4 ms·

As I've addressed in previous comments: none of these nations actually helped Israel at all in its early days. The British in fact actively fought against the

As I've addressed in previous comments: none of these nations actually helped Israel at all in its early days. The British in fact actively fought against the formation of Israel, by forcibly preventing incoming Jewish immigration, and actively fighting against the Jewish defense groups that were to be the Jews' only defense against the Arabs who attacked them once the Brits left in 1948: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/british-restrictions-on-jewish-immigration-to-palestine https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/british-restrictions-on... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_insurgency_in_Mandatory_Palestine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_insurgency_in_Mandatory... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Paper_of_1939 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Paper_of_1939 The US enforced an arms embargo against Israel starting from 1948, and only became its ally after it won a major victory in 1967, proving it to be a valuable regional ally. Still, the main point is that this isn't colonialism, because Israel isn't a colony of any other country or power.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
>Jewish immigration, and actively fighting against the Jewish defense groups that were to be the Jews' only defense against the Arabs who attacked them once the Brits left in 1948: Yes, while they were fine maintaining their empire they opposed a Jewish state. Sometime during or after the war their policy shifted as they would rather not give such prime land over to a group certain to be bitter over their very recent mistreatment. Better to support the colonization of outsiders and make them dependent on you militarily. And as for the US, you ignore their role in stopping the 1948 war, their role in the Tripartite alliance, and Kennedy's beginning of the military alliance.
- NeverFade 6y ago
  Really not sure what you're trying to say. You admit that the Brits were opposed to the Jewish efforts to establish Israel. In other words, Israel was not established with the help of the Brits, but in fact against their opposition, contrary to your original claim. I'm not sure what actions by the US during the 1948 war you refer to. From wikipedia: > This situation caused the United States to withdraw its support for the Partition plan, thus encouraging the Arab League to believe that the Palestinian Arabs, reinforced by the Arab Liberation Army, could put an end to the plan for partition. In other words, US policy actually encouraged the attack on Israel and Arab hopes that they could destroy Israel and subjugate the Jews. The only way US was involved at any later point was as part of the UN efforts to establish a ceasefire, after the Jews successfully defended Israel against the Arab attack. In other words, after the Jews already won. The US allied itself with Israel during the Kennedy administration, i.e. much much later, because Israel won the 1967 war. Either way, your representation that Israel was established based on foreign powers is not supported by any facts. As a side note, one of the most capable armed forces that attacked Israel in 1948 was the Arab Legion, a forced trained, organized, and armed by the British Empire, and commanded by British officers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Legion#1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Legion#1948_Arab%E2%80%93... So much for that argument, then.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    >Really not sure what you're trying to say. You admit that the Brits were opposed to the Jewish efforts to establish Israel. Before WWII, they wanted to maintain Mandatory Palestine. As the breakup of the Empire became obvious during the war, they changed their tune and supported Israel. >The only way US was involved at any later point was as part of the UN efforts to establish a ceasefire, Ignoring the large amount of US arms that ended up in Israel's hands, you act like US stepping in to end the war is a small thing. Prolonging the war would not benefit Israel, and guaranteeing their gains in the aftermath is what gave them the time they needed to truly colonize. >much much later, because Israel won the 1967 war. Kennedy was elected in 1960, and served under a term. > a forced trained, organized, and armed by the British Empire, and commanded by British officers: Obviously, as before that the region was a part of the British Empire. Much of your claims that nobody supported Israel seemed to be based on their resistance to arm the nation. Immediately following WWII, the hope was to limit the ability of such nations to wage war, and guarantee them in case they are invaded. Plus, the west's constant worst fear was arming Israel only for the Kibbutz to take control.
    - NeverFade 6y ago
      > As the breakup of the Empire became obvious during the war, they changed their tune and supported Israel. So you're just going to keep repeating this claim, that is backed by zero evidence or facts, and is contradicted by established historical facts which I cited. You claim that Britain decided to support Israel after WWII, which ended in 1945. Yet in 1948, the most powerful military force that attacked Israel was organized, trained, and armed by the British and led by acting British officers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Legion#1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Legion#1948_Arab%E2%80%93... The rest of your claims are likewise false and counterfactual, and you presented no evidence supporting any of them.
      - boomboomsubban 6y ago
        >So you're just going to keep repeating this claim, that is backed by zero evidence or facts, and is contradicted by established historical facts which I cited. None of your facts mention a time past 1942, except the existence of the Arab Legion which I addressed in my last post. As for evidence, the fact that Britain allowed the creation of Israel in their territory is about all you need.
- reissbaker 6y ago
  Your conspiracy theory that Britain decided to give land to the Jews "to support the colonization of outsiders and make them dependent on you military" makes no sense. Israel has never been dependent on the UK for military support. The UK has even attempted to impose arms embargoes on Israel. Relations between the two countries have been strained at best for nearly all of Israel's lifetime; it was only in the 2000s that things improved. The first ever joint training session occurred in 2019.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    >The UK has even attempted to impose arms embargoes on Israel. During a period where they guaranteed Israel's border with an agreement to intervene in any war. And beyond that, what about the 1956 war? This claim is just ridiculous, not wanting to arm Israel is separate from not making them dependent on the UK military
    - reissbaker 6y ago
      You've asserted without evidence over and over again that Israel is somehow dependent on the UK for military support, and that this was true around the time of Israel's founding as well. The UK opposed Israel's creation, armed its enemies, and its officers served in armies that actively attempted to crush the state, while its air force provided air support. If you somehow contest this, and claim that Israel and the UK were close allies despite everything linked to you in this discussion thus far, please provide evidence. It's pointless to continue this while you handwave away numerous and repeated historical references to actual military engagements where the two countries were on opposite sides, and provide no references of your own other than your own assertions. The first time Israeli and UK forces even trained together was in 2019. The claim that the UK provided long-term military support from the date of Israel's founding is just totally specious.
      - boomboomsubban 6y ago
        >You've asserted without evidence over and over again that Israel is somehow dependent on the UK for military support, and that this was true around the time of Israel's founding as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite_Declaration_of_1950 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite_Declaration_of_1950

