« Conflit israélo-arabe » : différence entre les versions
Turion (discussion | contribs) |
Turion (discussion | contribs) |
||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
been built, armed. staffed, and even beaded by such colonialist | been built, armed. staffed, and even beaded by such colonialist | ||
British officers as Glubb Pasha.) | British officers as Glubb Pasha.) | ||
Is there any differenceatall between | |||
this kind of attitude and that of the Nazi persecutors of the | |||
Jews whom our press has been attacking, day in and day | |||
out, for well over twenty years? | |||
Revision as of 21 July 2018 à 14:59
Rappels historiques
http://liberpedia.net/t/Short_history_of_israel.pdf
Propriété privée
- Propriété privée et non collective
Débats
Rothbard
- The British, in return for mobilizing the Arab peoples against their oppressors of imperial Turkey, promised the Arabs their independence when the war was over. But, at the same time, the British government, with characteristic double-dealing, was promising Arab Palestine as a « National Home » for organized Zionism. These promises were not on the same moral plane: for in the former case, the Arabs were being promised their own land freed from Turkish domination; and in the latter, world Zionism was being promised a land most emphatically not its own.
- ... Zionism had succeeded in carving out a European Jewish State, over Arab territory in the Middle East.
- ... Historians are wont to describe the ensuing war as an invasion of Israel by the Arab states, heroically rebuffed by Israel, but since all of the fighting took place on Arab territory, this interpretation is clearly incorrect.
Exemple typique de raisonnment nationaliste, collectiviste, par propriété collective.
- The UN agreement had provided (a) that Jerusalem be internationalized under UN
rule, and (b) that there be an economic union between the new Jewish and Arab Palestine states. These were the basic conditions under which the UN approved partition. Both were promptly and brusquely disregarded by Israel--thus launching an escalating series of aggressions against the Arabs of the Middle East.
From
that day to this, for two decades, these hapless Arab
refugees, their ranks now swollen by natural increase to
1.3 million, have continued to live in utter destitution in
refugee camps around the Israeli borders, barely kept
alive by meagre UN funds and CARE packages, living only
for the day when they will return to their rightful homes.
In the areas of Palestine originally assigned to the Arabs,
no Palestinian Arab government remained. The acknowledged
leader of the Palestinian Arabs, their GrandMuftiHaj Amin
el-Husseini, was summarily deposed by the long-time British
tool, King Abdullah of Trans-jordan, who simply confiscated
the Arab regions of east-central Palestine, as well as the
Old City of Jerusalem. (King Abdullah's Arab Legion had
been built, armed. staffed, and even beaded by such colonialist
British officers as Glubb Pasha.)
Is there any differenceatall between this kind of attitude and that of the Nazi persecutors of the Jews whom our press has been attacking, day in and day out, for well over twenty years?
https://thejewishlibertarian.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/israel-rothbard-defense.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ET3MkT1QTg0&feature=youtu.be&t=3594
http://reason.com/archives/2014/08/10/can-moshe-feiglin-reconcile-libertariani/
