Here is one interpretation. No doubt Lawry see it differently
The 1948 War of Independence was the first
major conflict of the ongoing series of
Arab-Israeli wars. The war was initiated by the
Arab states following the termination of the
British Mandate of Palestine and the Israeli
Declaration of Independence on May 14 1948. The
next day on May 15, five Arab states: Egypt,
Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq simultaneously
invaded Israel with the goal of destroying the
Jewish state. This war was the result of years
of Arab rejection and violence stemming from
the rise of modern Zionism and British policies
in the Middle East. The 1948 War resulted in a
decisive Israeli victory. For the Arab states,
the war was a complete tactical and strategic
failure that resulted in continued
anti-Semitism and rejectionism as well as the
creation of both the Arab and Jewish refugee
situation that has perpetuated the conflict and
led to further Arab-Israeli wars.
From:
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of de Bivort Lawrence
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 6:26 PM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Hatred against Israel
organizing principle of the Middle East
It is not a matter of "views," it is a matter of facts.
To your statement and your language: please
tell us what Arab armies were "massed" and provoked the 1948 and 1956 war.
On Aug 6, 2012, at 5:49 PM, Arthur Cordell wrote:
We have been through this before. You have your views and I have mine.
Arthur
From:
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of de Bivort Lawrence
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 10:26 AM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Hatred against Israel
organizing principle of the Middle East
Please tell us what Arab armies were "massed"
and provoked the 1948 and 1956 war.
Then we'll address the 1967 war.
On Aug 6, 2012, at 9:45 AM, Arthur Cordell wrote:
Re: the 1948, 1956, and 1967 wars being the
cause of such anger at Israel. I think rather
than the wars it was because the massed Arab
nations that provoked the wars ended up
losing. It was the loss on the battlefield and
the loss of face that continues to rankle. But
there are other currents at work in the ME, and
it is the reaction to modernism. And this is
also seen in Israel with the strength of the religious groups.
If Israel disappears it will be a short term
victory, the fight against modernism will continue.
arthur
From:
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of de Bivort Lawrence
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 8:25 AM
To: Keith Hudson; RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Hatred against Israel
organizing principle of the Middle East
Good morning, Keith. Yes, Muslims view Jews,
Christians (broadly defined) and Muslims all as
"Ahl al-Kitab" -- People of the Book. All the
early converts to Islam were, of course,
Jewish, Christian, or pan- and polytheistic.
Converting to Islam was not difficult for Jews
and Christians, as they and Muslims have the
same god. So conversion simply meant
understanding that Muhammad was the most recent
of the prophets/messengers/ sent by
God/Yahweh/Allah, and taking the Qur'an as the
last and literal message/voice of Allah. If
you will, you can think of Muhammad and the Quran as the 'latest edition.'
Would you say more about the effect of
Sunni-Shi'a tension on Muslim-non-Muslim relations? Thanks.
My sense is, and this summarizes many disparate
conversations with Arabs/Muslims about Israel,
is not that Israeli technological and
scientific success provokes them against
Israel, but that the seizure of Palestine; the
current onerous and murderous occupation; the
Israeli black ops against Arabs and Muslim
countries; and the 1948, 1956, and 1967 wars
are the cause of such anger at Israel.
Israel's technological succes is something that
many Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims admire,
though the relative debauchery of some segments
of the Israeli Jewish population do not. Of
course, the Arabs have their own record of
world-class debauchery among some of their
elites -- a source of considerable resentment
and contempt among the general population.
Or an interpersonal level, Israelis and
Palestinians (and Arabs/Muslims) generally can
get along fairly easily. Indeed I know of many
deep and lasting friendships between them, including marriages.
Cheers,
Lawry
On Aug 6, 2012, at 7:11 AM, Keith Hudson wrote:
Muhammad enjoined his followers to treat Jews
and Christians with respect, as fellow
believers in the Bible (that is, the old
testament) and partners of the Abrahamic line.
What has coloured Muslim's attitude to
non-Muslims is a byproduct of the growing
overlay of antipathy between the Sunnis and
Shias of their own faith. Also, I feel sure
that the scientific and technological successes
of Israel in recent years, rather than its mere
existence, have been provocative.
Keith
At 20:53 05/08/2012, Arthur wrote:
Just to provide some more perspective on the very unstable middle east.
