> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: John D. Giorgis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Verzonden: donderdag 24 januari 2002 12:59
> Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Onderwerp: RE: Ignoring Source Materials (Was: re: CNN Breaking News)

> >To some extent, yes. They are living under Israeli occupation and as
> >such have the right to fight Israel. 
> 
> And this is not at all tempered by the fact that the entity known as
> Palestine is the *agressor* in this conflict, having four times
> viciously attacked Israel, with the goal of Israel's destruction, and
> having refused to sign a peace treaty with Israel (thus remaining in a
> state of a war of agression against Israel)?

You really need to dig out your history books on this. Israel was not
attacked by an entity known as "Palestine", it was attacked by entities
known as (and commonly referred to as the countries) "Egypt", "Jordan",
"Syria" and "Lebanon". At best, you could group them together under "Arabs"
(but even then they are only a subset of the entity "The Arabs" which
includes *all* Arabs). Palestine as a country does not exist.

Since you still disagree, I will ask you again: where on the map do I find
the country known as "Palestine"? Where are its borders, and who are its
neighbours?

If what you say is true, then the logical conclusion is that there is one
gigantic country in the Middle East called Palestine, which includes at
least the territories of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. Although these
four are recognised as sovereign countries, it follows from your statement
that they are not sovereign countries but provences of this enormous State
of Palestine. Somehow, I doubt their respective governments would agree with
that...

The Palestinians are an ethnic group that has its roots in those countries.
They currently live in areas that belonged to those countries but are now
under Israeli occupation. Occupation and oppression are by definition acts
of aggression, so in this particular case it is *Israel* who is the
aggressor.


> In my mind, entities that engage in a war of agression and then are
> defeated have a duty to sign a peace treaty, not a duty to continue
> waging that war by any means possible until they win.

So, they should *accept* living under Israeli occupation and oppression?
They should stop fighting a country that is not their own but nevertheless
imposes its will on them? If the Soviet Union had invaded and occupied the
US, would you expect the US population to accept it and not fight back with
all means possible?


Jeroen

_________________________________________________________________________
Wonderful World of Brin-L Website:                  http://www.Brin-L.com
Tom's Photo Gallery:                          http://tom.vanbaardwijk.com

Reply via email to