The main point here is: "In all the time since, they had made no attempt to create an independent Palestinian state west or east of the Jordan and none was ever established." Yet now those continuously hostile to the nation of Israel demand Palestinians have their own country "back," and that the Israelis are "occupying Palestine." What the. . ?
Mr. Horowitz has nailed it.
FWIW, I've made that point for years. The Arab states have literally millions of square miles of empty lands... why not settle the Palestinians? Unless what they really wanted was not a solution, but a perpetual grievance....
Every place on earth with a current Islamic terrorst threat is also a point at which Arab Intersts converge (OIL or Energy access). Look at the map and look at the terrrists from Islam. Take the kingdoms from the damn Arab Shieks and install a UN government and the terrorists will dry up. The UN wants to tax the world; make them the keepers of energy - then we can decide if the UN needs to go!
1 good piece.
2 If I'm not mistaken Israel has supported by the left....until 1967. The election of a Likud government was the nail in the coffin as far as the left was concerned.
Official (Iran) calls for setting up Islamic fund for Palestinians
(on funding of the intifada) THE ARAB-ISLAMIC MIDEAST TERROR FROM 1929 TILL JULY 2001
One point I would annex to those of Horowitz -- at the 1919-1923 Paris Peace agreements and subsequent amendments, the Arab Nationalists and the Zionists solemnly agreed to the creation of Jewish Palestine in the Palestine Mandate, and the creation of various Arab Nations carved out of the wreckage of Turkey. Everyone knew the score, and everyone had willingly and in good faith "signed on the dotted line" -- the Arab Nationalists were to receive their Arab Nations in 99% of the Middle East, and the Zionists were to receive the remaining 1% for Jewish Palestine (defined, even after the Churchill revisions of '21-23, as every inch of Galilee, Samaria, and Judea from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean sea, plus the Negev wedge down to Eilat - although not including the Golan after 1923, which should be considered a legally separate matter).
But, once their own nations were established, the Arab Nationalists stabbed the Zionists in the back. Why stick to your agreed 99% portion, when you can grab the whole? They're only Jews, after all... no one really cares whether you keep your word to a Jew, right?
Claims predicated on 3,000 year old Biblical texts may mean nothing to modern atheists, but contracted-and-binding Twentieth Century International Law ought to mean something. The Arab Nationalists, in 1919-1923, already swore agreement to the arrangement which today only the most right-wing Jews demand: Eretz Y'Israel, Greater Israel, Israel from the Jordan to the Med. Frankly, Israel should hold them to the deal.
I say this as a libertarian who does not support foreign aid to any country, and who does not believe that American official policy should, for the most part, ever concern itself with Middle Eastern wars (or interfere in internal Israeli matters). Even if the Zionists are legally in the right (and they are), it's not our fight (JMHO).
Of course, now Jews are suspect of "dual loyalty," to Israel instead of "the Elders of Zion."