, but it only works of the law abiding side wins.
What if you lose?
I think most people forget that, and in Israel you have Israeli modern military fighting against a militant group using medieval tactics; i.e. taking hostages and hiding among women and children.
It gets nastier. But, it is part of the criteria of what side you choose and why you fight in the first place.
This is ignoring all of the ones that took place in the Middle East, this is one of those situations where people are basically getting pulled into a religion war because for some reason Catholics and Jewish constantly have to fight without the public saying "Oh mom and dad are fighting again"
Of course war is seemingly an inseparable part of humanities history & yes I do agree with the consequence of war being an economic motivator for some. As I said earlier,
It is at least my opinion that many more reasons exist for war other than just money & resources. Yes what you mention is certainly a reason, but I can also speculate, many other causes for war. What about generational oppression, rebellion, tyranny, religious beliefs, subjugation, homeland defence, revenge, retribution, hatred & power?
Your opinion of the global connections to the middle east situation is very interesting. Even though I can not myself agree with it entirely, I can see how variations of your perspective may be plausible.
At the end of the day, with all our differences we are here discussing our personal points of view with respect & dignity towards opposing opinions. Dialogue & compromise is much better than war, It may even be an extremely positive tool that ultimately prevents bloodshed in the first place.
the reverse is true.
if it was so simple as give away some land in exchange for peace.. israel would do that.
but its palestinans who are terrorist lunatics who settle for nothing but the complete destruction of israel and no matter how much land you give them or how well you tread them they keep attacking.
if your neighbour keeps tossing grenades over your fence.. killing your kids..
it shows great restraint if all you do is wall in that neighbour to block him shipping in more grenades.. and periodicly do searches of his house to destroy any mortars he keeps building to fire them with. while that does destroy his bed and fridge so he has to sleep on the floor and his food now spoils.. that neighbour keeps hiding them in there.. so he has only himself to blame.