From: adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack)
Subject: Re: Israeli Expansion-lust
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University
Lines: 83

In article <1993Apr13.182614.2634@bnr.ca> zbib@bnr.ca writes:
>In article  <1993Apr13.002118.24102@das.harvard.edu> 
> adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:

>> In article <1993Apr12.184034.1370@bnr.ca> zbib@bnr.ca writes:

>>>IMHO, it does not really matter who started any individual battle within 
>>>the Arabs/Isreal war context. The real question is who/what  started the 
>>>War. Does anyone have any doubts it was the creation of Israel on Arab 
>>>land ? 
>>	Huh?  A war was started when several armies invaded Israel,
>>vowing to drive the Jews into the sea.  Most Jews wanted to live in
>>peace, and the Arabs who stayed in Israel were granted citizenship.

> I am
>surprised that you don't consider the acquisition of land by
>the Jews from arabs, for the purpose of establishing an exclusive
>state, as a hostile action leading to war.

	It was for the purpose of establishing a state, not an
exclusive state.  If the state was to be exclusive, it would not have
400 000 arab citizens.

	And no, I do not consider the purchase of land a hostile
action.  When someone wants to buy land, and someone else is willing
to sell it, at a mutually agreeable price, then that is commerce.  It
is not a hostile action leading to war.

>As to whether the Jews wanted to live in peace, maybe.
>However they wanted and still want an exclusively Jewish
>state, where Jews are in control and Jews are the masters of
>the land.  Living in peace is meaningless unless it means
>living *WITH* someone else, as equal. For a native arab, this 
>does not leave many options.

	Oh, you mean like both Jews and Arabs being citizens?  The
arabs who stayed are now citizens, with as much right to choose who
they vote for as the Jews.

>Those palestinians who stayed, actually stayed despite of what 
>happened, and their number was somewhat tolerated as a defenseless
>and ineffective minority.
>If I were wrong, you'd have Israel recall all the
>palestinian refugees (we're talking millions). After all,
>they are civilians. 

	Huh?  The people who left, did so voluntarily.  There is no
reason for Israel to let them in.

>Israel gave citizenship to the remaining arabs because it
>had to maintain a democratic facade (to keep the western aid
>flowing).

	Israel got no western aid in 1948, nor in 1949 or 50...It
still granted citizenship to those arabs who remained.  And how
is granting citizenship a facade?

>>	Tell me something, Sam.  What makes land "arab?"

>How shall I explain, Its a contract between the man and the
>land.  Control isn't it. The Ottomans ruled 400 years, and
>then left with barely a trace.  The concept of Land identity
>is somewhat foreign to the mobile and pragmatic West.  It is
>partly the concept of 'le sol natal', native soil.  I know
>that jews had previous history in the region, but none in
>recent memory.  I'm talking everyday life not archeology.

	Try again, you tell me what its isn't, but you fail to
establish what it is.

	Also, Jews did have history in Israel for over a thousand
years.  There were lots of Jews slaughtered by Crusaders in Israel.
There was a thriving community in Gaza city from roughly 1200-1500.
Jews were a majority in Jerusalem from 1870 or so onwards.  Does that
make the land Jewish?

Adam


Adam Shostack 				       adam@das.harvard.edu

"If we had a budget big enough for drugs and sexual favors, we sure
wouldn't waste them on members of Congress..."   -John Perry Barlow