Israel, the Arab worlds all-purpose enemy
<http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/author/gjonasnp/>George Jonas |
Aug 4, 2012 6:01 AM ET |
Last Updated: Aug 4, 2012 9:48 AM ET
National Post
And how is the Arab Spring? Well, theres bad
news, and good news. The bad news is that since
the beginning of the phenomenon that has been
discussed more and understood less than any in
recent years, hostility to Israel in the region
has only increased. The good news is that while
the appetite to harm the Jewish state and its
inhabitants has grown in the Arab/Muslim world
since the fall of Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali in
Tunisia launched what was supposed to be the
regions democratic renewal, the capacity to do so has diminished.
An increase in hostility was predictable.
Hatred against Israel, kept on a low boil, is
the organizing principle of the Middle East.
Its the regions main fuel of governance;
often its only fuel. Some ruling regimes
kings, dictators, whatever may have oil wells
and sandy beaches, but other than hating Israel
(and looking after their families and tribes)
they have few if any ideas. If they do, chances
are its to hate some other group in addition to Israel.
In the Middle East a countrys national purpose
often amounts to little more than a list of its
enemies. A feeling of being ill-done by
dominates the consciousness of groups and
individuals. Since its a self-fulfilling
prophecy, its not necessarily baseless: The
easiest way to have an enemy is to be one.
The centrality of hatred to the culture is
remarkable. The Cartesian idea is I hate,
therefore I am. Self-righteousness is
overwhelming: each desire thwarted becomes an
example of justice denied. Its not a pretty place, but millions call it home.
In many ways, Israel is a godsend to the
one-trick ponies who rule the region. Their
culture defines ruling as inoculating your
own sect or tribe against all others, including
the ones that form your own country. Many
Middle East nations Iraq, Syria, Libya, to
name three are just temporarily halted civil
wars. Theyre truces rather than countries.
Canada may be two solitudes, but it isnt an
uneasy truce between French and English
Canadians. Iraq is, between Shia and Sunni Muslims.
In such an ambiance, nothing is handier than an
all-purpose enemy, just out of reach, close
enough to seem a realistic threat but too far
to be one. Tyrants can govern by whipping up
enough popular sentiment against the Jewish
state to give their regimes an apparent
national purpose and distract peoples
attention from domestic woes, then relax and
spend some money in the capitals of Europe.
The key is a low boil, though. If the
anti-Israeli sentiment boils over, causing
riots against the government for being too soft
on the Zionists, or foolish attempts to attack
Haifa with rockets, which in turn invites
retaliation, the peoples hatred of Israel
becomes a headache for the very rulers who instigated it.
Yeah, well, it couldnt happen to a nicer
bunch, somebody might say, Ill lose no sleep
over it. He should, though, because its like
pulling a thread from a piece of fabric. Things can unravel in an instant.
Tyranny, Egyptian-style, under Hosni Mubarak or
Libyan-style, under Muammar Gaddafi, often
manifested itself in dictatorial governments
balancing on a tightrope, trying to maintain a
fragile peace with Israel against their own
bellicose people, trying to counteract the
effects of the sentiments they themselves
instigated. When they couldnt, the forces they
helped conjure up turned against them. If
lucky, they died in a hail of bullets on the
reviewing stand like Anwar Sadat; if not,
bludgeoned like a cornered rat in a culvert, in
the manner of Gaddafi. Its a fate Bashar
al-Assad has been trying to avoid, which is hardly surprising.
Assad has threatened to rain missiles down on
Tel Aviv should NATO try to dislodge him, as
<http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/how-the-arab-spring-keeps-israel-safe-7268>Michael
Koplow put it in the National Interest, but in
fact Syrias tyrant has been raining missiles
(and if not missiles, then shells and bullets)
on his own towns and villages. No wonder, for
thats where his enemies live his actual
enemies, as opposed to his mythical ones. Its
his fellow Syrians who want to trap him in a
culvert and drown him, preferably along with
his entire tribe. Israel has no interest in
touching him with a 10-foot pole, especially as
long as hes keeping Syrias armed forces and
rebels thinning each others ranks.
We wont understand much about the Arab Spring
as long as we persist in looking at it through
Western eyes. We see popular uprisings against
dictatorships as moves in the direction of
Western-style democracy. If they happened here,
they probably would be. Where theyre actually
happening theyre taking their societies in the opposite direction.
The Arab Spring is an attempt to return the
region to its roots. Its not to Westernize the
Middle East and make it more democratic; its
to Easternize it and make it more Islamic. If
the early 20th century was about the East
trying to join what it couldnt lick, the early
21st may be about the East trying to lick what it hasnt been able to join.
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England
<http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/>http://allisstatus.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
