Lt Kije Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 You are quite correct about the vote Lp, The vote was passed by one vote, And the USA were putting alot of pressure on Small countries to get the vote there way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted November 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Thought "Palastine" was created by the allied "powers" following WW1, where the previous Turkish Empire was divided up amongst the winners, with the French getting Syria and Lebanon, and the Brits getting Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and Palastine. At the time, Palastine contained both Jews and Arabs living along side each other - and was administered by the UK. Following WW2, the displaced Jews from central Europe began to head for the "promised land", illegally in most cases, setting up their kibutz' and the ethnic tensions kicked off. The quest for a an Israeli State began, with Jewish terrorist attacks on British police and soldiers by groups such as the Stern Gang - finally the new UN granted them or recognised the State of Israel, which was quickly followed by attempted invasion by it's Arab neighbours - and the fighting and emnity has continued ever since. During the cold war, Israel became a proxy State of the US, whilst the Arabs joined the USSRs camp, both receiving ?billions in support from their respective patrons - the subsequent "wars" were a usefull weapons testing opportunity for both the US and USSR. Most extreme Arabs still oppose Israel's right to exist, whilst Israel's paranoia has led to it becoming an armed camp, now with a Nuclear capability. The danger for us, aside from this feeding Muslim resentment throughout the world and consequential terrorism; is that the Isreali paranoia will not allow the possibility of parity in the M/East arms race, and if any Arab State (such as Iran) were to achieve a nuclear capability; I've no doubt the Israelis would attack it - with or without US permission - and there's the basis of WW3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Pretty good summary Observer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 I know the facts asperity, How very ignorant of you to call my interpretation of the facts wrong and then not have the guts to post your own when asked. No problem with you commenting on me asperity, but if you are going to join a debate do it properly or stay out Now have you got the guts to tell us your interpretation of the facts Also I didn't know you were an expert on computers, I would like to know why you think I have a computer of sorts. The Mac platform has had a fully 64 bit operating system for a number of years, unlike Pc, but you already new this as you are an expert Nothing you have written on here could possibly be construed as "interpretation" LtKije, just uninformed statements. As I said if you want the true facts read up on them. I'm not about to do it for you. As for me claiming to be a computer expert, would you like to quote the post where I said this? No? I thought not. Is a Mac platform similar to a high horse I wonder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 I know I nailed you once asperity,and you might be afraid of it happening again, but if you want to play play properly or not at all. Now are you going to give us your interoperation of events or just carry on being a non event You've got a computer (of sorts) I'll help you asperity it was your own quotes that got you in to trouble last time, be careful Now can you explain your statement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 I fail to see why I should have to explain myself to you LtKije There is nothing you can say that could possibly "scare" me by the way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Found this on Wikipedia, yes I do know they are not normally known for their accuracy, but I broadly concur with this. One thing they do not mention is the activity of America in getting Countries not to vote or vote in favor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine May be a bit of homework for asperity he might even find it enlightening Then again It does help if you put the link in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 As baffling as ever LtKije Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Sorry, LK, that seems to argue against you - a majority of 33 to 13 and a division of Palestine in order to allow both factions to establish themselves - Jewish and non-Jewish. As so many Jewish people were leaving Europe for Palestine (as it was then) then surely the division was at least 50% based upon ensuring that the non-Jewish faction was able to keep its culture mainstream, as opposed to becoming a minority in a mainly Jewish state? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 I should have made myself a little clearer The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine or United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) Future Government of Palestine was a plan adopted by a decision of the General Assembly. The resolution was approved by a vote of 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions on November 29, 1947.[1][2] The decision recommended the division of the British Mandate of Palestine into two provisional states, one Jewish and one Arab, and a framework for economic union. The resolution reflected two competing nationalist expressions embodied in Palestine, one emanated from Europe The Un plan was really an American plan, as you would expect non of the states bordering Palestine wanted it, even the UK was against it at first as Churchill had promised the Palestinians self rule for their help in the War, The USA put alot of pressure on States to either abstain or vote in favor. hence 10 States abstaining, People need to look more on the vote and what America was doing behind the scenes to get it though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 I should have made myself a little clearer The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine or United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) Future Government of Palestine was a plan adopted by a decision of the General Assembly. The resolution was approved by a vote of 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions on November 29, 1947.[1][2] The decision recommended the division of the British Mandate of Palestine into two provisional states, one Jewish and one Arab, and a framework for economic union. The resolution reflected two competing nationalist expressions embodied in Palestine, one emanated from Europe The Un plan was really an American plan, as you would expect non of the states bordering Palestine wanted it, even the UK was against it at first as Churchill had promised the Palestinians self rule for their help in the War, The USA put alot of pressure on States to either abstain or vote in favor. hence 10 States abstaining, People need to look more on the vote and what America was doing behind the scenes to get it though Amazing that you know all that stuff Sgt.... I would have had to copy and paste it from a website somewhere! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Wikid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 The web site I quoted earlier on I see you didn't bother to read it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 The web site I quoted earlier on I see you didn't bother to read it errr nope! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Hence your crap post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Hence your crap post well you'd know one when you saw it Sgt, so I will bow to your superior intelect! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.