boomboomsubban 6y ago

>Jewish immigration, and actively fighting against the Jewish defense groups that were to be the Jews' only defense against the Arabs who attacked them once the Brits left in 1948: Yes, while they were fine maintaining their empire they opposed a Jewish state. Sometime during or after the war their policy shifted as they would rather not give such prime land over to a group certain to be bitter over their very recent mistreatment. Better to support the colonization of outsiders and make them dependent on you militarily. And as for the US, you ignore their role in stopping the 1948 war, their role in the Tripartite alliance, and Kennedy's beginning of the military alliance.

NeverFade 6y ago
Really not sure what you're trying to say. You admit that the Brits were opposed to the Jewish efforts to establish Israel. In other words, Israel was not established with the help of the Brits, but in fact against their opposition, contrary to your original claim. I'm not sure what actions by the US during the 1948 war you refer to. From wikipedia: > This situation caused the United States to withdraw its support for the Partition plan, thus encouraging the Arab League to believe that the Palestinian Arabs, reinforced by the Arab Liberation Army, could put an end to the plan for partition. In other words, US policy actually encouraged the attack on Israel and Arab hopes that they could destroy Israel and subjugate the Jews. The only way US was involved at any later point was as part of the UN efforts to establish a ceasefire, after the Jews successfully defended Israel against the Arab attack. In other words, after the Jews already won. The US allied itself with Israel during the Kennedy administration, i.e. much much later, because Israel won the 1967 war. Either way, your representation that Israel was established based on foreign powers is not supported by any facts. As a side note, one of the most capable armed forces that attacked Israel in 1948 was the Arab Legion, a forced trained, organized, and armed by the British Empire, and commanded by British officers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Legion#1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Legion#1948_Arab%E2%80%93... So much for that argument, then.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  >Really not sure what you're trying to say. You admit that the Brits were opposed to the Jewish efforts to establish Israel. Before WWII, they wanted to maintain Mandatory Palestine. As the breakup of the Empire became obvious during the war, they changed their tune and supported Israel. >The only way US was involved at any later point was as part of the UN efforts to establish a ceasefire, Ignoring the large amount of US arms that ended up in Israel's hands, you act like US stepping in to end the war is a small thing. Prolonging the war would not benefit Israel, and guaranteeing their gains in the aftermath is what gave them the time they needed to truly colonize. >much much later, because Israel won the 1967 war. Kennedy was elected in 1960, and served under a term. > a forced trained, organized, and armed by the British Empire, and commanded by British officers: Obviously, as before that the region was a part of the British Empire. Much of your claims that nobody supported Israel seemed to be based on their resistance to arm the nation. Immediately following WWII, the hope was to limit the ability of such nations to wage war, and guarantee them in case they are invaded. Plus, the west's constant worst fear was arming Israel only for the Kibbutz to take control.
  - NeverFade 6y ago
    > As the breakup of the Empire became obvious during the war, they changed their tune and supported Israel. So you're just going to keep repeating this claim, that is backed by zero evidence or facts, and is contradicted by established historical facts which I cited. You claim that Britain decided to support Israel after WWII, which ended in 1945. Yet in 1948, the most powerful military force that attacked Israel was organized, trained, and armed by the British and led by acting British officers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Legion#1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Legion#1948_Arab%E2%80%93... The rest of your claims are likewise false and counterfactual, and you presented no evidence supporting any of them.
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      >So you're just going to keep repeating this claim, that is backed by zero evidence or facts, and is contradicted by established historical facts which I cited. None of your facts mention a time past 1942, except the existence of the Arab Legion which I addressed in my last post. As for evidence, the fact that Britain allowed the creation of Israel in their territory is about all you need.
reissbaker 6y ago
Your conspiracy theory that Britain decided to give land to the Jews "to support the colonization of outsiders and make them dependent on you military" makes no sense. Israel has never been dependent on the UK for military support. The UK has even attempted to impose arms embargoes on Israel. Relations between the two countries have been strained at best for nearly all of Israel's lifetime; it was only in the 2000s that things improved. The first ever joint training session occurred in 2019.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  >The UK has even attempted to impose arms embargoes on Israel. During a period where they guaranteed Israel's border with an agreement to intervene in any war. And beyond that, what about the 1956 war? This claim is just ridiculous, not wanting to arm Israel is separate from not making them dependent on the UK military
  - reissbaker 6y ago
    You've asserted without evidence over and over again that Israel is somehow dependent on the UK for military support, and that this was true around the time of Israel's founding as well. The UK opposed Israel's creation, armed its enemies, and its officers served in armies that actively attempted to crush the state, while its air force provided air support. If you somehow contest this, and claim that Israel and the UK were close allies despite everything linked to you in this discussion thus far, please provide evidence. It's pointless to continue this while you handwave away numerous and repeated historical references to actual military engagements where the two countries were on opposite sides, and provide no references of your own other than your own assertions. The first time Israeli and UK forces even trained together was in 2019. The claim that the UK provided long-term military support from the date of Israel's founding is just totally specious.
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      >You've asserted without evidence over and over again that Israel is somehow dependent on the UK for military support, and that this was true around the time of Israel's founding as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite_Declaration_of_1950 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite_Declaration_of_1950