Before June 1967 when Egypt controlled Gaza and Jordan controlled the West Bank, did anybody ever talk about the "occupation" of Palestinian land?
Discussions about the "occupation" of Palestinian territories typically became prominent after the Six-Day War in June 1967, during which Israel captured the Gaza Strip from Egypt and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, from Jordan. Prior to this event, the terminology and framing of the situation in the Palestinian territories might have differed, but concerns about sovereignty, self-determination, and the rights of Palestinians were certainly present.
Before 1967, the Palestinian territories were under the control of Egypt and Jordan, but the term "occupation" as it came to be understood after the Six-Day War was not necessarily widely used in the same context. Instead, there were discussions about the status of the territories and the desire for Palestinian self-determination, often framed within the broader context of Arab-Israeli relations and the conflict over the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948.
However, it's important to note that concepts related to occupation, colonization, and sovereignty have been part of discussions about Palestine for much of the 20th century, particularly as various powers exerted control over the region. The terminology may have evolved over time to reflect changing political circumstances and perspectives.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Prior to the end of WWII, and following the end of WWI and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the entire Fertile Crescent was getting reshaped into various nations, artificially drawn by the European colonial powers.
While there was country of Palestine, there was no country of Israel either. However, the area was known as Palestine, and was a British protectorate.
Post 1948, and following various iterations of Transjordan, both banks of the Jordan River were joined together under the Kingdom of Jordan, given that they were the same people.
Gaza is a different story. Prior to 1948, it had a population of 50K or so, mostly connected to Egypt. Post 1948, Gaza filled up with refugees who were driven out of the new state of Israel.
@Northwest Gaza is geographically about the same size as Philadelphia. Gaza's population is about 2.1 million people. Philadelphia registered it's highest population in 1950 at 2,071,605. I've never heard Philadelphia referred to as an open-air prison. Plenty of green spaces in Philadelphia.
@Northwest And how does spending huge sums on a vast tunnel network improve conditions in Gaza? Gazans have agency. They don't use it.
[i]A resident of Gaza cannot leave Gaza, without permission from Israel.
A resident of Gaza cannot invite someone over, without permission from Israel.
Gaza has no airport
Gaza has no port
A fisherman in Gaza cannot take their fishing out, without, you guess it, permission from Israel[/i]
It's a shame Israel is so mean. At least, Gazabs have a governing entity in Hamas that works day and night for the welfare and betterment of Gazans, devoting all its energies and resources to helping Gazans. That's something we can all be thankful for.
@Aidankenny23 In the context of arguments or debates, deflection refers to the act of redirecting attention away from the main issue or point being discussed. Instead of addressing the core issue or responding directly to an argument, a person who uses deflection may shift the focus to a different topic or raise unrelated points in order to avoid addressing the original topic or to confuse the other party.
The point of my post relates to self-determination versus subjugation. Israel subjugates. Hamas subjugates. Palestinians want self-determination, but apparently only when Israel subjugates, not when Hamas subjugates not when Egypt stands in the way of self-determination, and not when Jordan stands in the way of self-determination. No deflection. That was my "argument."
@flipper1966 [quote]Why do Gazans live like Gazans, but West Berliners lived like West Berliners?[/quote]
Your penchant for picking false equivalencies continues.
The people who were in an open-air prison are East Germans, not West Berliners. I had no problem traveling to West Berlin, by plane or train, and the train trip was out of curiosity, to see how the trapped East Germans, from within the train. Not a single West Berliner ever needed to ask for permission to travel, or do whatever the hell they want, for that matter.
Do continue providing examples that refute the point you're trying to make.
@Northwest [quote]your diversions are falling apart as well.[/quote]
[b]Deflection can take various forms, such as:[/b]
Changing the subject: When someone avoids addressing the main topic of discussion by bringing up a different issue altogether. [b][i]Attacking the person: Instead of engaging with the substance of the argument, the person attacks the character or motives of the other party.[/i][/b] Using logical fallacies: Employing flawed reasoning or logical fallacies to divert attention from the main argument. Questioning motives or intentions: Casting doubt on the intentions or motivations of the other person rather than engaging with their arguments.
@flipper1966 [quote]That's because I'm stupid .[/quote]
Self-realization, The first step toward improvement.
[quote] and evil as well.[/quote]
I don't know you. But you're too quick to throw these labels around, and allude that I'm using them in reference to Israel. That's another failed technique, and proves your arguments failed.
Now, about that West Berlin last attempt of yours, to tap dance. 🤣
@flipper1966 [quote]Changing the subject: When someone avoids addressing the main topic of discussion by bringing up a different issue altogether. Attacking the person: Instead of engaging with the substance of the argument, the person attacks the character or motives of the other party. Using logical fallacies: Employing flawed reasoning or logical fallacies to divert attention from the main argument. Questioning motives or intentions: Casting doubt on the intentions or motivations of the other person rather than engaging with their arguments.[/quote]
Your really should consider every one of these arguments very careful, and re-read this thread,, for every single place you used them. When in doubt, think of a couple of things: your West Berlin false equivalency, and your Philadelphia false equivalency.
@Northwest By the way, "open air prison" was used metaphorically to convey the sense of isolation and confinement experienced by those living in West Berlin, surrounded by the physical barrier of the Wall and the political realities of the Cold War.
@flipper1966 [quote]By the way, "open air prison" was used metaphorically to convey the sense of isolation and confinement experienced by those living in West Berlin, surrounded by the physical barrier of the Wall and the political realities of the Cold War.[/quote]
And the term "open air prison" is exactly where the comparison stops. It's dishonest to pretend that a place where people were free to pursue normal lives, trade with the rest of the world,, travel without any restrictions, have total control over their own destiny and existence, and pursue life and liberty, with the actual reality of Gaza.
Which is actually at the core of this discussion because for the purposes of your false equivalency, you painted a picture of Gaza, drawn from a subsection, of a subsection of the one-sided propaganda you got your information from.
@Northwest @Aidankenny23 · And, by the way, my post is absolutely on target. Use of the term "occupation" became prominent only after June 1967. This is exactly what I said at the outset. All of your comments are a diversion, or, as you like to say, a "deflection." [b]STOP DEFLECTING, SIR![/b]
[quote]Discussions about the "occupation" of Palestinian territories typically became prominent after the Six-Day War in June 1967, during which Israel captured the Gaza Strip from Egypt and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, from Jordan. Prior to this event, the terminology and framing of the situation in the Palestinian territories might have differed, but concerns about sovereignty, self-determination, and the rights of Palestinians were certainly present.
Before 1967, the Palestinian territories were under the control of Egypt and Jordan, but the term "occupation" as it came to be understood after the Six-Day War was not necessarily widely used in the same context. Instead, there were discussions about the status of the territories and the desire for Palestinian self-determination, often framed within the broader context of Arab-Israeli relations and the conflict over the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948.
However, it's important to note that concepts related to occupation, colonization, and sovereignty have been part of discussions about Palestine for much of the 20th century, particularly as various powers exerted control over the region. The terminology may have evolved over time to reflect changing political circumstances and perspectives.[/quote]
@flipper1966 [quote]Use of the term "occupation" became prominent only after June 1967.[/quote]
A distinction without a difference, given how ill you're prepared to discuss the context. And you might benefit from reading this part of the quote you just posted:
[quote]However, it's important to note that concepts related to occupation, colonization, and sovereignty have been part of discussions about Palestine for much of the 20th century, particularly as various powers exerted control over the region. The terminology may have evolved over time to reflect changing political circumstances and perspectives.[/quote]
